Why are these planes still using toxic fuel?

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...

While there are folks that think there is no safe levels of exposure to lead, for adults the accepted BLL is 5 mcg/dL, that is, the standard range is <5 mcg/dL. But when the BLL is between 5 and 20 mcg/dL, your doctor will probably just tell you to reduce your exposure to lead. Above 20 mcg/dL the government gets involved (and your employer is notified)... at least in massachusetts.

Not having any children, I haven't paid attention to BLL standards applicable to children. However, if the mayoclinic is an ok source for you...

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/lead-poisoning/diagnosis-treatment/drc-20354723

"There is no safe blood level of lead. However, a level of 5 mcg/dL is used to indicate a possibly unsafe level for children. Children whose blood tests at those levels should be tested periodically. A child whose levels become too high — generally 45 mcg/dL or higher — should be treated."
 
RyanB said:
I’m not saying this is unfounded, but I wonder how many people have elevated levels of carbon monoxide in their blood due to automobile exhaust inhalation?
Click to expand...
It ain't the 60's anymore. CO levels from automobile exhaust have fallen off the cliff. Indoor smoking at work / schools is a thing of the past too. The only real CO belchers left any more are vintage cars and aircraft running rich of peak.
 
Silvaire said:
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.
Click to expand...

And we ran with scissors, pet stray dogs, talked to strangers, threw rocks at each other, rode our bikes in traffic, played in play grounds without adult supervision, had bottle rocket fights, held roman candles in our hands and went outside without putting on clean underwear in case we are in an accident.

But, we were safe and always waited 30 minutes after eating before going swimming....
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
It ain't the 60's anymore. CO levels from automobile exhaust have fallen off the cliff. Indoor smoking at work / schools is a thing of the past too. The only real CO belchers left any more are vintage cars and aircraft running rich of peak.
Click to expand...

Don't forget heating systems in the home.... otherwise, I'm not sure why the building code requires my house to have multiple CO detectors.
 
Bob Noel said:
Don't forget heating systems in the home.... otherwise, I'm not sure why the building code requires my house to have multiple CO detectors.
Click to expand...
Because of when they eff up. If your furnace is operating properly CO up the chimney is minimal. If the flu gets blocked, then it's another story - inadequate air flow makes the burner run rich of peak and make lots of CO. Plus there is the potential for reduction in O2 if the house is tight enough which leads to an increase in CO out of the furnace.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
It ain't the 60's anymore. CO levels from automobile exhaust have fallen off the cliff. Indoor smoking at work / schools is a thing of the past too. The only real CO belchers left any more are vintage cars and aircraft running rich of peak.
Click to expand...
I read somewhere that ships are a huge contributor as well.. they're burning bulk oil. While diesels by default run lean of peak I've been told that ship smoke is remarkably "toxic"

You can see the shipping lanes
https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/80375/a-satellites-view-of-ship-pollution
 
Thanks Bob, I did look around the web for a few minutes and am finding zero data or research on "low level, environmental Pb has been shown to cause specific illness" although there is TONS of unsupported statement or second/treble-hand quoting of others saying it causes lower IQ, behavioral changes, etc.
You'd think it would be easy to tie together an increased incidence of these symptoms with areas or countries which are known to have high levels of environmental lead.
I just hope this isn't another episode of someone wanting their way, and using non-science (is that where the word "nonsense" comes from, lol?) to achieve it. So many people will read baloney scare-articles and make a decision from that, including legislators.




Bob Noel said:
While there are folks that think there is no safe levels of exposure to lead, for adults the accepted BLL is 5 mcg/dL, that is, the standard range is <5 mcg/dL. But when the BLL is between 5 and 20 mcg/dL, your doctor will probably just tell you to reduce your exposure to lead. Above 20 mcg/dL the government gets involved (and your employer is notified)... at least in massachusetts.

Not having any children, I haven't paid attention to BLL standards applicable to children. However, if the mayoclinic is an ok source for you...

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/lead-poisoning/diagnosis-treatment/drc-20354723

"There is no safe blood level of lead. However, a level of 5 mcg/dL is used to indicate a possibly unsafe level for children. Children whose blood tests at those levels should be tested periodically. A child whose levels become too high — generally 45 mcg/dL or higher — should be treated."
Click to expand...
 
Some will be aware that lead was not removed from auto gas in relation to documented health hazards associated with lead oxide, it was removed to stop lead fouling of catalytic converters.

