Slow Fill on EPA regulated fuel systems: 

EPA regulated fuel tanks and the supporting parts are one of the most misunderstood yet simplest parts of boats built in recent years. Because of that techs in the marine industry spend lots of time diagnosing problems or complaints, and often more time than is necessary. I will try to help explain the way they work and what to do when they do not function as we expect them.

First the most common complaint is slow to fill. The most common cause of this complaint is the tank is full by design, but it will take more fuel if the operator is persistent enough. In fact the bigger tanks may take another 10 gallons or so after the tank is actually full. Of course this doesn’t make sense, until you understand what is going on. So let’s cover ullage space first.

Ullage is literally an air space maintained in the tank to allow for expansion during a normal heating and cooling cycle of a 24 hour period. This air space is big enough to contain the fuel without it being pushed into the vent line, which prevents the fuel from spilling overboard and contaminating the environment. In some systems there is a charcoal canister in the vent line which could be rendered inoperable when fuel enters the canister, and it can even become a plug in the vent line which would make fueling difficult at any time.

This brings us to the next issue where ullage space is concerned. Most tank builders, or maybe we should say fuel level sender builders, do not allow for that air space in the design of the fuel level sender. Most senders are a straight shaft mounted vertically from the top of the tank. On that shaft is a float which activates sensors in the shaft which in turn send an ohms reading to the fuel gauge. This ohms reading is interpreted by the gauge as a fuel level. Introduce the ullage space and the float can no longer reach the top of the shaft, so the full tank will sometimes result in a ¾ or so reading on the gauge. Seeing that on the gauge encourages the operator to keep on filling. Unfortunately modified senders to allow for ullage are not commonly in use, but they are coming.

Now let’s move on to physical problems that could cause the slow fill situation even when the tank is not already full. The most common physical cause is a venting problem.  A pinched or kinked vent line can be the cause. Test for that removing the vent line at the tank and blowing through it. It should allow air to pass through that line with little effort. Some vent lines will have valves or canisters, but still should allow an easy flow of air since that is what happens during filling. Keep in mind some of the vents are in the fill assembly so best to remove the fill cap to be sure the vent outlet is open.

The least common cause of slow fill is the fill line itself. This is a big and tough hose that is hard to kink or crush so that cause is extremely uncommon, but there have been some cases in older hoses where the inside lining of the hose has bubbled out effectively blocking the incoming fuel. Again, this is extremely rare but when all else is right, remember this one.

And another surprise the EPA tanks threw our way; some of the fill systems will only accept fuel at the rate it comes out of the pump. So the dock caddies, jugs, whatever present a challenge of filling too slow. There are some special funnels out there in the aftermarket designed to overcome this challenge.

In summary, EPA regulations have led to a more complex system with mysterious connections, but the fill process is very much the same as it’s always been. When fuel comes in, the air needs to flow out. Keep this in mind and most of the mystery is irrelevant. 

Fuel Additives

As much as I dislike ethanol in our fuel it seems that it is here for a while so we may as well learn to live with it as well as we can. To minimize the adverse affects of the ethanol many companies have developed fuel additives to protect the fuel. They all claim to be the best and the answer to our needs but I want to know from personal experience which ones work and which ones don't, and maybe even which is the best. To accomplish that goal I started a hands on, side by side test of various brand name additives in known ethanol laced gasoline. That test was started on 10/1/10, so it's been one year to date that the test has been running. The results were interesting.

First step was to verify that I had an ethanol/gasoline mix. I bought a gallon at the local Hess station and poured a small quantity in a glass jar. With an eye dropper I added a few drops of water. The drops fell to the bottom of the jar as beads but as I stirred the fuel the water suspended in the fuel and did not settle out. I repeated the procedure several times before I reached saturation where it would no longer suspend, and then I witnessed phase separation where the ethanol/water mix fell to the bottom of the jar. Sure enough, the quantity of mixed fluid on the bottom of the jar was quite a bit more than the quantity of water I'd added to the fuel assuring me that I had ethanol in the fuel.

Step two: I took seven equal sized jars and added an equal amount of fuel in each jar. Then I took six brands of fuel treatment and added the recommended quantity of each in the fuel, leaving one jar with pure gasoline/ethanol mix. The jars were vented and left in an open air garage as if stored in a vented container, or the fuel tank of the typical boat. After one year I have what I consider to be valuable results.

