Why are these planes still using toxic fuel?

Whatever happened to the most recent UL fuels certification attempts? Been radio-silence for a long time. Last thing I can find from the G100UL tests is 4 years ago...
 
Wealthy private pilots putting their interests above those of the local children.
 
I just got done reading that article about 30 minutes ago. I am genuinely interested in the data of increased lead levels, but they present none. I think there has to be some impact, but is it just on the barely detectable level, or is it actually a serious concern for the community?

That article was mostly full of antidotal stories and save the children rhetoric.

Again I’m not opposed to change, but show us some data...
 
Somedudeintn said:
I just got done reading that article about 30 minutes ago. I am genuinely interested in the data of increased lead levels, but they present none. I think there has to be some impact, but is it just on the barely detectable level, or is it actually a serious concern for the community?

That article was mostly full of antidotal stories and save the children rhetoric.

Again I’m not opposed to change, but show us some data...
Click to expand...

Follow the sources cited in the two below articles for more if you’re interested.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/scien...DKLq6Ya73GvzI4pFK6fbDN4o0DOxwPj3Q8VnmQ9-0C3cw

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5338738/
 
Quite honestly, this is the first time I’ve ever heard of someone having noticeable effects on their daily life from aircraft piston engine byproducts.
 
Somedudeintn said:
I just got done reading that article about 30 minutes ago. I am genuinely interested in the data of increased lead levels, but they present none. I think there has to be some impact, but is it just on the barely detectable level, or is it actually a serious concern for the community?

That article was mostly full of antidotal stories and save the children rhetoric.

Again I’m not opposed to change, but show us some data...
Click to expand...
Denier
 
Matthew Rogers said:
Found one. Lead dropped off at 2 kilometers from an airport, but was elevated, especially for kids living within 500 meters, and especially (predominantly) downwind.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3230438/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3230438/
Click to expand...

Thanks,

In the categorical distance specification, compared with the reference category (> 2,000 m from an airport), children living within 500 m of an airport had blood lead levels that were, on average, 4.4% higher

Based on the geospatial and statistical analysis presented above, lead from avgas may have a small (2.1–4.4%) but significant impact on blood lead levels in children who live in proximity to airports where avgas is used.

I was expecting to see numbers much higher than a 4.4% increase over the baseline for those very close.
 
So, his respiratory problems were from the lead discharged by the 383 aircraft movements per day, not the hundreds or thousands of cars and trucks per hour idling or going past the area.
 
Ok this is interesting too. From https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6213a3.htm

The geometric mean (GM) BLLs (Blood Lead Levels) for children aged 1–5 years and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) also were calculated.

National estimates of the GM BLL for children aged 1–5 years declined significantly over time, from a 1976–1980 estimated GM BLL of 15 µg/dL (CI = 14.2–15.8) to a 1988–1991 estimated GM BLL 3.6 µg/dL (CI = 3.3–4.0), and this trend continues. During 1999–2002, the GM BLL was 1.9 µg/dL (CI = 1.8–2.1), compared with the 2007–2010 estimated GM BLL of 1.3 µg/dL (CI = 1.3–1.4).*

Certainly good news that the numbers are trending down. So using the 2007-2010 numbers on average a child would have a GM BLL on 1.3-1.4, and a child living 500m from an airport would on average be elevated 4-5% over that. So 1.36-1.47ish.

This is certainly not my expertise, I’m just trying to follow the math.

Please let me know if my logic is illogical!
 
Hang 4 said:
Would be interesting to understand the average age of houses in both areas. Lead paint ingestion is the main pathway for higher lead levels in children.
Click to expand...
It was looked at in the study I posted and certainly older houses had more lead in them.

But many houses next to airport are also quite new as airports were built in open areas and the houses filled in around them much later.
 
Somedudeintn said:
I just got done reading that article about 30 minutes ago. I am genuinely interested in the data of increased lead levels, but they present none. I think there has to be some impact, but is it just on the barely detectable level, or is it actually a serious concern for the community?

