Since I have nothing better to do at work today, I'll throw some fuel onto the fire.
Samm is just as correct in his assessment as most everyone else. It is all dependent upon your point of view. Let me illustrate.
Assuming a base has storage for 10000 gallons of fuel, when there are 10000 gallons present, the base is at 100% capacity. However, if a tanker truck comes in with an extra 2500 gallons on board, the base now contains 125% of its fuel capacity. There is no way you can store that fuel on the base in the given containers, because as has been pointed out, you simply cannot pour 10 ounces of coffee into an 8 ounce cup. Samm's perception here is that even though there is more fuel on the base than could possibly be stored, the bae's total volume of fuel is 100%. The assumption is correct, given that you are looking at the entire base as the container. So therefore, from one perspective, the base has 125% fuel, whereas from the other there is only 100% because the base now has the ability to store more than it did before.
One can continue to apply this logic, such that at ALL volumes, we can safely say there is 100%. If, for example, we empty one of the containers at the base containing 25% of the total fuel, we can now say two things: first is that we have 75% fuel left. The second is that we have 100% fuel left, because even though we have used up 25% of the fuel, the remaining fuel is now representative of the total.
It all boils down to whether or not you believe 100% is subjective. If you feel, as Samm does, it is not. It represents an absolute that can never be crossed. It then becomes a boundary which you can base calculations around. It is concrete and easily identifible.
Enough babbling. I really should attempt to work now.
