First Terror Free Gas Station To Open in Omaha

[Bronco_Beerslug]

They're claiming all their gas comes from oil produced in Canada and the U.S. only (Sinclair). Interesting business strategy to say the least!

--------------------------------------------------





http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20070122/capt.ah10101222148.terror_free_oil_ah101.jpg?x=380&y=252&sig=lHRNCLohGhnxbfivyEYT2w--
The country's first Terror-Free Oil gas station nears completion, in Omaha, Neb., Monday, Jan. 22, 2007. Claiming U.S. dollars used to purchase gas made from Middle East oil funds terrorism, a group called the Terror-Free Oil Initiative plans to open the country's first 'terror free' gas station in Nebraska. The Coral Springs, Fla.-based group urges Americans to only buy gas and other oil products that originate from countries that do no support terrorism. Its new gas station in will sell only gas from oil companies that don't do business in the Middle East. (AP Photo/Nati Harnik)

[Dendave]

Unfortunately, I can’t drive to Omaha to buy gas every week

[Tredici]

If Sinclair moves crude oil through a pipeline and trades products in a pipeline they have the same crude everyone else does.

I'm so tired of this Import of Record crap. Yes, certain companies import the oil. Once it's landed in the U.S. anyone can buy a piece of the cargo. And that crude isn't isolated when put into the infrastructure.

If thinking differently makes people feel better in Omaha, have at it.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

If Sinclair moves crude oil through a pipeline and trades products in a pipeline they have the same crude everyone else does.

I'm so tired of this Import of Record crap. Yes, certain companies import the oil. Once it's landed in the U.S. anyone can buy a piece of the cargo. And that crude isn't isolated when put into the infrastructure.

If thinking differently makes people feel better in Omaha, have at it.So you're saying they are lying?

[Paladin]

So you're saying they are lying?

Only for the money.......

[Steve Sewell]

Unfortunately, I can’t drive to Omaha to buy gas every week

I can! Yeah!

[defenseman]

I can! Yeah!

Where you live?...dman

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Only for the money.......Who is? You have some information that shows they are lying about their source of gasoline?

[Billy Clyde Puckett]

If Sinclair moves crude oil through a pipeline and trades products in a pipeline they have the same crude everyone else does.

I'm so tired of this Import of Record crap. Yes, certain companies import the oil. Once it's landed in the U.S. anyone can buy a piece of the cargo. And that crude isn't isolated when put into the infrastructure.

If thinking differently makes people feel better in Omaha, have at it.

Yep - Once the crude or the product hits a pipeline its mixed with everyone else's crude/product.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Yep - Once the crude or the product hits a pipeline its mixed with everyone else's crude/product.Sinclair has their own pipelines but I'm interested in the people here saying they use imported oil also. Does anyone have a link or reference to show that?

[worm]

Sinclair has their own pipelines but I'm interested in the people here saying they use imported oil also. Does anyone have a link or reference to show that?


Come on. This is an internet sports forum. When is proof EVER required to assert fact?

[Florida_Bronco]

Now I wish I lived back in Omaha.

[defenseman]

Now I wish I lived back in Omaha.

I live very close to that location. I'll gas up once for ya...dman

[ant1999e]

Unfortunately, I can’t drive to Omaha to buy gas every week

I'm here in Omaha. I'll buy some for you.:thumbsup:

[Florida_Bronco]

I live very close to that location. I'll gas up once for ya...dman

^5

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Well, just got off the phone with Sinclair corporate in Salt lake and here's what they told me...

They do have their own pipelines and other companies do pay them to use them but over 99% of their product from their refineries comes from Sunoco-Canada (oil sands) and West Texas Intermediate.

So is Sinclair lying, maybe but it seems the gas stations that will sell this product as "terror free oil" are acting in good faith from a business standpoint anyway.

EDIT: I guess "terror free oil" is somewhat subjective too when you think about it.

[defenseman]

Well, just got off the phone with Sinclair corporate in Salt lake and here's what they told me...

They do have their own pipelines and other companies do pay them to use them but over 99% of their product from their refineries comes from Sunoco-Canada (oil sands) and West Texas Intermediate.

So is Sinclair lying, maybe but it seems the gas stations that will sell this product as "terror free oil" are acting in good faith from a business standpoint anyway.

