Talk:Barrel (unit)

It has been suggested that bbl be merged into this article or section. (Discuss)

I don't think there's anything to discuss, by saying "The barrel (abbreviated bbl)", it's obvious it's the same thing. --Leladax 08:22, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

unless "how" it's what should be discussed --Leladax 08:34, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

No, there's no discussion yet. Let them be merged. Jimp 06:41, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Though "How?"'s a good question seeing as they don't exactly agree with eachother. Jimp 07:41, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Mbbl

Moved from Talk:bbl

There's some confusion over whether 1Mbbl means one million barrels or one thousand barrels. The usual usage seems to be 1 million. Try Google. Yes, it's an incorrect use of a metric prefix. 1MMbbl is also used for one million barrels. But in fact, both abbreviations are rarely used.

The Standard Oil blue barrel may be an urban legend, but the US Department of Energy believes it. See http://www.eia.doe.gov/kids/energyfacts/sources/non-renewable/bluebarrel.html

So does the Alberta government. See http://www.energy.gov.ab.ca/1960.asp

Removed text about "splashing" explaination for barrel size. Used some text from DOE Kid's Page: http://www.eia.doe.gov/kids/energyfacts/sources/non-renewable/bluebarrel.html

--Nagle 05:03, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

That should be 1 Mbbl.

It's not an incorrect use of a metric prefix. There's no violation of any rules to use megabarrels or kilofeet or microinches or whatever—but then, it probably isn't even a prefix in the first place. Many probably don't even read that M as standing for mega- but rather for million, just as in the old days we had "BeV" for billion electron volts and "MeV" for million electron volts.

Of course, that Roman numerals M for 1000, and MM for 1,000,000 (yes, sometimes seen in MMbbl—no, make that not just sometimes but far too often, search for mmbbl oil in any search engine). Gene Nygaard 06:04, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

21:47, 16 March 2007 (UTC)21:47, 16 March 2007 (UTC)21:47, 16 March 2007 (UTC)70.144.103.150 The use of M as a prefix for Mega or million is standard metric use. However the medical industry uses capital M to mean milli as in Mg = milligram on medications! I would hate to have to swallow a metric Mg (meaning Megagram) pill? That certaintly could cause a LARGE mistake, such as the British - Metric system mistake that caused a Mars probe to crash a few years ago! When is the USA going to drop the arcaic British system with all its odd and irratonal units and fully adopt the metric system? --70.144.103.150 21:47, 16 March 2007 (UTC)Aeh

Where do the major oil-trading exchanges define the capacity of a barrel?

Does the NYMEX (or any other exchange) define exactly what the capacity is of a barrel of crude oil? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.159.219.48 (talk) 01:47, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

They don't. In the US, trade is regulated by the Department of Commerce. They operate NIST who, on behalf of the Secretary of Commerce, are empowered to regulate the units of trade. Their definition for the barrel (petroleum) is 42 US gallons or exactly 158.9873 litres. See Barrel (unit). LeadSongDog (talk) 16:04, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

According to page C17 of this NIST document:

http://ts.nist.gov/WeightsAndMeasures/Publications/upload/h4402_appenc.pdf

"by custom, 42 gallons comprise a barrel of crude oil or petroleum products for statistical purposes, and this equivalent is recognized "for liquids" by four States."

Based on the above, it should be noted that (a) the definition of 42 gallons is "by custom" - not "by law", and (b) the definition of 42 gallons is "for statistical purposes" and does not mention "for use in trade or commerce".

This NIST document (page 10) also states that a barrel of oil is 42 gallons (approx. 159 liters):

http://ts.nist.gov/WeightsAndMeasures/Metric/upload/fs376-b.pdf

NYMEX does define the capacity of a barrel in terms of gallons according to this:

http://www.nymex.com/CL_spec.aspx

Here we see that the trading unit (for Light Sweet Crude Oil) is specified as "1,000 barrels (42,000 gallons)". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.49.240.201 (talk) 14:10, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Conclusion: The capacity of a barrel of tradable crude oil is 42 gallons (159 liters) as dictated by custom or convention and not necessarily by statute or legislation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.49.240.201 (talk) 14:13, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

NYMEX is just specifying which barrel they are using (i.e. not fermented liquor barrels). The NIST document Federal Standard 376B referenced above appears to have defined the U.S. oil barrel as 158.9873 liters, exactly, as a consequence of setting metric standards. The American Petroleum Institute has written a foot-long shelf of documents (the Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards or MPSM) specifying in great detail how to measure oil, and the U.S. federal and state governments have passed laws requiring U.S. oil companies to follow it. Other countries have other standards, and if you were selling oil on their markets you'd have to follow them, but that's not relevant here. RockyMtnGuy (talk) 23:57, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Wait - is it 42 gallons or is it exactly 158.9873 litres? Because, 42 gallons is exactly 158.987294928 litres. --Random832 (contribs) 18:57, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Answered my own question - it's not exact; exact conversions in that document are in boldface and 158.9873 is not. --Random832 (contribs) 18:59, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

You can't measure crude oil that accurately in any case. They store it in tanks which may range from -40°C to +40°C, it (and the tanks) expand and contract with temperature changes, the changes are nonlinear depending on chemical composition, the tanks are not perfectly cylindrical and bulge when you put oil in them, and sales quality oil may contain up to 0.5% sand and water. They can correct the readings for all this stuff, but it's still not a perfect measurement. Some operations think they are doing well if the meters balance within +/-5% of each other. Others manage +/-1%. RockyMtnGuy (talk) 06:35, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

When we convert a billion barrels to litres in a spreadsheet, nobody expects to get an approximate answer, however fictional the apparent accuracy may be. We expect to be able to stipulate any rounding we require after the calculation is made. Also, unecessary rounding leading to inaccuracies in intermediate results can introduce errors in final results of a size that can be measured in the real world. It is perverse to use an approximate factor in calculations when an accurate one is available. For all these reasons, quoting the full 12 digits of the conversion factor is correct.HighsideUK (talk) 17:14, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . Maximum and careful attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories , but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 04:19, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Whiskey?

