Anti static strap

[Coyote machine]

Yes and no. Did you read the entire page? Seems oil companies and at least one state law prohibit electronic devices, including and most often citing call phones as a potential problem when fueling. The last paragraph supports what I stated about static electricity and fueling. Better safe than sorry, no?
BTW, the stations all tell the consumer to leave the pump on and the nozzle in the tank and notify the attendant if a fire starts, regardless of cause.

Here's the link at the bottom of your Snopes page regarding static electricity and gas station fires:

http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/blgas-static-fires2.htm

 

[Gary Fowler]

Mythbusters TV show did a rather extensive test to try to get a cell phone to spark off a vapor mixture. It could not be done, there just wasn't enough juice to ignite the gas vapors. They tried everything including the ringing, turning it on and off etc. They did demonstrate that static electricity discharge was enough to ignite the vapors.
This lead them to conclusively state that any fires related to fueling must have been caused by static electricity or other outside source of ignition and not the cell phone itself.

 

[aczlan]

Yes and no. Did you read the entire page? Seems oil companies and at least one state law prohibit electronic devices, including and most often citing call phones as a potential problem when fueling. The last paragraph supports what I stated about static electricity and fueling. Better safe than sorry, no?
BTW, the stations all tell the consumer to leave the pump on and the nozzle in the tank and notify the attendant if a fire starts, regardless of cause.
Here's the link at the bottom of your Snopes page regarding static electricity and gas station fires:
Static Electricity Causes Gas Pump Fires [Analysis]

Static electricity yes, but not cell phones. From your link:

"The fact is," PEI spokesman J. Rex Brown confirmed in an email message, "static electricity has caused fires at gas stations. We have documented cases and even have some on video. Unlike the cell phone scare (which was started by a major oil company and PEI was never able to document) this situation is rare, but a very real problem."

Aaron Z

 

[timster2]

The static charge is built up by sliding your butt on the seat. The gas station fire hazard happens more for women then men because they get back in the car to stay warm as the car is fueled. When they get out and touch the fuel nozzle the static charge is dissipated at the worst possible spot.

 

[jinman]

My logic tells me that Mace Canute is exactly right about cell phones and electronic devices. After all, a car driving by with a faulty spark plug wire while you are pumping will generate more RF emissions than a cell phone. Just look at what happens inside a car's gasoline engine. Each cylinder has an exact mix of gas and air plus it is compressed. Then, it takes a high energy spark from the spark plug to ignite the fuel. None of these conditions is present at the fuel filler neck. All the conditions would have to come together in an unbelievable series of coincidences far less likely than induction from nearby high power lines or power transformers.

Static, on the other hand, can be very high voltage and is even worse in cold, dry weather with so many man-made fabrics with plastic fibers. The synthetic fibers in most women's undergarments make them more likely to generate high static charges than men with predominantly cotton fiber underwear. However, the non-leather soles of our modern day sneakers and many other shoes can generate very high charges just by walking across a polyester carpet or rug. Your shoes rubbing on the carpets in your vehicle can generate extremely high charges in a very short time. Genuine leather shoes with leather soles/heels will dissipate the charges slowly and keep high potentials from building up. Certainly, it is possible to build up static charges while getting into and out of a vehicle.

However, I believe careful handling of a fuel nozzle can prevent the likelihood of a static induced ignition. If you trail a fuel nozzle dripping raw fuel as you put it into your filler neck or remove it, you can have raw fuel just waiting for spark. Handling the nozzle carefully is just as important as trying to discharge static. If you do both, your likelihood of ever having a fueling fire is extremely rare. In my opinion, carelessness is the the major culprit, not static nor electronic emissions.

EDIT: BTW, how many of us have those piezoelectric igniter barbecue grill starters? Do they work every time? They have an extremely high energy spark, yet you have to click them several times until the fuel-air mixture is just right to ignite. Just sayin. . .

 

[D7E]

Combines here all drag heavy chains off the back axle like a ground strap to stop static electricity . In very dry conditions with a fine fluffy dust like sunflowers it makes an amazing difference with combine fires .

 

[Daver1963]

Here is a link that shows electrostatic discharge (ESD) damage to electronics. The military is serious about ESD because handling circuit cards, power supplies, and other electronic components WITHOUT a ground strap can cause fatal damage to those items as shown on the web page. Considering some DoD electronic equipment can have cards that cost in the 10's of thousands of dollars that is not much of a surprise. There have been many cases of multi-million dollar weapon systems being incapacitated by ESD damage to a 10 cent diode.
The lowest threshold of static electricity the body can normally detect through a discharge is 400 volts. Considering most modern electronics operate on voltages between 0vdc and 5vdc then 400 volts will do some damage. The human body can hold a charge of around 40kv. It doesn't kill you because there's no current to speak of.

https://nepp.nasa.gov/index.cfm/6095

 

[jinman]

The lowest threshold of static electricity the body can normally detect through a discharge is 400 volts. Considering most modern electronics operate on voltages between 0vdc and 5vdc then 400 volts will do some damage.

When I was teaching electronic assembly for the F16, we had FETs with blown junctions by as little as 85 volts of static discharge. That's far below the level detectable by touch. The use of machines to stuff circuit boards and the use of ICs cut down tremendously on damage during assembly because the components were not handled by people except to load the machines. Once assembled into the circuit boards, most components were shielded sufficiently to make static damage rare. Still, anytime you handled a circuit board, you had to wear wrist straps, stand on anti-static mats, and have air ionizers running over the workstation. Humidity levels were also held at 70% or greater in the facility.

 

[Western]

My Graco commercial line painters all have a chain-to-ground

 

[timster2]

Back when I was teaching some basic automotive electronics I had the students pass around some Styrofoam blocks and then measure the static charge with my static meter. They were amazed just how short a time playing with the blocks generated several thousand volts of a static charge. They learned to use a ground strap when replacing or working on electronic components real fast.