Brands tested:

Stabil
Stabil Marine
Startron
Valvtect
CRC Phase 4
BRP 2+4 for Ethanol fuel

Symptoms tested for and noted:

Evaporation. As fuel sits it slowly evaporates leaving a sticky residue which can clog carburetors and injectors. If the additive can prevent this you'll save hundreds of dollars in rebuilds and clean up. Evaporation also robs the fuel of needed hydrocarbons and such degrading the fuel of BTU's and octane. It's obviously better if we can prevent this and have a use able fuel after a reasonable storage time. Based on past experience with stored fuel I gave the evaporation protection the highest importance.

Moisture absorption protection. By now most of us know that ethanol fuel is very susceptible to water absorption which creates all sorts of havoc in the fuel systems of any gasoline engine. If we can stop or slow that process the additive is wonderful stuff.

Inhibit organic growth. Most do not know of this phenomenon but when water is absorbed into ethanol the result is an organic based mix quite hospitable to organic growth such as mold and mildew. If you've ever siphoned off the mix from the bottom of a fuel tank after phase separation has taken place and noticed the little flakes floating around in it, that's what I'm talking about here. The best way to slow this is obviously to slow the water absorption but it's important to slow the growth of the organics as well since moisture absorption to some extent is inevitable.

This covers the methods used and the test criteria, now for the results.

Startron came in first with the best protection against evaporation, crystal clarity of the mix after one year suggesting no organic growth, and no phase separation.

Valvtect scored a strong second with only minimal clouding of the mix, no separation, and evaporation protection equal to Startron.

Stabil Marine with excellent protection against evaporation, some clouding, and no separation.

The others were a mixed bag. None of them showed any sign of phase separation. Some were extremely cloudy. One offered no better protection against evaporation than the straight gasoline. No need to name names here since my mission is accomplished. So many folks ask what I would recommend and the three mentioned here get that nod. I'll never store over a year and all of them did a great job up to that point.

Fuel tank clean out procedure.

Since the first fuel tank was introduced there has been the risk of condensation depositing a volume of water in the fuel over time. That still exists today but in reality the volume is minute and the time frame required is generally long. This happens when the contents of the tank goes through the normal heating and cooling cycle of a typical day; in the heat of the day fuel expands pushing air out of the tank. In the evening the fuel cools and contracts pulling cooler and moist air into the tank. Cooling causes condensation of the moisture and the condensation clings to the walls of the tank. The resulting water settles and accumulates at the bottom of the tank being heavier than gasoline. This relatively minor amount of water could be effectively removed with a typical water separating fuel filter, or even harmlessly removed with one of many fuel additives. With ethanol in the mix though those days are gone.

Fuel tanks still go through the breathing process and there is still the same level of condensation but the water doesn't settle to the bottom anymore. Water readily mixes with ethanol, therefore the water is suspended in the fuel, much the same way it used to be suspended with fuel additives. In fact, most fuel additives for straight gasoline are mostly ethanol. The differences is in quantity. We never put as much as ten percent fuel additive in a tank of gasoline so the fuel has much more ability to absorb water than treated gasoline. In addition to the condensation of water ethanol has the ability to absorb moisture directly from the air bypassing the condensation step. This absorption dramatically speeds up the water accumulation process shortening the shelf life of stored fuel to only a few months, or even weeks before a phenomenon called phase separation takes place.

In phase separation the ethanol reaches its water absorption limit where it becomes too heavy to remain suspended in the gasoline, and it simply falls to the bottom of the tank as a water/ethanol mix. The bottom of the tank is where the fuel pick up line is of course, so the next time the engine is run it will be picked up and fed into the engine where the engine will fail to continue running. If no harm is done initially but the water/ethanol mix is left in the engine's fuel system long enough without being flushed, irreversible and/or expensive engine repairs can be needed. If the water/ethanol mix remains in the tank long enough another new problem can develop. As odd as it sounds organic growth can now begin in the fuel tank. If you think about it that's not as odd as it at first sounds. Ethanol is an organic compound, and it's mixed with the source of all life; water. Mold and fungus now have a fertile bed to grow and this stuff can clog the best fuel filter in short order, not to mention the havoc it can cause if it gets into a fuel injection system on the engine.

