toto Posted October 8, 2022 Report Posted October 8, 2022 Article in the WSJ today regarding a proposed EPA finding. I’m not sure what if anything this means for the progress of PAFI or G100UL or anything else, but thought it was interesting. https://archive.ph/cKIaf (Direct link for subscribers: https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2022/10/07/epa-leaded-fuel-airplanes/) Quote
Shadrach Posted October 9, 2022 Report Posted October 9, 2022 https://foe.org/news/epa-endangerment-finding/ “Gratitude to the Biden administration and the EPA for issuing the proposed endangerment finding,” said Miki Barnes of Oregon Aviation Watch. “This decision is a significant step forward in efforts to protect vulnerable communities from the environmental damage and devastating harms caused by aviation lead emissions.” Imagine devoting a non prof for the sole propose of destroying aviation. https://www.oregonaviationwatch.org/OAW-About.php About OAW: The primary purpose of Oregon Aviation Watch is to research, educate and advocate on behalf of the public interest and public welfare about aviation issues. Mission: The mission of Oregon Aviation Watch is to enhance and protect the quality of life for Oregon residents by eliminating the adverse impacts of aviation activity. Issues of Concern: noise intrusions environmental pollution climate change health risks social injustice property devaluation safety hazards security threats land use restrictions fiscal inequities This is a political organization masquerading as a public interest group. They are a member of Stay Grounded another international non profit dedicated to the “Degrowth of Aviation” and “Airport-related Injustice and Resistance”. 1 1 Quote
M20F Posted October 9, 2022 Report Posted October 9, 2022 100Ll has a tremendous amount of lead in it which isn’t good for anyone. The goal here should be finding a good solution that doesn’t require lead. 6 Quote
Shadrach Posted October 9, 2022 Report Posted October 9, 2022 15 minutes ago, M20F said: 100Ll has a tremendous amount of lead in it which isn’t good for anyone. The goal here should be finding a good solution that doesn’t require lead. Agee that a substitute is needed. Disagree that 100LL has a tremendous amount of lead. My mooney emits approximately .006oz of lead per nautical mile or about .75 oz per hour. 2 Quote
MikeOH Posted October 9, 2022 Report Posted October 9, 2022 "...devastating harms caused by AVIATION lead emissions." GMAB!! Can they list even ONE demonstrated harm from AVIATION lead?? I doubt it. Seems I recall that some airport haters in central California tried to monitor the air around an airport and could NOT find any evidence of higher levels than non-airport air! Quote
McMooney Posted October 9, 2022 Report Posted October 9, 2022 who cares, GA/FAA has only had 40+ years to do something, get on with it already 4 Quote
aviatoreb Posted October 9, 2022 Report Posted October 9, 2022 13 hours ago, Shadrach said: Agee that a substitute is needed. Disagree that 100LL has a tremendous amount of lead. My mooney emits approximately .006oz of lead per nautical mile or about .75 oz per hour. Who is to say how much is a lot or a little? 0.75oz sounds like a lot to me. When dispersed into the air. Multiplied by all the airplanes. I love my airplane but I think it is a very good thing they are finally getting the lead out of our fuel. Go Gami. 2 Quote
Shadrach Posted October 9, 2022 Report Posted October 9, 2022 On 10/9/2022 at 10:53 AM, aviatoreb said: Who is to say how much is a lot or a little? 0.75oz sounds like a lot to me. When dispersed into the air. Multiplied by all the airplanes. I love my airplane but I think it is a very good thing they are finally getting the lead out of our fuel. Go Gami. Yes I agree it’s a good thing and said as much in the first sentence of my post. I’ve also said in other threads that I will be an early adopter. I had my lead levels checked years ago. They were well below “safe” levels but still had lead present. I am 99.9% sure my lead exposure is aviation related but not in the way that is being suggested in the media or by the Fed. In my youth (20s), I was careless with exposure to raw Avgas and Aircraft exhaust residue. I know firsthand what Avgas will do to your skin if saturated and it isn’t pretty. Stupid but it is what it is. The Fed seems to be emphasizing “extrapolated models” over the collection of real data; which would be easy and inexpensive to accumulate. The media piece on Ried/Hillview suggests that houses and cars are being covered with leaded exhaust residue. Unless I missed it, nobody went to the trouble to actually have a sample of this “residue” tested. I have stored a car outside for months at a time at my airport; it collects no “residue”. I have a real distaste for groups and media pieces that, by design sensationalize or outright lie about an issue. It is possible to agree that 100LL should be phased out ASAP without agreeing with the often specious arguments being used to hasten its demise. That’s where I’ve landed on the issue. When G1000UL is available, I will support it with my wallet, but I do not align with the tantrum throwers jumping up and down vilifying and lying about everyone and everything that they oppose. I believe the real danger of TEL is to those involved in the manufacturing, handling and transportation of the compound. The environment in general is at risk of spills and tank leaks. Then there are the wash racks with exhaust/belly residue going into the sewer. There any number of scenarios were leaded gas is potentially problematic. We’ve done a reasonable job of mitigating most but finding a new fuel would be in everyone’s interest. Just because I think that 28 grams of lead spread over approximately 170 statute miles is minuscule doesn’t mean I’m not onboard with eliminating it. 4 Quote
