How best to dilute gasoline to use in a kitchen sink?

[Oren]

On Sat, 19 Nov 2016 14:40:36 -0500, TekkieŽ <Tekkie@comcast.net>
wrote:

Any suggestions of common household chemicals that can dilute gasoline?


AS a FF I was going to let this pass but I see from some of your replies are
less than "manly" as you put it.

Please let me know where you live, when you are going to do it and if there
are innocent victims in your abode. I will update the run card and CAD so
responders will not endanger themselves to recover your charred
unrecognizable remains.

.... sometimes it isn't worth chewing through the restraints :-\

 

[Phil Allison]

Robert Bannon wrote:

Any suggestions of common household chemicals that can dilute gasoline?

I use gasoline as a home goo-gone substitute for removing labels.
Most often I do it outside, because of the stink, but I want to keep it
inside in tiny amounts, diluted as much as possible.

** The adhesives used on most labels soften with heat - so a hot air gun will allow you to peel or scrape it off easily. The label itself stops solvents from penetrating through to the adhesive.

Any residual can be cleaned up with mineral turps.

I find "Eucalyptus Oil" a good solvent too.


..... Phil

 

[dadiOH]

"Robert Bannon" <rbannon@yahoo.spam.nowhere.invalid> wrote in message
news0q7v9$tte$11@news.mixmin.net...

Butane is even worse.
I don't see butane readily available either.
It might be (e.g., lighter refills), but it seems too flammable for me to
consider as the diluent.

Wouldn't work even if it weren't flammable since it is only a liquid when
under pressure.

 

[Raymond Spruance III]

On Sat, 19 Nov 2016 18:11:04 -0500, clare@snyder.on.ca wrote:

The reason one solvent doesn't work all the time is there are so
many "glues" used to attach labels.

I understand.

You might not notice but I don't believe anyone who says any one solve works
all the time, because it's just not going to happen.

You'll notice that I take pains to say that the gasoline works "most" of the
time, and "more" so than the other solvents that I have tried (with acetone
coming in second to gasoline but a distant second at that).

Also, I didn't realize you guys actually put the solvent *on* the label,
which I never do.

I remove the labels first, and only *after* the label is gone, do I use the
solvent to try to get rid of the goop.

So some of us (e.g., peanut oil Oren! ) are attacking different problems.

 

[Robert Bannon]

On Sat, 19 Nov 2016 17:19:41 -0700, Charles Bishop wrote:

> If ethanol works, how about isopropyl alcohol, a near relative?

The problem with *any* alcohol, is getting it without the water.

I guess mixing gasoline with water might not be a bad idea though.

Dunno. I never tried it.

But that's the theoretical problem with consumer alcohol (which is a lot of
water with some alcohol).

 

[Raymond Spruance III]

On Sat, 19 Nov 2016 18:31:08 -0800, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

So, by using gasoline for cleaning and label removal, you're dumping
VOCs into the atmosphere. If there was a reward, I would probably
turn you in for re-education and brain washing (using an eco friend
brain wash cleaner).

Yikes. And I invited you to our weekly inventors luncheon too!

 

[Robert Bannon]

On Sat, 19 Nov 2016 18:19:25 -0500, clare@snyder.on.ca wrote:

There really isn't anything that will "dilute" gasoline that is not
either at least as flammable or at least as dangerous as gasoline
itself - particularly not that will not also destroy it's solvency.

Actually, while you're probably right in a *practical* sense, I'm sure there
are zillions of things that can dilute gasoline.

For example, Jeff already looked up what is in gasoline, so, diluting the
gasoline with any of those compounds would *probably* work.

Jeff mentioned for example,
a. butane,
b. isobutane,
c. pentane, and
d. isopentane.

Note to Jeff: I'm not sure if that is accurate though, because there must be
alkenes and alkynes, and aromatics too; but the point is that anything that
is *in* gas (which is a *lot* of things should be able to dilute it.

