This Fuel Pump Nozzle Screen Could Save Millions Of Litres In Dripping Petrol

Spilling petrol on your shoes after you fill your car seems like just a small annoyance. But it happens to everyone, and apparently all that wasted fuel adds up to about half a billion litres of fuel lost every year. An epidemic this simple mesh cap promises to solve.

Created by a Canadian company called Dram Innovations, the Fuel Nozzle Drip Retainer might not have the catchiest name, but its benefits alone will easily sell the product. It attaches to the end of a standard petrol pump nozzle, and like the aerator on the faucets in your home, it prevents the last drops of fuel from dripping out.

Of course, a small amount of the fuel it saves will evaporate and be lost, but the design still retains about 89 per cent of the fuel that would have otherwise dripped out. And while it means an end to shoes smelling like petrol, in theory the saved fuel could also mean cheaper prices at the pumps. Because we all know that oil companies like passing savings onto the consumer, right? [Dram Innovations via Gizmag]



    The thing will be blocked with sed within a week

    I love that there is no mention of the benifit of keeping millions of liters of fuel from dripping into the environment.

      This is a copy and pasted American article, they don't care as much about that sort of thing over there.

      Actually, it would be better for that fuel to remain dripping. That way it will NOT be burned and turned into the various form of carbon burning petrol in a car engines produces. This will allow fuel stocks to dwindle and increse in price and make other form of energy affordable by comparison, sooner. The more land based fuel spills the better.

      When you poor a glass of milk, do you just move the bottle away from the glass and splash milk all over the floor or do you lift the spout up first to stop the milk coming out. It's not that hard people.

    Skip to 2:00 to see the product

      Note that they are still holding down the handle slightly on the example without the product on the right, so it doesn't add much credibility to their claims...

    Well.. I've never actually had this happen to me.. ever. Maybe our pumps in Australia don't do this? I dunno.. either way this is a saving for the petrol stations not the average road user.

    A few tips for those filling up:
    1. Never fill up during the day, always fill up in the morning or late evening. Even a 1 degree change to the underground tanks makes the petrol expand.. then when it gets in your tank, it contracts once it isn't as hot.. thus, you're actually getting less than if you filled up while the fuel in the ground was cold.
    2. Never pump the petrol in at full speed!! Always go at the slowest or medium speed on the pump. The reason is that any fumes that are generated by you going too fast are sucked back into the fuel pumps, which then ends up back in the petrol station's pocket.
    3. Never allow your tank to get empty before filling it. Same as #2.. more fumes generated.. goes back into pump.
    4. Never, ever, pump petrol when there is a fuel truck parked at the petrol station and is filling up the underground tanks. As they are filling the tanks, sediment on the bottom of the tank is stirred up. This sediment could potentially get in your tank and do damage to your car.

    I'm sure there are more.. but there you go.

      Not bad tips Light487, but I think you may have you logic in number one backwards.. the tanks are buried far enough under ground so they are deliberately not affected by variations in surface temperature.. bury anything deep than 1.5 m and the ground temperature is very stable regardless of ambient temperatures.

      As for the fuel cooling down in your tank.. well if its the middle of winter you would be correct, but as Australia hardly had winter the outside ambient temperatures will do the opposite of your claim and the fuel actually expands.

      Firstly I agree with number 1 but I must debunk 2 and 3, while 4 is a bit yes and no.

      2. I agree that the fast pumping could generate vapour, however there is no way for this to travel from the nozzle back through the hose and back into the tank. It is simply impossible for a gas to travel that way. Now what is possible is that the pump itself produces some vapour which travels through the metering system which affects the volume flow rate. however since the pump would has a positive pressure on the output side this is unlikely to occur or it would be costing the petrol company lots to replace their pumps due to cavitation.

      3. Again vapour can not travel back up the nozzle, fluids don't work like that. what actually happens is you are losing vapour to the surrounding environment, look for the visual distortion around the opening this is a dead give-away for fuel vapour. while yes there are more fumes that you lose they do not every enter the back into the fuel stations tank's.

      4. while yes there may be some settlement mixed up, there is a reason that cars have a fuel filter. It is to prevent this sediment getting from the fuel tank to the engine. I would argue more that the fuel could be at a higher temperature if it is in the afternoon.

      So basically 1 is a good rule to go by while 2 and 3 are sketchy. in regards to 4. I normally just avoid servos that have a truck parked there.