NOx and particulates from Diesels is I think a much bigger issue in relation to health, especially considering the amount of them running daily in close proximity to people.
 
I think a simple solution to determine if Pb levels are high around airports would be to test the blood of the maintenance, ATC, etc. who work their day to day. I think OSHA would have already been on this if there was something to this.

And yes, I'm in the camp of "why are they still using lead?" - can't we get 100 octane some other way?
 
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...

This is one of the studies I remember reading a while ago (there were others I can't find quickly without going into the university database), and the take-home of this particular study is that although there was a measurable difference in blood lead levels of individuals living within 500-1500 m of an airport using 100LL, the differences were very small, in the range of 2-4% difference between those near and far from an airport, a magnitude of change that is going to be biomedically insignificant. That is, we are talking about raw blood lead level differences of 0.007-0.043 ug/dL, compared to a mean BLL of around 4 ug/dL in the study group. So, yawn.
 
chemgeek said:
This is one of the studies I remember reading a while ago (there were others I can't find quickly without going into the university database), and the take-home of this particular study is that although there was a measurable difference in blood lead levels of individuals living within 500-1500 m of an airport using 100LL, the differences were very small, in the range of 2-4% difference between those near and far from an airport, a magnitude of change that is going to be biomedically insignificant. That is, we are talking about raw blood lead level differences of 0.007-0.043 ug/dL, compared to a mean BLL of around 4 ug/dL in the study group. So, yawn.
Click to expand...
Quit building houses on top of airports and then blame airports for having airplanes
 
Tusayan said:
Some will be aware that lead was not removed from auto gas in relation to documented health hazards associated with lead oxide, it was removed to stop lead fouling of catalytic converters.

NOx and particulates from Diesels is I think a much bigger issue in relation to health, especially considering the amount of them running daily in close proximity to people.
Click to expand...
The ships would be much cleaner if they were not burning tar
 
It seems they revealed the true driving force for this article in the third from the last paragraph... More real estate development is desperately needed due to the housing crisis.
 
Here's the problem.
Near as I can find out, in 1918 (yes, 1918) the U.S. Government specified the distillation curve limits for aviation fuel based on existing fuel created strictly from distillation:

To increase octane ratings, tetra ethyl lead was added to the distillate.

Since World War 2, refinery technologies have changed, and gasoline can be blended to give higher octane ratings without resorting to lead, but the resulting fuel does not match the same distillation curves obtained in 1918 - so no-go as far as the FAA is concerned because approving a change to a time honored standard would involve sticking one's bureaucratic neck out. No way Jose'...
 
MBDiagMan said:
I’m a strong believer in ALL the constitutional amendments, but that does not mean that it is ethical to print non factual information as a news story. I stand with Ryan.
Click to expand...

Many unethical behaviors are constitutionally protected. Ever since news outlets started needing to make a profit, we have had to keep our salt shaker handy.
 
Kristin said:
Many unethical behaviors are constitutionally protected. Ever since news outlets started needing to make a profit, we have had to keep our salt shaker handy.
Click to expand...
The problem has gotten worse since the advent of social media.
 
Kristin said:
...Ever since news outlets started needing to make a profit, we have had to keep our salt shaker handy.
Click to expand...
Ever since communication/journalism schools abandoned "who, what, where, and how" for "I want to make a difference" journalism has declined.
 
Last edited:
Domenick said:
Ever since communication/journalism schools abandoned "who what, where, and how" for "I want to make a difference" journalism has declined.
Click to expand...
Isn't "why" supposed to be in that list?
 
Palmpilot said:
Isn't "why" supposed to be in that list?
Click to expand...
"Why" is often quite subjective, and open to reporter/editor/corporate bias. Explaining "why" is how journalism turned into activism. Did the gang tatted, needle marked guy rob a convenience store and shoot the proprietor because he had a troubled childhood or because he was an irredeemable reprobate or because his kids were hungry or ...

I'd rather make up my own mind, than hear a so-called journalist spout their editor's/managements opinion.
 
Palmpilot said:
The problem has gotten worse since the advent of social media.
Click to expand...
It started with the advent of 24 hour news channels. There has to be SOMETHING to sell advertising 24 hours a day, 365 days a year... and it didn't take long for them to start doing anything it took to sell that ad time. Nobody ever went broke catering to the lowest common denominator, but plenty have while trying to avoid doing that.
 