However, none of them appear to be 'common household chemicals'.

 

[Robert Bannon]

On Sat, 19 Nov 2016 18:29:18 -0500, clare@snyder.on.ca wrote:

The big danger with methanol combustion is you can't see the light
blue flame in a well lighted room - or even a poorly lighted one..
Other than that it is actually inherently safer than gasoline - and
the mixture is more dangerous than straight methanol as far as fire is
concerned.

I don't see alcohol, in any form, as viable, simply because I probably can't
easily get the alcohol without copious amounts of accompanying water.

 

[Raymond Spruance III]

On Sat, 19 Nov 2016 18:32:59 -0500, clare@snyder.on.ca wrote:

Turn your boots over and shake them before you put them on to be sure
there is no mouse or scorpian in your boot (or shoe)

Yup. That kind of advice.

It's the useless kind of advice that dumb mommy's love to give.

My sister keeps sending me these hoaxes to watch out for razor blades in my
kids halloween candy and to watch out for people selling cookies, etc.

There's a certain kind of person (most of those in the California Assembly,
in fact) who feel they need to be a nanny to everyone.

 

On Sat, 19 Nov 2016 10:57:44 -0800, Oren <Oren@127.0.0.1> wrote:

On Sat, 19 Nov 2016 02:02:46 -0000 (UTC), Robert Bannon
rbannon@yahoo.spam.nowhere.invalid> wrote:

On Fri, 18 Nov 2016 17:15:08 -0800, Oren wrote:

Lighter fluid, NAPHTHA!

Did you try peanut butter on the labels?

Butane might cut gasoline, as you suggested.
Naptha is almost certain verboten in California.


For removing labels I was suggesting lighter fluid (NAPHTHA) to remove
labels. Not suggesting mixing it with gas. I removes labels, tar,
grease & oil stains. <https://tinyurl.com/hpzopew


I wasn't joking about peanut butter (smooth variety) either. It takes
longer so the oil soaks in and loosens the label. YMMV

But I'm not sure.
It's got to be sold in order for me to use it though.

I don't see naptha at Home Depot for example.
http://www.homedepot.com/b/Paint-Paint-Thinner-Additives-Solvents-Cleaners-Paint-Thinner-Solvents-Cleaners/Paint-Thinners-and-Strippers/N-5yc1vZc5bmZ1z0t5hf

Forget the peanut butter. Peanut OIL is what does the job - the
"butter" is just a carrier

 

[Oren]

On Sat, 19 Nov 2016 17:54:41 -0500, clare@snyder.on.ca wrote:

Forget the peanut butter. Peanut OIL is what does the job - the
"butter" is just a carrier

But the "butter" holds the oil on :- )

....or try vegetable oil to soak the labels.

 

On Sat, 19 Nov 2016 19:08:19 -0000 (UTC), Robert Bannon
<rbannon@yahoo.spam.nowhere.invalid> wrote:

On Fri, 18 Nov 2016 20:35:03 -0800, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

Well, you could try using something that was actually formulated for
removing labels:
Ouch. Rather expensive at $25/quart.

Exactly.
1. Water, which is 1 cent a gallon, works fine to remove most paper labels
off of most grocery store jars (which is my application).

2. Gasoline, at $3 a gallon, works fine on most of the remaining underlying
goops. I use the gasoline outside, and I wash the jar of the gasoline, but
the stink still transfers into the house unless I air it outside for a day.

3. When the underlying goop is resistant to gasoline, usually acetone or MAF
cleaner does the trick.

That's my cheap, readily available 2-step (sometimes 3-step) process for
removing labels from food jars for further use of the jar.