I would have to agree with you...dman

[Bronco Bob]

If they sold ethanol instead of gasoline, they would be doing more for the world.
Despite the right wing naysayers, global warming is the biggest threat to
mankind this century. As crops fail and resources become short, terrorism
is only going to increase as people fight for food and other necessities of life.

[listopencil]

http://tesla.liketelevision.com/liketelevision/images/lowrez/bevh33212.gif




This is not a new idea.

[Tredici]

So you're saying they are lying?

I'm not saying they are lying. I'm saying they may be uninformed. It doesn't matter if Sinclair has their own pipelines they don't connect from lease to refinery. And if they are bringing in Canadian crude (which I know they are) they using several pipelines to lay that crude into their refineries.

Syn Crudes, blends, are all pushed through the same lines. The product side is worse. That all goes into tanks where people buy, sell, trade at inventory bearing locations. The only thing making a gasoline unique is the individual additives branded stations add to the product they pull off the racks.

The notion that anyone is selling purely domesticated product is fairly close to impossible.

[Tredici]

When you buy Sinclair you are supporting the Mormon Church. We all know what terrorists they are....

(J/K folks)

[Tredici]

http:/http://www.journalstar.com/articles/2007/01/23/news/business/doc45b68d434e0b0014941476.txt/

It's already been debunked by Sinclair. Doesn't matter half the population will be convinced they are buying terror free oil. If it makes them feel better, that's okay. Basically it's just someone using them in a marketing scam.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

http:/http://www.journalstar.com/articles/2007/01/23/news/business/doc45b68d434e0b0014941476.txt/

It's already been debunked by Sinclair. Doesn't matter half the population will be convinced they are buying terror free oil. If it makes them feel better, that's okay. Basically it's just someone using them in a marketing scam.That isn't what Sinclair told me this morning (your link isn't working for me).

[Tredici]

New station calls its gasoline 'terror-free'
By The Associated Press
Tuesday, Jan 23, 2007 - 04:47:15 pm CST
OMAHA — A group from Florida called the Terror-Free Oil Initiative plans to open what they call the nation’s first “terror free” gas station in Nebraska.

The Coral Springs, Fla.-based group urges Americans to buy gas and other oil products only from countries that do not support terrorism.

Whether that can be accomplished is not so clear. Joe Kaufman, spokesman of the Florida-based group, also called Terror-Free Oil, said Sinclair is listed by the Energy Information Administration, a statistical agency of the U.S. Department of Energy, as not using foreign crude oil.

The future site of the Terror-Free Oil station already was emblazoned with signs Monday calling for the use of non-Middle Eastern oil.

Dalton Kehlbeck, a regional manager for Sinclair, said most of the company’s oil comes from the United States or Canada, but some is bought on the New York Mercantile Exchange.

“It’s a basket of crude oil,” he said of the exchange oil. “We cannot be sure where the conglomeration of the product comes from.”

The same is true of most oil products sold in the United States.

According to the Energy Information Administration, an agency of the U.S. Department of Energy, oil refineries often mix oil from different sources and companies during refinement and shipping.

The United States imported an average of 2.3 million barrels of oil a day from the Persian Gulf region in 2005, according to the administration. That accounted for about 9 percent of U.S. consumption.

Sinclair turned down Terror-Free Oil's request to remain a Sinclair station after the group's purchase because of its claim of no foreign oil, Kehlbeck told the Omaha World-Herald.

"We had to deny" the request, Kehlbeck said. "We don't feel comfortable to categorically say 100 percent. While we don't have any contracts with foreign oil or buy directly from them, we do buy from the Merc. … when it's on the New York Mercantile Exchange, we don't know where it comes from."

The station, at 12901 Q St., will continue to buy gas from a Sinclair distributor when it opens Feb. 1, Kaufman said.

The U.S. Department of Treasury, whose office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence oversees the government’s concerns about terrorism funding, said it would not comment on the prospect of oil money funding terrorists.

Kaufman said the Terror-Free Oil Initiative plans to open more gas stations across the country.

Beerslug - It is impossible to claim isolated crude or product streams with the pipeline infrastructure in place. It just doesn't happen.