That article was mostly full of antidotal stories and save the children rhetoric.

Again I’m not opposed to change, but show us some data...
Click to expand...

I was especially interested in the guy wiping gray dust off his car daily. It’s not a big challenge to get a lead test kit and see if that’s lead, or just local dust. But I saw no indication that any effort at all was made to see whether the dust in question was in any way whatsoever related to GA... or not. It’s just there, with the implication that it’s lead dust falling from the sky from all those evil rich people flying overhead.

Listen, if it’s a problem then it’s a problem. But I do get tired of the agenda pushing opinion pieces, or half-assed efforts by incredibly lazy “journalists”, masquerading as reporting.
 
Journalism. Is. Dead.

"...a layer of grey film appeared on his car every few days, which he believed was an accumulation of exhaust from leaded-fuel planes flying overhead."

"...people like Alarcon have been forced into making a wrenching decision: pay more affordable rent but endure poorer air quality..." - from the small airport nearby?? Amazing. These should all be shut down! And we should probably shut down the large airports, too. Just think how much poor air quality is caused by commercial air traffic. Shut. It. All. Down.

"...Reid-Hillview is one of 13,000 so-called general aviation airports..." - so called? No.. they are called that.

Bah, that's only the first few paragraphs. I'm exhausted trying to pick all the issues with this piece of trash article out.

Seriously. Journalism is dead.
 
Deelee said:
Seriously. Journalism is dead.
Click to expand...

DaleB said:
Listen, if it’s a problem then it’s a problem. But I do get tired of the agenda pushing opinion pieces, or half-assed efforts by incredibly lazy “journalists”, masquerading as reporting.
Click to expand...
Yeah I agree. It’s a darn shame journalists can publish articles without having factual data behind them, instead of Joe or Steve’s unconfirmed observation. We’d be so much better off as a society if this were the case. :(
 
PuhLEASE!!!!!

there are about 216,000 General Aviation aircraft as compared to 276 Million road vehicles. That means there are about .0008 % of aircraft as compared to road vehicles.

The vast majority of these aircraft cost less than a new crew cab pickup. Most of the owners are not wealthy.

If you MUST have something to complain about, make it something worthwhile.
 
MBDiagMan said:
PuhLEASE!!!!!

there are about 216,000 General Aviation aircraft as compared to 276 Million road vehicles. That means there are about .0008 % of aircraft as compared to road vehicles.

The vast majority of these aircraft cost less than a new crew cab pickup. Most of the owners are not wealthy.

If you MUST have something to complain about, make it something worthwhile.
Click to expand...

Not to mention, many who WERE wealthy cease to be once they own an airplane...:D
 
MBDiagMan said:
If you MUST have something to complain about, make it something worthwhile.
Click to expand...

"Most of the general public doesn't own airplanes. Therefore, airplanes are bad/should be eliminated."

That pretty much sums it up.
 
I probably just need educating on subclinical effects of Pb but I have not heard of nor read of a single case of someone suffering notable effects from casual exposure to environmental lead.
Anyone know?
I don't mean the people doing pottery or burning paint off church frescoes but little Johnny in suburbia with his parents, sister, dog and such.
Of course, there is the whole dumbing down of the world that needs explaining so maybe that's it!
 
When I was a kid we used to follow the bug sprayer around on our bicycles and at school they had us passing around a blob of mercury in the palms of our hands.
 
MBDiagMan said:
PuhLEASE!!!!!

there are about 216,000 General Aviation aircraft as compared to 276 Million road vehicles. That means there are about .0008 % of aircraft as compared to road vehicles.
Click to expand...

We're on the same side here, but you might want to check your math . . . .


In addition (pardon the pun) I saw one post on BeechTalk stating that breathing difficulty is not a symptom of lead poisoning. So there's that.
 