MSDS shows interesting and noxious chemicals:
http://multimedia.3m.com/mws/mediawebserver?mwsId=SSSSSuUn_zu8l00x4xt9PxmxOv70k17zHvu9lxtD7SSSSSS--
Ingredient C.A.S. No. % by Wt
Xylene 1330-20-7 30 - 60 Trade Secret *
Hydrotreated Light Naphtha (Petroleum)
64742-49-0 30 - 60 Trade Secret *
Ethylbenzene 100-41-4 7 - 13 Trade Secret *
Toluene 108-88-3 0.5 - 1.5 Trade Secret *
Benzene 71-43-2 < 0.1 Trade Secret *

Like you, I love the MSDS because they give you the list of noxious things
in the can (they don't need to list non-noxious stuff though).

This one looks suspiciously similar to gasoline, by the way, in that
gasoline contains the same stuff (almost certainly in different percentages
though).

For naphtha, use Coleman camp fuel. Xylene and toluene are no longer
available in California, so those won't work.

I definately tried Coleman Camp Fuel in the past, since I had about 4 cans
of the stuff. It didn't work anywhere nearly as well as gasoline did, and it
stunk too. It's almost certainly less flammable though.

I also tried charcoal lighter fluid, which was just as bad at removing the
goop as was the Coleman fuel.

Charcoal lighter fluid is usually undistinguishable from "varsol" ot
"mineral spirits".

Coleman fuel, or "white gas" has virtually the same flammability as
regular gasoline but burns cleaner and has an octane of about 50 - the
same as the old "straight run" gasoline from the '20s.

So, whatever they put in those cans, is no good for the task of removing the
underlying goop under labels (once the label is removed by soaking in
water).

There are made for purpose label removers, all of which really smell
awful. Goop-Off, Un-Du, Turtle Wax T-529, Goo-Gone, etc.

Yup. The label removers are no better than gasoline, as far as I know, when
it comes to removing the underlying adhesive under most food-jar labels.

They're only better than gasoline in that they're not flammable, which is
why I use the gasoline outside currently.

Then, there are the home concoctions:
https://www.pinterest.com/explore/remove-sticky-labels/

Not one of those seems to use gasoline, even though it's clearly and
obviously a fantastic solvent (which I've used for years and which works
fine for removing the goop).

The main problem with gasoline is that it needs to be used outside.

 

On Sat, 19 Nov 2016 19:08:21 -0000 (UTC), Robert Bannon
<rbannon@yahoo.spam.nowhere.invalid> wrote:

On Sat, 19 Nov 2016 08:30:51 -0500, Frank wrote:

+ He does not know that I am a retired chemist. I survived many fires
and explosions and release of toxic materials in the lab so I sorta know
what I am talking about. Then from the technical side, if the gasoline
is diluted the polar characteristics will change and it may not function
the same.

That's interesting that you're a retired chemist.
My chemistry training stopped after Organic Chemistry (Morrison and Boyd) in
college.

Water is polar.
But are you sure gasoline is polar?

There must be a good reason gasoline is the best solvent for removing label
goop, so, if you're saying the reason is its polarity, all we need to do is
find a solvent with similar polarity.

But I've never found a solvent better than gasoline for removing the
underlying goop (although no one solvent works at all times).

I'll google to see if gasoline is polar, but it may get complex because
there is no one "chemical" called "gasoline". It's a mix of alkanes,
alkenes, alkynes and aromatics (but I'll doublecheck since that's off the
cuff).

The reason one solvent doesn't work all the time is there are so
many "glues" used to attach labels.

 

On Sat, 19 Nov 2016 19:08:22 -0000 (UTC), Robert Bannon
<rbannon@yahoo.spam.nowhere.invalid> wrote:

On Fri, 18 Nov 2016 23:43:42 -0500, clare@snyder.on.ca wrote:

But "real men" are not "totally" stupid.

Agreed.
We wear goggles (sometimes) when cutting wood.

But, do you read the warning on California hammers?
They suggest you wear goggles every time you hammer a nail.

Nothing wrong with goggles. I have a half dozen myself.
But every time you hammer a nail?

My perscription bifocal glasses are listed safety glasses - and
without them I'm not sure I'd hit the "right" nail . . .

They mitigate danger where
it makes sense - and in your case it does.