[maven]

That isn't what Sinclair told me this morning (your link isn't working for me).

http://www.journalstar.com/articles/2007/01/23/news/business/doc45b68d434e0b0014941476.txt/

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Beerslug - It is impossible to claim isolated crude or product streams with the pipeline infrastructure in place. It just doesn't happen.
That's fine with me but Sinclair corporate seems to have some disagreement or lack of communication on the percentage of domestic and Canadian oil they refine and send to retail outlets. Like I said, they (Salt Lake) told me just this AM that over 99% of their refined product is from these two sources.

What I'm wondering is did someone tell the retailer what you posted or what I was told. If the retailer was told what you posted, and that's the truth, then they are lying about their product they are offering.

[defenseman]

That's fine with me but Sinclair corporate seems to have some disagreement or lack of communication on the percentage of domestic and Canadian oil they refine and send to retail outlets. Like I said, they (Salt Lake) told me just this AM that over 99% of their refined product is from these two sources.

What I'm wondering is did someone tell the retailer what you posted or what I was told. If the retailer was told what you posted, and that's the truth, then they are lying about their product they are offering.

Let's hope they aren't lying. Misrepresenting in such a manner would certianly get them in some trouble...dman

[maven]

That's fine with me but Sinclair corporate seems to have some disagreement or lack of communication on the percentage of domestic and Canadian oil they refine and send to retail outlets. Like I said, they (Salt Lake) told me just this AM that over 99% of their refined product is from these two sources.

What I'm wondering is did someone tell the retailer what you posted or what I was told. If the retailer was told what you posted, and that's the truth, then they are lying about their product they are offering.

What is not to understand? Sinclair purchases oil on the NYMEX.

[Phantom]

They'll probably price gouge like the rest.

I filled up for $1.89 two days ago - drove less than two miles and saw $2.09 on several stations. What's up with that. I realize the price isn't always set locally, but day-am!!!

[defenseman]

They'll probably price gouge like the rest.

I filled up for $1.89 two days ago - drove less than two miles and saw $2.09 on several stations. What's up with that. I realize the price isn't always set locally, but day-am!!!

Being located off a major high way and such I'm thinking as opposed to a rural location would affect the price in some cases I'm sure. However, a .20 cent diff is relatively extreme, agreed...dman

[Bronco_Beerslug]

What is not to understand? Sinclair purchases oil on the NYMEX.Who said they didn't "understand" anything? Or do you know that http://www.terrorfreeoil.org/ was told Sinclair uses no foreign oil or that they do? If they were told that Sinclair does use foreign oil then they are misrepresenting their product they are selling.

[Dudeskey]

I fill up @ the Sinclair on Quincy & Parker does that count?

[Tredici]

Who said they didn't "understand" anything? Or do you know that http://www.terrorfreeoil.org/ was told Sinclair uses no foreign oil or that they do? If they were told that Sinclair does use foreign oil then they are misrepresenting their product they are selling.

The question is, if it is deliberate misprepresentation. Unless you work the operational side of crude oil or products and are aware of all the logistics it isn't uncommon to not understand what is going on in regards to the movements through the infrastructures.

Sinclair very well could PURCHASE only domestic or Canadian crudes but there is no physical way to determine they only PROCESS domestic or Canadian crudes. And there is absolutely no way they can keep their refined product from co-mingling with everyone else's once it hits the pipeline. This would be true for their direct purchase contracts but since they are trading on the NYMEX there really isn't any way of proclaiming terror free oil.


In order to do that you would have to pipeline from the lease directly to your refinery and pipeline the refined product directly to your retail outlets. That isn't feasible.

No one here could possibly "know" what dialogue occurred between Sinclair and the Terrorist Free group. But Sinclair pulling their branded name off that location probably tells us something.

[Dudeskey]

Who said they didn't "understand" anything? Or do you know that http://www.terrorfreeoil.org/ was told Sinclair uses no foreign oil or that they do? If they were told that Sinclair does use foreign oil then they are misrepresenting their product they are selling.

For what its worth I know of a couple sinclair refineries in Wyoming... But dude has a point... That crude could have come from Venezuela, the middle east, Canada... ???

[Bronco_Beerslug]

The question is, if it is deliberate misprepresentation. Unless you work the operational side of crude oil or products and are aware of all the logistics it isn't uncommon to not understand what is going on in regards to the movements through the infrastructures.