Unit74 Posted October 10, 2022 Report Posted October 10, 2022 Fear mongering has been a very effective tactic of certain leans for decades. The stchic? Make bold claims with no basis in fact to influence uneducated populations to adopt the person or groups goals. The more noise you make, the more valid the claims must be. Thus, it must be true! When faced with real data, deny, redirect and make counter accusations, again, with no basis in fact. It’s worked great for them, especially in areas where the population is easily influenced and manipulated. 1 Quote
GeeBee Posted October 10, 2022 Report Posted October 10, 2022 I want lead gone for no other reason than I'm tired of cleaning up after it with maintenance bills. 3 Quote
carusoam Posted October 10, 2022 Report Posted October 10, 2022 Always wondering…. Why isn’t the government supporting the development of lead free fuels? Do they not believe going lead free is a good idea? So many transportation bills out there… Doesn’t lead free aviation warrant a proper look / see…. Shutting down leaded avgas without a proper replacement would be un-American… Over-pricing the new replacement fuel would be equally un-American… Getting to the right replacement fuel at the right price, and all other details in place… probably won’t be accomplished by any tree huggers bent on destruction of American institutions such as aviation… PP thoughts only, not disparaging all tree huggers…. MS has chemical, petroleum, and environmental engineers working to save the fueling future…. At their real jobs… and a few Mooney owners with real companies in the real oil business… According to the article above… ”The agency said 363,000 children age 5 and younger live within 500 meters of an airport runway” That is shorter than most GA runways are long! Were they counting all the kids living within a third of a mile of a class B airport, that mostly uses Jet-A for fuel? Expect to pay a little extra to support your favorite legal team… Go AOPA! PP thoughts only… on the east coast we are battling for the right to have grocery stores provide grocery bags so we can get our food home… from the grocery store… Apparently, paper bag making isn’t exactly an eco-panacea either…. Often, having single use items has tremendous health benefits… Re-using certain items can be very hazardous to one’s health… let’s not share a community drink cup just to say we are saving the world from the evil Solo cup….! truth be known… there is plenty of recycled materials in the center of multi-layered structures like solo cups… somewhere in between the white, red, and clear layers of PS… is a layer of all the edge trimming that didn’t become a cup the first time… wait a sec… every time the (certain) tree huggers say we should use alcohol in our fuels… do they close their eyes to where that alcohol comes from…? Using grains to produce alcohol… has a tendency to remove grains from the food supply at the same time… thus raising the price of bread, through supply and demand… Geeeeees…. This is a complex subject! PP thoughts only, not a solo cup guy… Best regards, -a- Quote
0TreeLemur Posted October 10, 2022 Report Posted October 10, 2022 I'll add that to us, TEL is a strategic material, made by one manufacturer in the UK. This makes us (GA) susceptible to supply chain interruption. If the US Military was still dependent on it they would have paid contractors to develop UL avgas a long time ago. They solved this problem by making their fleet uniformly kerosene burning. Kerosene powered GA uses vastly more fuel than piston GA. We're a dying breed. It seems that the majority of GAMI invention is to put more Xylene in the mix in place of Toluene. I'm glad somebody figured that out before it's too late. 1 Quote
Fly Boomer Posted October 10, 2022 Report Posted October 10, 2022 15 minutes ago, 0TreeLemur said: It seems that the majority of GAMI invention is to put more Xylene in the mix in place of Toluene. I'm more impressed by their demonstrated ability to get the STC approved, than I am by their hydrocarbon mixing skills. 3 1 Quote
0TreeLemur Posted October 10, 2022 Report Posted October 10, 2022 4 minutes ago, Fly Boomer said: I'm more impressed by their demonstrated ability to get the STC approved, than I am by their hydrocarbon mixing skills. Agree. An excellent demonstration of dogged persistence I'd say. Quote
Pinecone Posted October 10, 2022 Report Posted October 10, 2022 3 hours ago, Fly Boomer said: I'm more impressed by their demonstrated ability to get the STC approved, than I am by their hydrocarbon mixing skills. Exactly. Somewhere was a report that the basic idea was developed in the 40s. It also took vision to not look at meeting the ASTM spec, but to get the fuel approved without meeting that standard. Quote