I've spoke with many individuals with water in the fuel issues through the years but with the instroduction of ethanol in our fuel this problem has increased dramatically. Most people suspect a leaking fuel tank as the cause, or possibly a leaking fuel cap or lines. This can be the cause and should be investigated but it's really not likely. The quantity of suspected water in the tank is usually in the gallons. Think about how long it would take for a gallon of fuel to get into a tank from rain even if the fill cap were left off. A hole in the tank also most often results in a fuel leak instead of water intrusion. The only spot on a tank that occasionally allows a considerable volume of water intrusion is the gasket under the fuel level sending unit on top of the tank.

Curing the problem takes some work but most people can do it themselves. The key is to remove all of the fuel from the system; all being the key word. If only a minor amount is left it can be enough to foul the filter and injectors or carbs again so everything has to be removed from the tank and the tank should be dried out. This can't be accomplished by simply using the fuel supply pick up and hose attached to the tank. You need to go in through the fuel sender hole by removing the sender and angling the tank so that all the fuel can be siphoned from the tank, then the tank should be allowed to dry completely. Angling the tank can be accomplished easily if it is on a trailer by raising the front of the trailer causing the contents to flow to the rear, then you may need to raise one wheel at a time to be sure nothing is trapped behind a baffle. All of the fuel should be properly disposed of. Do not try to separate the gasoline from the water/ethanol mix. Because the ethanol is part of the octane of the gasoline the remaining pure gasoline is not safe to use without risking serious internal engine damage which can result from pre-ignition and detonation. Once the tank is completely clean and dry refill with fresh gasoline, then flush all the lines and install a new filter. Be sure to flush all the lines on the engine as well.

Another common scenario is when the tank is pumped, filled with fresh fuel and flushed, and everything is fine, but comes right back in just a few weeks. This is when most are convinced there is a leak allowing water into the tank, and it can be, but again ethanol may be the explanation. If the tank was pumped but part of the water/ethanol mix was missed, and then fresh fuel is pumped on top of that, you now have enough ethanol in the fresh fuel to suspend the water that is left in the tank, but it is near saturation level where phase separation can again occur. Under these circumstances the time frame it takes for the problem to return is dramatically shortened. If it comes right back, you most likely didn't get it all.

Why is there so much of this mixture? It's got to be a leak to get this much; right?

Remember, ethanol laced gasoline is around a 10/90 % mixture. If your tank holds 20 gallons of fuel for instance, it can contain 2 gallons of ethanol. When the ethanol absorbs enough water and separates out of the fuel in this tank the resulting sediment would exceed two gallons which will appear to be a huge quantity of water. This is a possible logical explanation for the huge quantities I'm hearing of in the fuel tanks.

Is ethanol a logical alternative fuel?

Is ethanol a logical alternative fuel?

I think all Americans can agree that it is important to reduce our dependence on foreign oil to fuel our industry and automobiles, or even our toys for that matter, but the question is what are logical alternatives?

Alcohol, of which ethanol is a form, has been used as a fuel for hundreds of years, and has been used as an internal combustion fuel on and off for the last century or so. There’s no real debate about those facts. Comparing ethanol to gasoline we find that the energy contained in a gallon of ethanol is about 51% of the energy found in a gallon of gasoline. Therefore it’s logical to assume that we will need more ethanol to do the same work when compared to gasoline. Keeping the comparison between the two fuels to that very narrow perspective gasoline obviously comes out way on top, but the arguing point is that alcohol is renewable and can be home grown. Those are again clear facts, but then we become bogged down in the debates over cost to produce, environmental impact, government subsidies, and seemingly endless other arguable facts.

There are two clearly defined sides in the debate. Pro-ethanol and anti-ethanol. Each side will present evidence to support their own agenda, of course, making the truth almost impossible to determine. After quite a bit of research I’m still not at all sure that I have the truth, or the whole truth but this is what I believe to be the unbiased truth with regard to ethanol.

Considering all energy required to produce ethanol including the fuel required to run the tractor to plant it and the fuel required to ferment and distill it; everything conceivably needed to produce ethanol related to energy we net about a 25% gain from the potential energy produced by burning it. Whether 25% is worth the effort is another debate but at least I’m satisfied that there is a gain. I’ve seen numerous claims otherwise. Let’s proceed with the notion that the 25% gain is worth while.

The obvious advantage of this fuel is that we got it primarily from renewable home grown corn, not from a potentially hostile foreign source. The money spent for the most part stayed within the United States. Mixing ethanol in gasoline at a 10% ratio raises the octane level of the mix and causes the fuel to burn with less of some emissions. What’s the down side?