I wear a helmet, boots, and gloves when I ride a motorcycle.
You don't need to tell me that riding a motorcycle is dangerous.

Tell me something I don't know.
Otherwise you're wasting everyone's time.

That was my only point in preventing people telling me that the otherwise
excellent solvent has deleterious properties (that everyone already knows).

I hope you haven't fathered
any kids yet - the world doesn't need any more Bannons with yout
cheap-assed attitude.

Grandkids. All Roman Catholic.
You're doomed.


Buy a commercial goo remover that is safe
(relatively) to use - and use it outside in fresh air - because they
ALL STINK.

1. Water works fine to remove most paper labels.
Water is much cheaper than anything else you can suggest for removing the
label.

2. Gasoline works fine to remove most goop under the labels.
The only problem with gasoline is that it (a) stinks and (b) is flammable.
Outside is no problem, which is how I do it currently.

But the goal is to dilute the gasoline 10:1 so that it can be stored and
used inside. The scientific trick is to find a good diluent that negates the
deleterious properties of the gasoline.

If that's too difficult a scientific problem for you, I understand.
Engineering a solution isn't always as simple as buying something off the
shelf.

 

On Sat, 19 Nov 2016 19:08:26 -0000 (UTC), Robert Bannon
<rbannon@yahoo.spam.nowhere.invalid> wrote:

On Sat, 19 Nov 2016 00:03:06 -0500, clare@snyder.on.ca wrote:

Naptha won't help the flammabilty/explosive danger.

Thanks for looking at the problem from a scientific standpoint.

The main issue is that gasoline is a *fantastic* readily available and cheap
(relatively) solvent for eliminating the goop under the labels (after the
label is removed by soaking in water); but gasoline (a) stinks, and (b) is
flammable.

So all we're trying to do is reduce those two deleterious qualities:
a. Lower the stink (or mask it with a better stink perhaps)
b. Lower the flammability issue (probably by lowering the quantity)

Looking at naphtha as the diluent and gasoline as the solvent, and assuming
something around a 1:10 ratio of diluent to solvent, the first thing I find
is that naphtha is, like gasoline, not a single chemical in and of itself.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum_naphtha

Looking up whether naphtha is a good diluent for gasoline, people do it:
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2013/10/20131008-naphtha.html

But the results were too complex for me to glean the gist of the results in
a single skim, so I'll move on to the next suggestion for the moment.

Butane is even worse.
I don't see butane readily available either.
It might be (e.g., lighter refills), but it seems too flammable for me to
consider as the diluent.

Methanol is corrosive, VERY flammable and poisonous (absorbs
through the skin too)

The problem, I think, with *any* alcohol, is that they're gonna dilute it
with water, and water isn't what we want to mix with the gasoline, so,
unless we can find reagent grade alcohols, I think alcohol that we do find
will have water in it.

Dichloromethane may be an alternative but it has serious health risks
as well

Is that a common household chemical?

Also known as Methylene Chloride it is the main component of many
paint strippers. It is not generally available for retail sale in it's
"raw" form.

 

On Sat, 19 Nov 2016 19:08:26 -0000 (UTC), Robert Bannon
<rbannon@yahoo.spam.nowhere.invalid> wrote:

On Fri, 18 Nov 2016 23:16:28 -0500, JC wrote:

Well, I'm just really glad I don't live in Califailia. I do like my
solvents.

I am hoping that the solvent that we scientifically come up with is not only
readily available, but that it *lowers* the negative qualities of gasoline.

There really isn't anything that will "dilute" gasoline that is not
either at least as flammable or at least as dangerous as gasoline
itself - particularly not that will not also destroy it's solvency.

 

[Oren]

On Sat, 19 Nov 2016 18:19:25 -0500, clare@snyder.on.ca wrote:

There really isn't anything that will "dilute" gasoline that is not
either at least as flammable or at least as dangerous as gasoline
itself - particularly not that will not also destroy it's solvency.