Sinclair very well could PURCHASE only domestic or Canadian crudes but there is no physical way to determine they only PROCESS domestic or Canadian crudes. And there is absolutely no way they can keep their refined product from co-mingling with everyone else's once it hits the pipeline. This would be true for their direct purchase contracts but since they are trading on the NYMEX there really isn't any way of proclaiming terror free oil.

In order to do that you would have to pipeline from the lease directly to your refinery and pipeline the refined product directly to your retail outlets. That isn't feasible.

No one here could possibly "know" what dialogue occurred between Sinclair and the Terrorist Free group. But Sinclair pulling their branded name off that location probably tells us something.

We'll see what Joe Kaufman's response is (if any). I posted on his blog and contacted him through his website.

And I wonder why Sinclair told me that over 99% of their refined product is domestic or Canadian. She was adamant about that when I talked to her this AM.

[BigPlayShay]

If they sold ethanol instead of gasoline, they would be doing more for the world.
Despite the right wing naysayers, global warming is the biggest threat to
mankind this century. As crops fail and resources become short, terrorism
is only going to increase as people fight for food and other necessities of life.

My 2002 Ford Explorer runs on E85. It was awesome this summer when gas prices were outrageous. Fuel burns a little quicker, but my vehicle is more powerful running on E85. Right now with the way gas prices are, I am actually paying more to run E85, but it is worth it to me.

[maven]

And I wonder why Sinclair told me that over 99% of their refined product is domestic or Canadian. She was adamant about that when I talked to her this AM.

Dalton Kehlbeck, a regional manager for Sinclair, said most of the company’s oil comes from the United States or Canada, but some is bought on the New York Mercantile Exchange.

“It’s a basket of crude oil,” he said of the exchange oil. “We cannot be sure where the conglomeration of the product comes from.”

The same is true of most oil products sold in the United States.

Here's your other 1%. I would say it's more, JMO, but there you go.

No matter how you slice & dice it, the person you talked to said 99%. She didn't say 100%

[yavoon]

If they sold ethanol instead of gasoline, they would be doing more for the world.
Despite the right wing naysayers, global warming is the biggest threat to
mankind this century. As crops fail and resources become short, terrorism
is only going to increase as people fight for food and other necessities of life.

so as ppl fight for food u want to use corn to make gas?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Dalton Kehlbeck, a regional manager for Sinclair, said most of the company’s oil comes from the United States or Canada, but some is bought on the New York Mercantile Exchange.

“It’s a basket of crude oil,” he said of the exchange oil. “We cannot be sure where the conglomeration of the product comes from.”

The same is true of most oil products sold in the United States.

Here's your other 1%. I would say it's more, JMO, but there you go.

No matter how you slice & dice it, the person you talked to said 99%. She didn't say 100%Actually, she said over 99% and then told me "I'd say 99.9%" but the thing is, is she said 99% of the refined product to retail is domestic or Canadian.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

so as ppl fight for food u want to use corn to make gas?Don't have to use corn exclusively. Biomass will be a large part of ethanol production.

[Spider]

Yep - Once the crude or the product hits a pipeline its mixed with everyone else's crude/product.

Sinclair do its own thing with pipelines ..............but as far as cheveron , texaco ,etc ......... dead on ............ Now if we can only do something about the real terrorist ......... the 60 year old woman that goes through the express lane with way too many items ,and counts pennies to pay ........... these people have to be stopped..................

[yavoon]

Don't have to use corn exclusively. Biomass will be a large part of ethanol production.

then lets spend money researching that instead of spending money subsidizing the corn producers.

[Bronx33]

Good sales pitch in the heartland.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

then lets spend money researching that instead of spending money subsidizing the corn producers.

Setting the Record Straight on Ethanol (http://www.rmi.org/sitepages/pid1157.php)
Focusing on the Nexus of the Agriculture and Energy Value Chains

by Nathan Glasgow and Lena Hansen

Ethanol, which can be substituted for or blended with gasoline, has traditionally been produced from either corn or sugarcane feedstocks.
Biofuels, and specifically ethanol, have been the subject of a great deal of criticism in recent months by detractors claiming that more energy is required to produce ethanol than is available in the final product, that it is too expensive, and that it produces negligible carbon reductions. These critiques are simply not accurate. State-of-the-art technologies have been competently forecasted—even proven in the market—to produce ethanol that is far more cost-effective and less energy-intensive than gasoline. We'll explore why, and why the critics have gotten it wrong.

