Re-Refining oil

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Doug Hillary
Hi,
re-refining lubricants is viable in many instances. About 1975 or so Mercedes-Benz sold a whole bus (chassis) fleet to New Zealand's Auckland City Council - the Council made the purchase conditional to the use of re-refined engine lubricants


Was that the stuff made or sold by BP?
 
Of course. Why would the re-refined oil be any worse than what is made from crude?

It's not like the stuff that comes from the ground just has a few things added and then it's packaged into bottles that show up on the shelf of your favorite retail outlet. So why would folks think re-refining oil is some sort of sketchy operation?

After all, there are both good and bad blenders using VIRGIN stock, so one would stand to reason the same is true in the re-refined market space. Go with a trustworthy outfit that demonstrates they consistently produce a quality product.

Originally Posted By: LargeCarManX2
Question: Would you feel comfortable with re-refined oil from a decent company and running it in your engine?

Just wondering
whistle.gif
 
Originally Posted By: LargeCarManX2
Question: Would you feel comfortable with re-refined oil from a decent company and running it in your engine?

Just wondering
whistle.gif

I've seen what gets dumped into the waste oil recycle container at MY "transfer station". ATF, paint thinner, gear oil, gas, cooking oil, antifreeze. No way, Jose.
 
Much of that was derived from crude in the first place, and obviously they got the crude refined sufficiently. They are certainly not just adjusting the viscosity and sending it out the door as is (except for, perhaps, some of those on the PQIA alert list).
 
I dont see a problem using any re refined/recycled oil. I have used some SK ECO POWER 5w20 oil before also without issues.
 
Up here, Doug, all our Walmart Supertech products are Safety-Kleen recycled oil. The benefit of that is we get just about every normal API and ILSAC conventional variety in 5 gallon pails there, including PCMOs, and for under $50.
 
Originally Posted By: Garak
Up here, Doug, all our Walmart Supertech products are Safety-Kleen recycled oil. The benefit of that is we get just about every normal API and ILSAC conventional variety in 5 gallon pails there, including PCMOs, and for under $50.

That is convenient isn't it. Even rotella t 15w-40 is under 70 bucks for 5 gallons. I bought a pail last year for my bikes
 
Originally Posted By: HerrStig
Originally Posted By: LargeCarManX2
Question: Would you feel comfortable with re-refined oil from a decent company and running it in your engine?

Just wondering
whistle.gif

I've seen what gets dumped into the waste oil recycle container at MY "transfer station". ATF, paint thinner, gear oil, gas, cooking oil, antifreeze. No way, Jose.

Please. If oil companies can take the crude out of the Canadian oil sands and turn that into fuel,oil etc then do you really think for a moment removing those contaminants would be an issue.
Like I already said,changing opinions with the old guard(such as this poster)likely wont happen however the younger generation accepts that we have the technology to take one thing and create another,so over time I don't think it will be an issue.
To be honest valvoline is pioneering this whole process and there is no doubt in my mind that all oil companies will be doing this in the future.
It's the cost that keeps it from taking off. I bet if they priced it even just a couple bucks cheaper than the bottles on the shelf around it it would sell well. Give folks an incentive to buy it. Or the famous mail in rebate idea.
 
Or, just have all companies do it, and don't label it any different. After all, our Super Tech isn't labelled as recycled, yet it most certainly is. 99% of Canadian Walmart customers probably have no idea, and no problems, either. This is a case where what one doesn't know doesn't hurt.
 
Originally Posted By: Garak
Or, just have all companies do it, and don't label it any different. After all, our Super Tech isn't labelled as recycled, yet it most certainly is. 99% of Canadian Walmart customers probably have no idea, and no problems, either. This is a case where what one doesn't know doesn't hurt.
Not informing consumers is always a good idea.
 
Well, considering the state of product data sheets for almost every oil company in existence, along with the "real synthetic" argument, I think Walmart Canada's use of recycled oil for Super Tech is pretty transparent. After all, it's extremely easy to find out that the ST is make by Safety-Kleen, and it's extremely easy to find out what Safety-Kleen produces.

Try to find an HTHS for a non-European Castrol variety, or a NOACK for PU that won't cause a war.
wink.gif
 
No problem with its quality, but I'm thinking whether the whole process of using it in lubrication again is more efficient than feeding it into large ships and burn it directly before the delicate re-refining process.