Shadrach Posted October 10, 2022 Report Posted October 10, 2022 13 minutes ago, Pinecone said: Exactly. Somewhere was a report that the basic idea was developed in the 40s. It also took vision to not look at meeting the ASTM spec, but to get the fuel approved without meeting that standard. Braly himself said the idea had been around for ever. He simply mixed and tested until he arrived with a blend that worked and then hunkered down to get it through the gov process. Quote
MikeOH Posted October 11, 2022 Report Posted October 11, 2022 On 10/9/2022 at 9:45 AM, 1980Mooney said: Based upon current 100LL sales it is about 680,000 lbs of lead annually that is in the air, in our rainwater, in your hangar, in your mechanics shop, and on your mechanic. Yeah, that 3 microgram/sq. ft per YEAR is really excessive. To put that level of ANNUAL surface deposition in perspective, OSHA has an 8-hour PEL for lead of 1.4 microgram/cubic foot of workplace air. It is left to the student to approximate what 3 micrograms per year might amount to in atmospheric concentration in a given cubic foot of air at given point of time as it settles out of the atmosphere. Quote
OR75 Posted October 11, 2022 Report Posted October 11, 2022 a good portion of the lead actually ends up in the lubricant 2 Quote
Utah20Gflyer Posted October 11, 2022 Report Posted October 11, 2022 8 minutes ago, OR75 said: a good portion of the lead actually ends up in the lubricant Which is why we can't use full synthetic oil. It can't suspend the lead in solution until the next oil change. Synthetic oil and longer oil change intervals will be a nice byproduct of getting rid of the lead, also cleaner spark plugs and no more stuck valves. 2 Quote
ilovecornfields Posted October 11, 2022 Report Posted October 11, 2022 14 hours ago, Unit74 said: Fear mongering has been a very effective tactic of certain leans for decades. The stchic? Make bold claims with no basis in fact to influence uneducated populations to adopt the person or groups goals. The more noise you make, the more valid the claims must be. Thus, it must be true! When faced with real data, deny, redirect and make counter accusations, again, with no basis in fact. It’s worked great for them, especially in areas where the population is easily influenced and manipulated. Unfortunately the secret is out that this works. Now everyone is doing it. The only argument is who “them” is. When I first heard “alternative facts” I knew we were in for some tough times. 100 LL is on its way out. I don’t see how this won’t happen within the next ten years. I know complaining about it certainly won’t change things. I’m looking forward to using synthetic oil. Hopefully the GAMI G100UL smells as nice as 100LL and not as bad as mogas. 2 Quote
N201MKTurbo Posted October 11, 2022 Report Posted October 11, 2022 13 minutes ago, ilovecornfields said: Hopefully the GAMI G100UL smells as nice as 100LL and not as bad as mogas. Good luck with that. It uses aromatics to raise the octane number. I always thought aromatics meant smell. Quote
MikeOH Posted October 11, 2022 Report Posted October 11, 2022 1 hour ago, ilovecornfields said: 100 LL is on its way out. I don’t see how this won’t happen within the next ten years. I know complaining about it certainly won’t change things. Sadly, neither will the facts change anything: the minuscule amount of lead from 100LL as I noted above just doesn't rise to a pragmatic level of concern. Politically, it's GIANT, and that will make 100LL's demise inevitable as you point out. It just sickens me that many are more than willing to pay what I truly believe will be a $2 per gallon adder to eliminate 100LL If you do your own oil changes and Lycoming/TCM and Mooney approve 100 hour oil change intervals with synthetic oil it'll only cost you $2000 to save one $200 change (Mooney at 10 gph x 100 hours x 2$ = $2000) Quote
mooniac15u Posted October 11, 2022 Report Posted October 11, 2022 9 hours ago, N201MKTurbo said: Good luck with that. It uses aromatics to raise the octane number. I always thought aromatics meant smell. The term "aromatic" in chemistry goes back to before they had a good understanding of the structure. The aromatic compounds they were working with tended to have more of a detectable odor than aliphatic hydrocarbons. In modern chemical usage the term aromatic has a specific definition related to having a cyclic planar structure with double bonds in resonance. Many aromatic compounds don't have much/any smell. 1 1 Quote
N201MKTurbo Posted October 11, 2022 Report Posted October 11, 2022 19 minutes ago, mooniac15u said: The term "aromatic" in chemistry goes back to before they had a good understanding of the structure. The aromatic compounds they were working with tended to have more of a detectable odor than aliphatic hydrocarbons. In modern chemical usage the term aromatic has a specific definition related to having a cyclic planar structure with double bonds in resonance. Many aromatic compounds don't have much/any smell. I'm pretty sure nobody on this forum has smelled G100UL, especially old G100UL. Time will tell. 1 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.