      One thing I look at for at local servo's is when it rains how well does the area drain. There is one servo that I refuse to buy from after any significant rain simply because water sits and doesn't drain.

        Hahaha far our you guys are tightarses. With all this energy you expend planning your servo trips and perfecting your technique, you're saving about 10 cents a year. And veering away from a servo because it doesn't meet your requirements costs you a few bucks to get to the next servo, which might have higher fuel prices.

          Well I avoid servos that are being filled mainly because there is a chance that the level of volatile gases being higher, and well I don't much fancy driving though a cloud of volatile gases.

          I avoid the servos that have a lot of still water after it has rained mainly because I feel there is a higher risk of it being contaminated with water. Well I just don't want to go through the hassle.

          It doesn't cost anything extra if I am heading that direction anyway. Stopping now or stopping later if both servo's are on the same path that I am taking it makes no difference what so ever.

        Hrmm.. I've read that petrol bowsers actually have a special tube to suck the vapours back in.. maybe this is just a myth..

          I used to deliver fuel, and the vapour recovery you talk about is actually when the fuel tanker is unloading into the underground storage tanks. The fuel going in pushes the vapour in the underground tank up into the tanker's compartment, via a vapour recovery hose, and then back at the depot, the vapour in the tanker is displaced by the fuel being loaded, which goes back into their tanks or a "slops" tank where it will condense. From what I heard from management, just the introduction of the vapour recovery system saved the fuel companies hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars a year. Not that every fuel depot/servo utilises the system, either. Next time you're at your local servo, look for tall metal vent pipes, usually off the side of the main building (a bit like the breathers/vents on toilets) - if these are there, thats where the fuel vapour is pushed out of the underground tanks when the fuel tanker is unloading (ie no vapour recovery). The number of people you see smoking under these is unbelievable, and since fuel vapour is heavier than air, it all drifts down to the ground just waiting for an ignition source...

            Also, the handle/spout of the fuel pump does suck vapour in, via that little hole at the top of the nozzle, but it comes straight back out with the fuel. It's (its?) sucked in by the venturi effect, and when your tank is getting full and that little hole in the nozzle is submerged, it sucks in fuel instead of vapour and that triggers the release mechanism in the handle and stops pumping. Perhaps that is what you were referring to?

    Umm I drip that fuel into my tank, what people can't wait 3 extra seconds or tap the end of the nozzle on there filler?

      Because it doesn't go in anyway. Only when the nozzle is fully in place is the valve open. So your tapping for no reason.

        the valve you speak of is just a metal flap with an imperfect seal so a few drips above it will eventually work their way past it, or become vapour and condense in the fuel tank. Also the nozzle doesn't need to be fully extracted from the valve for the drips to come out.

          I lift the hose s-bend up so that gravity will dribble whats left in the hose into my tank (which is a lot, incidentally) There are NO drips.

        Ummm see that little hole underneath it goes to a hole that connects to the filler neck it's there for spills. So no there is a reason and that valve us just a flap to stop fumes escaping so it really isn't a valve at all.

      I turn the whole thing up into the car when I'm done, to tip the tiny extra bit out. That extra 20ml of free petrol makes me feel like I'm cheating the system.

        Hate to break it to you but you are really just getting your money's worth. unless the person before you leaves a small amount of fuel already in the nozzle. you pay for every little bit of fuel that passes the valve in the handle.


      Could you please provide sources for the claim that fuel vapours are 'sucked back into the fuel pumps'. This doesn't make sense to me, but if you have a source that would be great. Thanks

    I want to know if the research looked into the effect of the mesh causes on the vaporisation of fuel as it exits the nozzle. as the fuel flows past the mesh is it not possible for flow separation to cause a small amount of vaporisation? This vapour is than displaced from the fuel tank by fresh vapour and fuel. Thus making the customer actually pay more money.

    I use a scanguage to measure consumption in my 4WD, it is a consistent method for measuring consumption (debatable if it is absolutely accurate, but useful for comparisons). When I fill up at one servo I consistently add 110L of diesel to the two tanks, the sub tank holds 30L and the filler snaps off within 0.1L of 30 every time. The 95L tank takes the balance. These numbers are verified by the calibrated scanguage.

    Now when I swap to the same brand servo about 5km away, I consistently add 115L to the tanks. the 40L is always 31+ and the balance is on the main.

    Tell me that each servo filler is not potentially ripping you off!!

    Am I the only one who saw that image and thought of C3PO's comlink?

    "shut down all the trash compactors on the detention level!!"

Join the discussion!