When we say biofuels, we mean liquid fuels made from biomass—chiefly biodiesel and ethanol, which can be substituted for diesel fuel or for gasoline, respectively. The technology used to produce biodiesel is well understood, although its biomass feedstocks are limited and production today is fairly expensive. We will instead focus on ethanol, which we believe has significantly greater potential.

Ethanol, which can be substituted for or blended with gasoline, has traditionally been produced from either corn or sugarcane feedstocks. In fact, Brazil currently meets more than 25 percent of its gasoline demand with ethanol made from sugarcane. (The sugar is so cheap that the resulting ethanol sells in New York for $1.10 a gallon—with about 81 percent the energy content of a gallon of gasoline—after paying a 100 percent duty, illegal under WTO rules, to protect U.S. corn farmers. Undeterred, the Brazilians are merrily expanding their ethanol exports to Asia.) Even gasoline in the United States contains, on average, 2 percent ethanol (used as a substitute for MTBE to oxygenate fuel). American ethanol is almost exclusively made from the kernels of corn, accounting for about 7 percent of the corn crop. But conventional processes and feedstocks used to make ethanol are not feasible in the United States on a large scale for three reasons: they're not cost-competitive with long-run gasoline prices without subsidies, they compete with food crops for land, and they have only marginally positive energy balances.

Happily, in addition to starch-based feedstocks, ethanol can be produced from "cellulosic" feedstocks, including biomass wastes, fast-growing hays like switchgrass, and short-rotation woody crops like poplar. While not cost-competitive today, already observed advances in technology lead us to believe that in the next few years, ethanol made from these crops will become cost-competitive, won't compete with food for cropland, and will have a sizeable positive energy balance. Indeed, because these crops are expected to have big biomass yields (~10–15 dry tons/acre, up from the current ~5 dry tons/acre), much less land will be required than conventionally thought. Further, cellulosic ethanol will typically have twice the ethanol yield of corn-based ethanol, at lower capital cost, with far better net energy yield.

A common complaint about ethanol is that the quantity of feedstocks is limited and land used to grow feedstocks could be put to better use. For cellulosic feedstocks, the situation is quite the contrary. Cellulosic feedstocks are plentiful: for example, municipal and agricultural wastes can be used to create ethanol, with the positive side-effect of reducing the quantity of waste we must dispose of. Using waste to produce fuel has the clear benefit of a virtually free feedstock, and because energy is generally expended to create the product, not the waste, this type of ethanol obviously has a positive energy balance.

Not quite as obvious is to what extent dedicated energy crops can be used to produce ethanol. We believe the answer is straightforward. Research by Oak Ridge National Laboratory shows that dedicated energy crops can be grown without competing with food crops because they can be grown in marginal areas unsuited for food crop production, or on about 17 million acres of Conservation Reserve Program land that is currently being withheld from agricultural use.

Cellulosic crops have additional environmental benefits for several reasons. First, because crops like switchgrass are deep-rooted perennials, growing them actually prevents soil erosion and restores degraded land. For this same reason, cellulosic crops also have significantly lower carbon emissions. While corn-based ethanol reduces carbon emissions by about 20 percent below gasoline, cellulosic ethanol is predicted to be carbon-neutral, or possibly even net-carbon-negative.

We can't remember how many times we've been asked the question: "But doesn't ethanol require more energy to produce than it contains?" The simple answer is no—most scientific studies, especially those in recent years reflecting modern techniques, do not support this concern. These studies have shown that ethanol has a higher energy content than the fossil energy used in its production. Some studies that contend that ethanol is a net energy loser include (incorrectly) the energy of the sun used to grow a feedstock in ethanol's energy balance, which misses the fundamental point that the sun's energy is free. Furthermore, because crops like switchgrass are perennials, they are not replanted and cultivated every year, avoiding farm-equipment energy. Indeed, if polycultured to imitate the prairies where they grow naturally, they should require no fertilizer, irrigation, or pesticides either. So, according to the U.S. Department of Energy, for every one unit of energy available at the fuel pump, 1.23 units of fossil energy are used to produce gasoline, 0.74 of fossil energy are used to produce corn-based ethanol, and only 0.2 units of fossil energy are used to produce cellulosic ethanol.

