(Phys.org) -- One of the hallmarks of the human race has been the myriad ways that single individuals or small groups respond when noting problems big and small. They may see something as a challenge or a glitch in the status quo, or simply as a way to improve on what currently exists using their intellect, their time and of course their energy, and because of that, things improve for everyone else. In just that vein comes a new kind of nozzle or nozzle attachment that solves the problem of dripping after the flow of a liquid has been stopped. We see it with our various types of water taps, but more often when transferring fuel from one container to another, especially when filling the gas tank of our cars and trucks.
The problem generally occurs because of the way we transfer our liquids such as gasoline. Rather than simply pour it, we prefer the convenience of a pump, hose and nozzle. This arrangement makes it easier to get the gas into our tank and to measure how much has been transferred. Unfortunately, it also leads to a tiny bit of leftover when the pump is turned off, which in most cases winds up as little drops of gasoline falling to the ground just before nestling the nozzle back into its holster. And that Canadian company Dram Innovations says, leads to some 500 million liters of gasoline dripped onto the ground and evaporated into the atmosphere worldwide every year.
To solve the problem, the company has developed a nozzle technology that can be used to prevent drips of any type, but that focuses most particularly on gasoline dripping. They’re not saying of course, exactly how it works, but one part of it at least employs the use of a small screen similar to that used to disperse the flow of water from a faucet. They say their nozzle, which can be attached directly to the end of a hose to replace conventional nozzles, or added as an attachment could serve as both a convenience and a means of reducing pollution.
The convenience factor comes in as consumers would no longer have to worry about drops falling on their hands, shoes, pant legs, etc. The pollution factor comes in due to the fact that when gasoline falls to the ground, it reacts with the surrounding air and produces ozone, and we all know what that does.
The company hasn’t yet found a buyer for their nozzle but hope to attract the attention of consumers and then hopefully big oil companies who they say would benefit too, as lost drops impact the bottom line of gas station owners as well.
Explore further:
Silent nozzle extinguisher does not harm hard disks
.jpg)
_ucci_oo
4.2 / 5 (5) Jun 08, 2012danlgarmstrong
4 / 5 (3) Jun 08, 2012dschlink
5 / 5 (3) Jun 08, 2012Temple
5 / 5 (2) Jun 08, 2012Nope. Think about it. After the drops have gone through the meter, they're not going to go through it again. No double charging.
Indeed if those drops go into the gas tank of the next person instead of evaporating, then theoretically, that next person will require *slightly less* gas to pass through the meter before the tank is filled. The gas company will earn slightly less on them.
I'm not suggesting this factors at all into motives or what have you, but if 500 million litres of gasloline goes into gas tanks instead of on the ground, that's 500 million less litres that gas companies will sell.
Vendicar_Decarian
4.3 / 5 (6) Jun 08, 20129 billion people, 50 percent fueling once a week and dropping 5 drops of fuel out of the fuel nozzle every refueling.
This represents 1.17 E 12 drops.
Each drop is approx 1/20 of a ml so this turns out to be 60 million not 500 million.
And of course not everyone fuels once a week and not all adults drive cars. So we know the waste is less than 60 million liters. Probably closer to 10 million liters or less.
Dram innovations can't be trusted as a company after making such claims.
But then honesty goes out the window when there are a few pennies to gather.
Skepticus
4.6 / 5 (9) Jun 08, 2012Vendicar_Decarian
4.2 / 5 (5) Jun 08, 2012It is the American way.
thermodynamics
5 / 5 (2) Jun 08, 2012Vendicar_Decarian
3 / 5 (2) Jun 08, 2012Bigbobswinden
5 / 5 (1) Jun 09, 2012A_Paradox
not rated yet Jun 09, 2012*At this US gov't web site:
[H teateapee : sl sl ga dot water dot usgs dot gov sl edu sl sc4 dot html]
"There is no scientific definition of the volume of a faucet drip, but after measuring a number of kitchen and bathroom sink faucets, for our calculations below (numbers are rounded), we are going to use 1/4 milliliter (ml) as the volume of a faucet drip [equates to 16 per drop]. So, by these drip estimates:
"One gallon: 15,140 drips
"One liter: 4,000 drips "
* A billion 1,000,000,000
* Number of billions in estimate 9
=9,000,000,000
* percentage getting petrol 50.00%
= 4,500,000,000
* number of drops each time 5
= 22,500,000,000
* number of drops per litre 4,000
= 5,625,000 Litres
9 billion is excessive for people, but petrol or diesel fuel goes into cars, motor bikes, trucks, tractors, small planes, boats, jerry cans ....
I must be missing something here? could somebody else please check these figures!!!
A_Paradox
not rated yet Jun 09, 2012A_Paradox
not rated yet Jun 09, 2012[and 'flood control' blew me a raspberry also :-[
Eikka
not rated yet Jun 09, 2012Vendicar_Decarian
not rated yet Jun 09, 2012A small screen over the nozzle isn't going to prevent that evaporation.
Mastoras
not rated yet Jun 10, 2012Myself, not only I tap the nozle untill all drops stop falling, but I'm lifting the hose above tank level while holding the nozle open, trying to catch whatever stays in the hose. I look for the smalest price, I unload the car from anything unnecessary, I drive with constant speed, I avoid acceleration. I should start using a bicycle for travels in the city.
-.
Mastoras
not rated yet Jun 10, 2012But..., but... It will bring investments --for one more unneeded product, though.
-.