In order to produce the ethanol a portion of the available food lots had to be dedicated to production of the raw material. It takes a bit more than 25 pounds of corn to produce a gallon of ethanol, for instance. It also takes a certain amount of fuel to plant, harvest, and produce ethanol and that fuel is primarily hydrocarbon, which is of course mostly oil based, which comes from those hostile foreigner; so did we really keep the money in the States? The corn requires a quantity of fertilizer to produce and the resulting nitrates pollute the drinking water supply and the run off pollutes the streams, rivers, and oceans. There’s a bigger dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico attributable to this nitrate run off than there is from the record oil spill. Of course most of that runoff can likely be attributed to food production rather than ethanol corn, but ethanol production is adding to it. Another issue with ethanol blended with gasoline is that as the level of ethanol is increased, energy output and fuel economy decrease, even though the octane level increases. And then there are the well recorded harmful affects of ethanol on the fuel system components because of the corrosive and high detergent nature of ethanol. It seems that engines and systems designed for gasoline aren’t necessarily compatible with ethanol even in small quantities. There may be more downsides to ethanol use but this is enough for now. We can see from this short discussion so far that the list of problems exceeds the list of advantages, which brings the question to my mind, is it logical to pursue ethanol as an alternative and renewable energy source?

Surprisingly the answer isn’t a clear and unequivocal no, and I support continued research and development. The need for alternative fuels is so clear and pressing that we as a nation would be foolish not to pursue every possible avenue of energy independence. In the last few years many alternative sources of ethanol have developed and the processing cycle has become more efficient. It is therefore entirely possible and probable that the 25% energy gain will be increased dramatically and the nitrate problem can be reduced considerably as well. Further good news is that the alternative sources of ethanol will not depend so heavily on traditional food sources, and consequently remove the pressure on food lots dedicated to fuel. What about the efficiency though? Remember it only has a fraction of the energy contained in an equal quantity of gasoline. The answer partially lies in the fact that it naturally has a much higher octane than gasoline, without the need for additives. Engines designed around the use of ethanol can be designed with much higher compression ratios and therein lays one of the biggest keys to literally squeezing more performance out of the fuel. With current technology we can obtain approximately the same fuel economy from ethanol as we can from pure gasoline if it is run in an engine specifically designed for ethanol fuel. Pure ethanol. Therefore the logical approach may be to pursue ever more efficient production of ethanol fuel, and engines designed to run on it, rather than trying to force feed ever increasing quantities of ethanol into gasoline engines.

There’s also some interesting research being done on vehicles equipped with dual fuel tanks; one for ethanol and another for gasoline. By injecting the needed fuel into the engine depending on operating conditions efficiency can be maximized, and the phase separation problem associated with the ethanol/gasoline blend can be more effectively controlled. It may work out but I’m betting on the pure ethanol approach mentioned above. It sounds simpler and simple usually equates to reliability.

Another topic of worthy discussion may be biodiesel. With current technology we already have an energy gain of 91% with biodiesel fuel. It’s renewable, home grown, and surprisingly the emissions from cutting edge diesel engines are already lower in most respects than the emissions possible from ethanol, the supposed green fuel. And the fuel economy can be unbelievable.

Ethanol

Should I be concerned about this new ethanol fuel in the fuel system of my boat?

This is the most common question I am asked day to day by far. Everyone is concerned and to complicate and even amplify that concern it seems that every fuel related problem, and even some that aren't fuel related, are attributed to ethanol. So, what is the bottom line? Is ethanol a problem and how concerned should we be? Here's my take on the situation....