DaleB said:
It started with the advent of 24 hour news channels. There has to be SOMETHING to sell advertising 24 hours a day, 365 days a year... and it didn't take long for them to start doing anything it took to sell that ad time. Nobody ever went broke catering to the lowest common denominator, but plenty have while trying to avoid doing that.
Click to expand...

It's been going on since Ben Franklin and before. Just happens quicker now and more players involved. The consumer needs to smarten up ( which will probably never happen) or it will be forever.
 
Matthew Rogers said:
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.
Click to expand...
Also the opposite. We have urban airports here that were built where land was cheap (read depressed property values) and no new development takes place around them. Just depends on what was there before.
 
I'm fine with unleaded fuel. I'm not fine paying 50% to 100%+ more for unleaded fuel. If that happens I'm out of the game and I'll find something else to do
 
Domenick said:
"Why" is often quite subjective, and open to reporter/editor/corporate bias. Explaining "why" is how journalism turned into activism. Did the gang tatted, needle marked guy rob a convenience store and shoot the proprietor because he had a troubled childhood or because he was an irredeemable reprobate or because his kids were hungry or ...

I'd rather make up my own mind, than hear a so-called journalist spout their editor's/managements opinion.
Click to expand...
I think it's possible for a reporter to ask people why they're doing what they're doing without injecting the reporter's own opinion.
 
EdFred said:
Possible but not probable.
Click to expand...
I'm talking about how journalism SHOULD be conducted, not necessarily how it IS conducted. I see wide variations in quality.
 
Kristin said:
Many unethical behaviors are constitutionally protected. Ever since news outlets started needing to make a profit, we have had to keep our salt shaker handy.
Click to expand...

So, in this country, roughly since Poor Richard's Almanac? I mean read about William Randolph Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer. Does the term Yellow Journalism ring any bells?

(Not picking on you @Kristin , just not sure (other than dramatization in the 1940's movies) where this moral high ground got apportioned to the press.
 
jsstevens said:
So, in this country, roughly since Poor Richard's Almanac? I mean read about William Randolph Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer. Does the term Yellow Journalism ring any bells?

(Not picking on you @Kristin , just not sure (other than dramatization in the 1940's movies) where this moral high ground got apportioned to the press.
Click to expand...

I am quite familiar with yellow journalism and the fact that towns used to have newspapers dedicated to each political party. "Media" is not a monolith. We had sort of a golden age when TV journalism was a loss leader for the major networks, hence were not required to make a profit and newspapers were the local go-to for advertising. Reporting in the 60's and 70's exposed things like Watergate and gave a luster to journalism.

Certainly sensationalism and bias was not eliminated, but it was at a lower ebb. With the advent of cable TV and then the internet, the whole thing has been scrambled. Add the social media algorithms which keep feeding people's belief systems, and you have today's fractured media environment which has led to alternative realities being created.

It has always been true that one needed to get their information from various sources. Now it is especially true. One also needs to be able to distinguish fact from opinion. Fortunately, most newspapers clearly identify the opinion pieces as such, but of course, opinion can sneak into all reporting, particularly the headlines of a story which are set by the editor and not the writer. Online, they are more clickbait than anything. I tend to skim articles for the facts and ignore most of the rest. The parts of an article related to facts is usually less than half of the article, especially if you ignore the parts were they are talking about the earlier reporting on the same subject.
 
“Approximately one-quarter of the piston-engine fleet are estimated to “consume more than half of all avgas,”

I love when the obvious becomes journalistic reporting. No ****, that piston airplanes consume more than half of the Avgas....becauuuuse it’s for airplanes! Duh!

This terribly written article uses a lot of fractions and percentages to make a point. I’m sure it’s more than 1/4 of the piston engine fleet consuming more than 1/2 of all avgas. You cant tell me 75% of the piston fleet runs on mogas or jet a.

This was another trash article with zero substance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Fracpilot said:
“Approximately one-quarter of the piston-engine fleet are estimated to “consume more than half of all avgas,”

I love when the obvious becomes journalistic reporting. No ****, that piston airplanes consume more than half of the Avgas....becauuuuse it’s for airplanes! Duh!

This terribly written article uses a lot of fractions and percentages to make a point. I’m sure it’s more than 1/4 of the piston engine fleet consuming more than 1/2 of all avgas. You cant tell me 75% of the piston fleet runs on mogas or jet a.

This was another trash article with zero substance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

The next gem will be, an overwhelming percentage of airplane crashes happens to airplane pilots.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top