Critics further discount cellulosic ethanol by ignoring the recent advancements of next-generation ethanol conversion technologies. A recent example that has received significant attention is David Pimentel's March 2005 paper in Natural Resources Research, which argues that ethanol production from cellulosic feedstocks requires more fossil energy to produce than the energy contained in the final product. However, Pimentel bases his analysis on only one technology used to produce ethanol, ignoring two other developing technologies. His chosen conversion technology, acid hydrolosis, is the least efficient of the three.

A superior option, thermal gasification, converts biomass into a synthesis gas composed of carbon oxides and hydrogen. The gas is then converted into ethanol via either a biological process using microorganisms or a catalytic reactor. Both of these processes show good potential for increased energy yields and reduced costs by using cellulosic feedstocks. This conversion technology is currently being tested in pilot plants in Arkansas and Colorado.

Still better, enzymatic reduction hydrolosis already shows promise in the marketplace. Such firms as Iogen and Novozymes have been developing enzymes, and "smart bugs," that can turn biomass such as corn residues (leaves, stalks, and cobs) into sugars that can then be converted into ethanol. Historically, the biggest cost component of this technology was the creation of enzymes. Earlier this year, though, in combination with the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Novozymes announced a 30-fold reduction in the cost of enzyme production in laboratory trials. Expected benefits from this process include low energy requirements, high efficiency, and mild process conditions. A pilot plant exists in Ontario and another is planned in Hawai'i. The first commercial-scale enzymatic reduction hydrolosis plant is scheduled to be built and operational by Iogen within two years, producing ethanol at a targeted cost of $1.30 per gallon.

No matter which of these conversion technologies ultimately wins, it is clear that cost-effective and efficient ethanol production from cellulose is on the horizon—which is good news for the United States, where mobility consumes seven of every ten barrels of oil we use. Our voracious appetite for that oil comes at a cost—we have to buy it, we have to deal with the pollution that comes from using it, and, because 12 percent of our oil comes from the Middle East, we have to defend it. Because mobility consumes 70 percent of the oil we use, mostly by burning gasoline, it's the first place to look for a solution.

Our recent publication Winning the Oil Endgame (www.oilendgame.com) shows that the critical first step to reducing our oil consumption is tripled automobile efficiency—which can improve safety, maintain or improve performance and comfort, and repay its extra cost (if any) within two years at today's U.S. gasoline prices. But there's no reason to stop there. Using biofuels instead of gasoline to power our cars has the potential to displace 3.7 million barrels per day of crude oil—that's a fifth of our forecasted consumption in 2025, after more efficient use. In fact, an 85/15 percent blend of ethanol/gasoline in the tank of RMI's designed 66-mpg SUV would result in the vehicle getting ~320 mpg per gallon of fossil fuel burned (because the majority of fuel burned is ethanol).

Clearly, focusing on the nexus of the agriculture and energy value chains will create huge opportunities for business and huge wins for our country. The critics simply have it wrong.


Nathan Glasgow and Lena Hansen are researchers/consultants at RMI.

* Winning the Oil Endgame (www.oilendgame.com) and the associated Chapter 18 Biofuels Technical Annex (id.).

* U.S. Department of Energy, Ethanol: The Complete Energy Lifecycle Picture at:
www.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/pdfs/program/2005_ethanol_brochure.pdf.

* P.C. Badger, Ethanol from Cellulose: A General Review at:
www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/ncnu02/v5-017.html.

[cbs1177]

Buy murphy oil.

http://www.murphyoilcorp.com/

Okay it is an Arkansas company but I guess buy American.

Here are location for gas:
http://www.murphyoilcorp.com/rm/retail/

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Buy murphy oil.

http://www.murphyoilcorp.com/

Okay it is an Arkansas company but I guess buy American.

Here are location for gas:
http://www.murphyoilcorp.com/rm/retail/
:) It's still foreign oil to some degree.

[BABronco]

I'm here in Omaha. I'll buy some for you.:thumbsup:

Is the price of gas different at that station than the rest?