Ethanol isn't a new fuel solution nor is it a new problem. As a fuel it's been around longer than most of us have, longer even than automobiles. In fact Henry Ford used it as an alternative fuel in his first car. After all, gasoline was practically unheard of before automobiles, so, yes, Henry Fords first automobile was also one of the first "Flex Fuel" cars. Our forefathers quickly learned though that gasoline worked out much better than ethanol; it was more efficient with more BTU's per gallon or pound, and it was cheaper to produce. Oil, the raw material, seemed to be abundant as well so ethanol was quickly forgotten as a fuel source for the average automobile, until the first Arab oil embargo came along in the early '70's. Overnight we needed an alternative source of fuel to power our cars and everyone seemed to jump on ethanol again. Gas stations started to pop up all over with signs proudly proclaiming "Gasohol". Gasohol contained up to ten percent ethanol much as it does today, maybe even more, and all was well for a short while. It didn't take long for the ethanol to take affect and fuel system components began to deteriorate. It was a problem in automobiles but the greater problem seemed to be in boats and outboard motors where fuel lines and gasket material were predominantly flexible hoses and neoprene gaskets. Ethanol would disintegrate those parts from the inside out and the industry scrambled to formulate alternative ethanol resistant materials with varying success. This battle went on for a few years with constant upgrades and the accompanying service bulletins. The Coast Guard eventually issued new regulations restricting which hoses could be used and builders of boats and outboards were regulated to reduce the risk of leaks and the resulting fire and explosion hazards. Things gradually got much better but there was still a problem with some of the fuel tanks, and there was amazing resistance in the industry to accept the fact that ethanol and fiberglass fuel tanks simply were not compatible.

Fiberglass tanks seemed to be the answer to many boaters' prayers for a tank that wouldn't corrode. We loved them for a while and didn't want to let go, but I noticed that in fuel systems, carburetors, hoses, anything that came into contact with the fuel from a fiberglass tank serious problems persisted even with all of the updated materials in place. The only logical explanation in my mind was that the fuel was dissolving the inside of the tank and components of the resin were mixing with the fuel causing the problems I was seeing. This was in the mid seventies. Yes, that far back we had ethanol problems. In order to prove my theory in the face of united denial I took a fiberglass tank and cut it into strips for testing. These strips were delivered to an independent engineering test facility. In just a few weeks the results were conclusive. The resin exposed to gasoline was dissolving, and the introduction of ethanol into the mix would speed up the breakdown rate of the resin exponentially based on the ratio of ethanol to gasoline. I'd proved my theory but fiberglass tanks remained in use for years to come partially because the use of ethanol waned in the next few years. Again we learned that straight gasoline was simpler to produce, less expensive, and more efficient than ethanol.

Now, years again later we are back facing a predominance of ethanol in gasoline. For the most part the fuel systems in boats produced in the last twenty years or so are compatible with ethanol fuel, including the tank material, hoses, filters, and gaskets. Engines themselves are designed to run on the blend. But does this mean we don't have anything to worry about? I'm afraid not. Ethanol is still corrosive and a powerful solvent. It has the ability to loosen deposits in older fuel systems resulting in clogged filters or worse. It also shortens the life of the best hoses and gaskets and even corrodes the inside of some tanks, but as bad as all of that can be it's not the worst of what can happen with ethanol laced fuel. With good materials and a clean tank most of those problems can be all but eliminated. The biggest problem that I've seen is that ethanol absorbs moisture directly from the air.

Since the first fuel tank was introduced ever in history there has been the risk of condensation depositing a volume of water in the fuel over time. That still exists today but in reality the volume is minute and the time frame required is a long while. This happens when the contents of the tank goes through the normal heating and cooling cycle of a typical day; in the heat of the day fuel expands pushing air out of the tank. In the evening the fuel cools and contracts pulling cooler and moist air into the tank. Cooling causes condensation of the moisture and the condensation clings to the walls of the tank. The resulting water settles and accumulates at the bottom of the tank being heavier than gasoline. This relatively minor amount of water could be effectively removed with a typical water separating fuel filter, or even harmlessly removed with one of many fuel additives. With ethanol in the mix though those days are gone.

Fuel tanks still go through the breathing process and there is still the same level of condensation but the water doesn't settle to the bottom anymore. Water readily mixes with ethanol, therefore the water is suspended in the fuel, much the same way it used to be suspended with fuel additives. In fact, most fuel additives for straight gasoline are mostly ethanol. The differences is in quantity. We never put as much as ten percent fuel additive in a tank of gasoline so the fuel has much more ability to absorb water than treated gasoline. In addition to the condensation of water ethanol has the ability to absorb moisture directly from the air bypassing the condensation step. This absorption dramatically speeds up the water accumulation process shortening the shelf life of stored fuel to only a few months, or even weeks before a phenomenon called phase separation takes place.