Matthew Rogers said:
Found one. Lead dropped off at 2 kilometers from an airport, but was elevated, especially for kids living within 500 meters, and especially (predominantly) downwind.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3230438/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3230438/
Click to expand...

So it is true then. Northerly Island in Chicago is a toxic sludge pit and turning it from an airport into a park is just a government plot to kill poor children. I knew it, it's not safe for children to be there.

Seems about the only thing that contaminated land is good for is being an airport.
 
I checked it. I gave it as a fraction rather than a percentage. My bad.

Let’s put it this way: There is one aircraft for every 1278 road vehicles.

Although I don’t have data to support this, I FULLY EXPECT that the average numbers of hours each road vehicle is operated per year FAR exceeds that of each aircraft. The amount of lead put into the atmosphere is ABSOLUTELY MICROSCOPIC as compared to the total pollutants from road vehicles.

Most people who complain about such things are not at all knowledgeable of the numbers involved. They also give no thought to the importance of aircraft engine health. An unhealthy aircraft engine can result in direct fatalities. Of course that would only involve the death of one of these utterly evil “rich” people who fly the things. Come to think of it, by denying these horrible, evil, rich people their leaded fuel, we could kill off a few of them. That would be a win.
 
31914460.jpg
 
MBDiagMan said:
Although I don’t have data to support this, I FULLY EXPECT that the average numbers of hours each road vehicle is operated per year FAR exceeds that of each aircraft. The amount of lead put into the atmosphere is ABSOLUTELY MICROSCOPIC as compared to the total pollutants from road vehicles.
Click to expand...
I fly airplanes to REDUCE tire pollution from my car (Oh, wait I do drive a Prius...) and my cute little Luscombe gets 25 mpg with no wind as opposed to Joe Schmoe's truck getting 16 mpg... so there's that, too.

And then this:

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/202...ical-implicated-mysterious-deaths-risk-salmon
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
I probably just need educating on subclinical effects of Pb but I have not heard of nor read of a single case of someone suffering notable effects from casual exposure to environmental lead.
Anyone know?
I don't mean the people doing pottery or burning paint off church frescoes but little Johnny in suburbia with his parents, sister, dog and such.
Of course, there is the whole dumbing down of the world that needs explaining so maybe that's it!
Click to expand...
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/lead-poisoning-and-health
https://www.who.int/bulletin/archives/78(9)1068.pdf
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4675165/
https://www.apa.org/action/resources/research-in-action/lead
 
No story here.

"A study published in 2011 conducted by three researchers from Duke University found that “children living within 500 meters of an airport at which planes use leaded avgas have higher blood lead levels than other children,” with this effect observable out to a full kilometer away from the airport."
​
One kilometer is about 3200 feet, kids beyond that are no different than any other. Within 3200 feet of an airport, I'd say the kids are more at risk of aluminum poisoning, should an airplane fall on them.
 
Garbage in equals garbage out. The only "fact" I could glean from either paper the amount of Avgas consumed in the US. How much is landing/takeoff vs cruise is anyone's guess. The FAA doesn't know, so I doubt these researchers know anything. Unsurprising these papers were published in journals I've never heard of.
 
dtuuri said:
No story here.

"A study published in 2011 conducted by three researchers from Duke University found that “children living within 500 meters of an airport at which planes use leaded avgas have higher blood lead levels than other children,” with this effect observable out to a full kilometer away from the airport."
​
One kilometer is about 3200 feet, kids beyond that are no different than any other. Within 3200 feet of an airport, I'd say the kids are more at risk of aluminum poisoning, should an airplane fall on them.
Click to expand...

How much higher are those lead levels.
 
RyanB said:
Yeah I agree. It’s a darn shame journalists can publish articles without having factual data behind them, instead of Joe or Steve’s unconfirmed observation. We’d be so much better off as a society if this were the case. :(
Click to expand...

That pesky First Amendment again.
 
Once again, Science in service to politics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top