| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
specialgreen
Site Admin
Joined: 10 Jul 2004
Posts: 259
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
|
 Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 6:38 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
This is a bad mix of nonprofit and government standards bodies.
Fire codes require that fuel dispensing pumps bear UL certification. But UL does not develop safety standards before they are needed.
Imagine if John Kennedy had said
| Quote: |
We will go to the moon. We will go to the moon and do other things, NOT because they are easy but because they are HARD.
|
...and someone had told him "sorry, sir; we can't go to the moon because OSHA has not established criteria for a safe working environment on the moon."
Our President has made the use of ethanol a national priority. Allowing state and local fire safety officials to rely on nongovernmental standards bodies that are not responsive to national goals is a mistake.
Removing the reliance on UL until they can respond to our national needs is the right move. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
matt621
Joined: 01 Apr 2007
Posts: 4
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2007 3:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| specialgreen wrote: | | Someone asked UL to certify a pump design specifically for E-85, and UL decided that request must be evidence that E-85 is different enough to warrant its own testing. Designing a new UL listing is only one option. |
UL has a financial motive as well. They charge for their certifications and it's very big bucks. By doing this, they are essentially creating more profit (and job security) for themselves. While UL is a non-profit, that doesn't mean what a lot of people think it means. What it means is that there is never a profit to be taxed. It doesn't mean the they work for free. In fact, in their 04 annual report they show something called "revenue per employee" and for 04 it was $125,000 per employee. Obviously someone is making money.
(http://www.ul.com/info/UL_AR_2004.pdf just in case someone wanted the source.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mtbottle
Joined: 14 Jan 2006
Posts: 46
Location: West Virgnia
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2007 7:37 am Post subject: UL |
|
|
Actually this topic has been way over-hyped. I called ULs contact man and he confirmed that the story was never suppose to get out this way. Of course the press got ahold of it and put their spin on it and now we know what has really happened.
The UL contact said to date that no defects or problems had been found. However, use of E85 in America was realitively new. I have talked to a local dealer that sells E85 and he is using a early 1970s gasboy pump for E85(2 years +) and has had no problems.
UL is also testing pumps in Brazil as the market has been established much longer, and also they are using clear up to E100.
New E85 pumps were already being built in America, but there was no specs from UL to go on.
I look for this issue to be cleared up by the end of this year.
_________________
Duane Combs |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mtbottle
Joined: 14 Jan 2006
Posts: 46
Location: West Virgnia
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 06, 2007 9:43 pm Post subject: UL E85 pump certication |
|
|
Here is the latest on the UL progress on E85 pumps. I look for this to all be over by the first quarter of 2008.
[url]http://www.ethanolrfa.org/objects/documents/984/ul_e85.pdf[url]
Sorry, but I have not been able to figure out how to post a link on this site.
_________________
Duane Combs |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Revision
Joined: 14 Sep 2005
Posts: 194
Location: Carol Stream, IL
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 03, 2007 4:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Still on track.
More information on UL progress on link:
http://www.ul.com/regulators/e85.cfm
- Note. Lots of good reading material in the link.
Survey results from Brazil and the initial survey into e85 pumps which led to revoking the UL cert from pumps. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