In phase separation the ethanol reaches its water absorption limit where it becomes too heavy to remain suspended in the gasoline, and it simply falls to the bottom of the tank as a water/ethanol mix. The bottom of the tank is where the fuel pick up line is of course, so the next time the engine is run it will be picked up and fed into the engine where the engine will fail to continue running. If no harm is done initially but the water/ethanol mix is left in the engine's fuel system long enough without being flushed, irreversible and/or expensive engine repairs can be needed. If the water/ethanol mix remains in the tank long enough another new problem can develop. As odd as it sounds organic growth can now begin in the fuel tank. If you think about it that's not as odd as it at first sounds. Ethanol is an organic compound, and it's mixed with the source of all life; water. Mold and fungus now have a fertile bed to grow and this stuff can clog the best fuel filter in short order, not to mention the havoc it can cause if it gets into a fuel injection system on the engine.

In short, to answer the question, "Do I have anything to worry about with ethanol fuel in my fuel tank?", the answer is yes, no matter how good the system is or what the tank is made of. If the tank breathes air phase separation will eventually take place.

How do we cure the problem after it's occurred and how do we prevent it?

Curing the problem may be the simpler answer. The key is to remove all of the fuel from the system; all being the key word. If only a minor amount is left it can be enough to foul the filter and injectors again so everything has to be removed from the tank and the tank should be dried out. This can't be accomplished by simply using the fuel supply pick up and hose attached to the tank. You need to go in through the fuel sender hole by removing the sender and angling the tank so that all the fuel can be siphoned from the tank, then the tank should be allowed to dry completely. All of the fuel should be properly disposed of. Do not try to separate the gasoline from the water/ethanol mix. Because the ethanol is part of the octane of the gasoline the remaining pure gasoline is not safe to use without risking serious internal engine damage which can result from pre-ignition and detonation. Once the tank is completely clean and dry refill with fresh gasoline, then flush all the lines and install a new filter. Be sure to flush all the lines on the engine as well.

The question of how to prevent the water absorption and resulting phase separation is almost impossible to answer with certainty. Additives are on the market and have been for several yeas now which claim to be effective in stabilizing ethanol blended fuel. Many people claim that they work and I hope they are right. I have not personally had an opportunity to test any of them to prove to my complete satisfaction that they are as advertised though. I have some dependable contacts who are working on that project scientifically testing the additives and I anxiously await their results which I intend to post as an addendum here with references.

I have my opinions as to the viability of ethanol as a green fuel alternative and the political ramifications or undertones of its use but that may be best saved for another discussion.

thanks,

Tom

The Marine Industry in 2008

Having been in the marine industry since 1970 I can tell you the roller coaster has had many ups and downs in those years. I remember well the first time the boss man called all the troops together and told us things looked bleak. Some of us might have to find other things to do. He would understand if we did. That was in the early spring of 1973. There were lines at the gas pumps; the ones still pumping gas, and there was speculation that prices could reach $1.00 a gallon. Who in the world would still be using their boat if gas went that high? And who would be willing to wait in line to get it?

As we all know, lots of folks would be willing to pay and wait. We all wish prices could be that low again, but at that time it was the end of the boating world. But things changed, as they always do. Supply lines freed up and prices fell, and folks went back to business as usual.

What will the future bring though? Will we have enough fuel to power our crafts, and can we afford it? All good questions, but all questions that have been asked by boaters throughout the years. I look at high gasoline prices as a double edged sword. The higher they go, the harder it is for average folks to enjoy boating, that's for sure. But on the other side of that sword, the higher gasoline prices go, the more pressure there is to find alternative sources for energy to power things that really don't need gasoline, or the oil it comes from. We do have now the means and technology to produce sufficient energy to power our homes from sources other than oil, we just have not had, until now, the motivation. As long as oil is the cheapest and easiest way to run things, that is what we will run everything on. Simple as that. But just as simple as that, one day we will run out of oil. Before that day comes though, oil will soon become simply too expensive and other sources of energy will then be more attractive. We will develop and pursue sources such as solar energy, wind power, hydrodynamic turbines driven by tides or dams, hydrogen power, and the list will go on to include things we may never have imagined until oil simply became too expensive. And when that day comes, and we have learned to harness the other endless sources of re-newable engergy for purposes which oil should not have been used in the first place, we might again find that gasoline is not only affordable again, but may even become obsolete.

This reminds me of a conversation I had with my youngest son about ten years ago when he was a young teenager. He asked me, "Dad, don't you think that internal combustion is a rather outdated method of propulsion?". As I pondered an answer I wondered, what do you say to a young man whose vision has not yet been clouded by things the way they've always been?