Model T Fords would run on moonshine added to leaded gas

 

On Sat, 19 Nov 2016 19:08:27 -0000 (UTC), Robert Bannon
<rbannon@yahoo.spam.nowhere.invalid> wrote:

On Fri, 18 Nov 2016 23:37:20 -0500, clare@snyder.on.ca wrote:

The only thing I know of that will "dilute" gasoline and make it
less flammable is Carbon Tet - which has serious safety issues itself
and has been illegal for years.

This is interesting, even though carbon tetrachloride is probably difficult
to get and hence isn't a standard household chemical.

You have a good point in that the goal of dilution is to reduce the
deleterious qualities of the gasoline, which, let's face it, works just fine
as a label goop remover.

The problem with the gasoline is obvious though, so that's what I'm trying
to reduce by diluting with some other common household chemical.

I was hoping that the dilution would reduce the negative complications of
gasoline.

From the scientific standpoint (which is really what I'm after), are you
saying that a 50:50 mixture of methanol and gasoline would be *more*
flammable than a 100% mixture of either one?

The big danger with methanol combustion is you can't see the light
blue flame in a well lighted room - or even a poorly lighted one..
Other than that it is actually inherently safer than gasoline - and
the mixture is more dangerous than straight methanol as far as fire is
concerned.

 

On Sat, 19 Nov 2016 19:08:29 -0000 (UTC), Robert Bannon
<rbannon@yahoo.spam.nowhere.invalid> wrote:

On Sat, 19 Nov 2016 14:38:22 +0000, Stormin' Norman wrote:

I will reiterate my recommendation, use WD-40 for label removal.

I hear you on the miracle-in-a-can as I knew about it, and had tried it
years ago, and decided it was a myth. But I can try it again, especially if,
as you say, they supply a liquid version of this miracle in a can.

If the odor is too offensive for your manly
sensibilities, buy the product in liquid form.

I appreciate that advice since I didn't know they made a liquid form.
I have only used the spray, and found it to be substandard in every way for
"lubrication" and "protection" of metal-on-metal surfaces.

If you do not atomize it with a spray, the odor is far less
pervasive.

Thank you for that point, which I agree with you on, which is that for my
use, the miracle in a can will best be the liquid version.

With WD-40, apply a light layer to the label and just let it sit for a little while. Come back in 10 - 15
minutes and the adhesive will have dissolved and the label will slide off with virtually no work.

Interesting that you mention a "label".
I always remove the label first, generally by soaking in plain old water.
Once I have the label removed, that's where I need the solvent to remove the
goop.

Perhaps the "single step" method using "miracle in a can" would be the
sinpler way????

If you need a powerful solvent that will dissolve almost anything else, buy a can of lacquer thinner (yes, it
is available in California) LT is unbelievable in it's utility.

I think I've tried it, but I see I don't have any on my shelves at the
moment, so, if California will allow me to buy it, I'll pick up some lacquer
thinner if it's still sold.

Use of and storage of gasoline and other highly carcinogenic chemicals mixtures inside the living area of a
residence is as inadvisable as smoking or leaving a loaded, unlocked firearm where might be accessible by a 5
year old child.

And wipe your shoes before you come in the house.
Otherwise, someone might slip on the mud.

Turn your boots over and shake them before you put them on to be sure
there is no mouse or scorpian in your boot (or shoe)

 

On Sat, 19 Nov 2016 16:02:42 -0500, "dadiOH" <xico@verizon.net> wrote:

"Robert Bannon" <rbannon@yahoo.spam.nowhere.invalid> wrote in message
news0q7v9$tte$11@news.mixmin.net...

Butane is even worse.
I don't see butane readily available either.
It might be (e.g., lighter refills), but it seems too flammable for me to
consider as the diluent.

Wouldn't work even if it weren't flammable since it is only a liquid when
under pressure.

Or below 31 degrees F at atmospheric pressure (sea level standard)