Does anyone know source tells that the 40-gallon barrel was for containing whiskey? --Octra Bond (talk) 02:41, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Oil drum photo

If a barrel of crude oil is 42 gallons, why is it being illustrated with a photo of a 55-gallon oil drum? This seems like a contradiction (or, at best, confusing). Dcwaterboy (talk) 18:41, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Good question. however, the text does point out the distinction between the non-existent 42-US gallon oil barrel and the ubiquitous 55-US gallon drum, and imho the article is more instructive with the captioned photo. Irv (talk) 21:00, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

It's a picture of a drum while the article is about barrels.
The drum picture, especially with the caption, while truthful can easily lead to confusion. Somehow I still thought a barrel was 55gal. So, on reading the article, I assumed a mistake had been made in the text. After checking with other sources I'm convinced that, in the US, when referring to oil a barrel is indeed 42 US gallons... just as the article states. Drums are still 55 US gallons.
A quick search for a Creative Commons licensed picture did not result in any good choices. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bluebbl.gif may be a 42gal barrel, but it is unclear.
Hmmmm... the picture used in the article, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Drum.jpg , does not seem to be sourced.
Perhaps, for now, just changing the caption to something more generic would alleviate the confusion.
Wow.. guess I'm a scaredy-cat editor.. I should just make the change. .done.

(2 minutes later..) I think it's clearer now, but am worried about Casey56's comment about the 42 gallon barrel not existing. Is it just a unit of measure, not an actual container? I have no idea.

Gatohaus (talk) 14:22, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Frankly, without any frame of reference in the image, I'd never be able to tell the difference between a 55-gallon drum and a 42-gallon barrel, especially since the caption itself says the two are "visually similar". A caption that explicitly states "this is not actually what the article is about" doesn't seem like it adds a lot of value to the article, and if they are truly visually similar, then the caption isn't really necessary. My 2¢. HalJor (talk) 22:14, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm still totally confused. What is leaking into the Gulf? 42 or 55 or what?

I suggest removing the current image, as it will just confuse visitors.

I just posted here looking for an image. If anyone in this thread works in the biz, please take a snapshot. Considering the current spill, I think the world would like a picture with a frame of reference. Traffic to this article has doubled since the spill, which is likely people trying to find out what a barrel is. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:01, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

It is confusing to readers to include an image of a 55 gallon drum when what is being talked about is a 42 gallon oil barrel. Oil was originally shipped in 42 gallon barrels when the oil industry was young, but oil companies have not used physical barrels to ship crude oil for probably most of the last century. They use pipelines, tanker trucks, and ships. It's a unit of measure, not a physical barrel. The name (and actually the unit of measure) is archaic. Maybe someone can find a picture in a museum. RockyMtnGuy (talk) 05:20, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Ha ha. Okay. But why is its use as a unit of measurement archaic? In any case, the image should be removed along with the mind-boggling caption. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:52, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Glad that picture was removed, agree that a museum picture of a real 42-gallon barrel would be appropriate. Kkken (talk) 12:25, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Merger proposal

It has been proposed that Barrel per day be merged to here, Barrel (unit).  --Lambiam 23:47, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

I think it seems like a reasonable merger. A lot of the information is duplicated in both articles. I say go ahead.TheFreeloader (talk) 07:12, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Merge. Lightmouse (talk) 11:52, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Done. Lightmouse (talk) 14:22, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Goofy arithmetic in cited reference

Wnt added some barrel/gallon/ton(ne) info on July 29, acknowledging in his Edit Summary that the Web-page source [Marine Oil Pollution Information Gateway] was questionable. It looks like a poorly maintained, organized, and proofread Website of an advocacy arm distantly related to the U.N. Are they an acceptably reliable reference? Not to me, and their bad arithmetic reinforces my bias.

First, they say "tonne" everywhere except in the cited paragraph, where they inexplicably switch to "ton"---which anyone can be forgiven for assuming must therefore mean a 2,000-lb ton, not the 1,000 kg tonne (1.1 tons). In that paragraph, they say:
"1 barrel = 42 American gallons or 35 British imperial gallons = 159 litres. In round figures: 7–9 barrels = 1 ton of oil, depending on the type of oil. Or: 294 American gallons = 1 ton of oil (ranging from 256 American gallons per ton of heavy distillate to 333 American gallons per ton of gasoline, with crude oil at 272 American gallons per ton)."

The arithmetic only works if either (a) those "round figures" should be 6-8 barrels per ton, not 7-9, or (b) 7–9 is correct, but they should have stuck with "tonne". Since the source did neither, I changed (a) in this WP article. Perhaps someone can find a more authoritative, less self-contradictory source. Kkken (talk) 13:21, 27 August 2010 (UTC)