Say your refinery is along the coast, you can feed the waste engine oil into a ship and burn it without the re-refining process, but you re-refine the waste oil and make new engine oil out of it. The ship still needs to burn fuel so it takes up new fuel from oil instead. This isn't saving the environment much.

Say your refinery is in the middle of the nation (Kentucky for example), and you send your waste oil from California to Kentucky for refining and then send the base stock or finished oil from the refinery in Kentucky back to California. This is totally not efficient compare to burning it directly in a ship from California back to China.

Now if your waste oil is in Kentucky, and you refine it into base stock and then blend into lubricant used in Kentucky, it would be much more efficient than sending it to California to burn in a ship.

If all the waste oil are used efficiently without re-refining them back into lubricant base stock, IMO it is not really that much of an improvement over what is already done (burning it as a fuel to reduce crude oil derived fuel).
 
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
A basic explanantion of how they Re-Refine oils.

http://www.nexlubetampa.com/technology1.html

Their figures on crude oil to lube oil is a bit off.

The conversion factor is more like 5.5% of crude is converted to lubricant oil, or 42 gallons of crude oil yields 2.3 gallons of lube oil.



Interesting. Thanks!!
 
Originally Posted By: PandaBear
No problem with its quality, but I'm thinking whether the whole process of using it in lubrication again is more efficient than feeding it into large ships and burn it directly before the delicate re-refining process.

Say your refinery is along the coast, you can feed the waste engine oil into a ship and burn it without the re-refining process, but you re-refine the waste oil and make new engine oil out of it. The ship still needs to burn fuel so it takes up new fuel from oil instead. This isn't saving the environment much.

Say your refinery is in the middle of the nation (Kentucky for example), and you send your waste oil from California to Kentucky for refining and then send the base stock or finished oil from the refinery in Kentucky back to California. This is totally not efficient compare to burning it directly in a ship from California back to China.

Now if your waste oil is in Kentucky, and you refine it into base stock and then blend into lubricant used in Kentucky, it would be much more efficient than sending it to California to burn in a ship.

If all the waste oil are used efficiently without re-refining them back into lubricant base stock, IMO it is not really that much of an improvement over what is already done (burning it as a fuel to reduce crude oil derived fuel).
You are "complicating" the issue with a good discussion of the economics involved. Throw enough government money at it and economics will no longer matter.
smile.gif
 
Originally Posted By: HerrStig
Originally Posted By: PandaBear
No problem with its quality, but I'm thinking whether the whole process of using it in lubrication again is more efficient than feeding it into large ships and burn it directly before the delicate re-refining process.

Say your refinery is along the coast, you can feed the waste engine oil into a ship and burn it without the re-refining process, but you re-refine the waste oil and make new engine oil out of it. The ship still needs to burn fuel so it takes up new fuel from oil instead. This isn't saving the environment much.

Say your refinery is in the middle of the nation (Kentucky for example), and you send your waste oil from California to Kentucky for refining and then send the base stock or finished oil from the refinery in Kentucky back to California. This is totally not efficient compare to burning it directly in a ship from California back to China.

Now if your waste oil is in Kentucky, and you refine it into base stock and then blend into lubricant used in Kentucky, it would be much more efficient than sending it to California to burn in a ship.

If all the waste oil are used efficiently without re-refining them back into lubricant base stock, IMO it is not really that much of an improvement over what is already done (burning it as a fuel to reduce crude oil derived fuel).
You are "complicating" the issue with a good discussion of the economics involved. Throw enough government money at it and economics will no longer matter.
smile.gif



Economics will always matter in spite of the gummints "best" intentions.

MIke
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
Where to take a Mercedes for an oil change when no MB dealer is nearby?
2
Replies
38
Views
1K
GON
O
Honda Engine Specification Study in regards to Fuel Dilution
Replies
2
Views
2K
OneLonelyBurrito
B
Case study: Chemical cleaning stuck rings to eliminate oil burning
2
Replies
22
Views
3K
Patman
J
PAO 68 A/C Oil
Replies
4
Views
2K
Joba27n
K
new used Bronco 2.7, looking for some advice.
2 3
Replies
40
Views
3K
kcarsey
Back
Top Bottom