8 ms·

Given all of the research in how much harm leaded gas does, it's crazy that the US still allows it for planes and race cars.

purple_ferret 5y ago
Household lead paint is still allowed in much of the world. India only banned* it in 2016(it is still poorly regulated, so still widely used). China the same in 2020. *reduced to max level to 90 ppm
- dredmorbius 5y ago
  Note that concentrations matter, that there is a dose-response curve (more lead => greater impacts), and that the quantities of lead in common products such as paint were insane. Lead wasn't simply some trace component of paint, but was up to half by weight (dried), or 500,000 ppm in the US (and probably comparable if not worse elsewhere: White house paint contained up to 50% lead before 1955. Federal law lowered the amount of lead allowable in paint to 1% in 1971. In 1977, the Consumer Products Safety Commission limited the lead in most paints to 0.06% (600 ppm by dry weight). Since 2009, the lead allowable in most paints is now 0.009%. Paint for bridges and marine use may contain greater amounts of lead. https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/csem/leadtoxicity/safety_standards.html https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/csem/leadtoxicity/safety_standards... Leaded petrol had on the order of 0.5 -- 1 g/l lead, again, not trace amounts, which were discharged directly into the air. Much settled out relatively quickly, within a few hundred metres, as lead is heavy. Still, lead permeated cities and land adjoining roadways and expressways. And still does. Remediation is expensive, natural remediation takes centuries. At 90 ppm, India's regulations seem to impose a maximum upper bound, and controls for incidental introduction. Given that total elimination is impossible, setting a maximum standard. The US standard is also 90 ppm: https://www.cpsc.gov/Business--Manufacturing/Business-Education/Lead/Lead-in-Paint https://www.cpsc.gov/Business--Manufacturing/Business-Educat...
  - throwaway946513 5y ago
    Partly though, if I'm remembering correctly, is that no amount of lead is considered 'safe'. Obviously that's very difficult, and many people will be exposed to lead at some point. End goal should be to minimize, and make the ppm as near zero as possible.
    - dredmorbius 5y ago
      Again: it's a matter of quantity, background or other source rates, costs of reduction, measurement capability, and alternative harms, etc. All quality standards are specified on some acceptable deviation. The goal is to not exceed the standard. Equipment, water supply, source materials, packaging, extant air containation (if in an area in which, say, leaded fuels remain in use), etc., might all contribute to trace contamination. If you have an interest in the reasoning / conditions, rulemaking hearings and evidence likely refer to this. I'm not about to dive into this, but if you have a genuine interest, the US regulation is in 16 CFR 1303.1, created in 1977, amended in 2008. Hearings reports are likely available and will have scientific, industry, and public-interest statements. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-16/chapter-II/subchapter-B/part-1303/section-1303.1 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-16/chapter-II/subchapter-... https://www.cpsc.gov/Regulations-Laws--Standards https://www.cpsc.gov/Regulations-Laws--Standards
  - hallarempt 5y ago
    When I was a teen, copper and tin were too expensive, and I was a bright, precocious teen sculptor. So picture eleven, twelve year old me melting lead in a crucible, taking the crucible in flaking asbestos gloves and pouring it into my casting form. I was a productive little sculptor, too, making many pieces a year.
TimTheTinker 5y ago
According to the FAA, "TEL has not yet been banned for use in avgas, because no operationally safe alternative is currently available."
- deepsun 5y ago
  Well, they can outlaw operating older private planes. Newer private planes often use kerosene (aka Jet-A) fuel, just like airlines. But that would be unjust. Imagine your car suddenly gets outlawed.
  - brandmeyer 5y ago
    Even cheap used small private planes cost > $100k. Since they are exclusively owned by wealthy people, it is a political impossibility to outlaw them.
    - Eugr 5y ago
      Most of the planes flying were made in 60's and 70's. Most of them can be bought below $100K. Most owners of 100LL burning planes are middle class. Wealthy people fly jets or at least turboprops and burn Jet-A.
    - toomuchtodo 5y ago
      We could buy them up and scrap them as their value declines while also working to outlaw 100LL at the ~4000 FBOs in the US that still carry the fuel. At some point, demand decline encounters an inflection point where it's no longer economically feasible ("death spiral") to continue to provide 100LL fuel to FBOs. Cash for clunkers sort of thing.
      - brandmeyer 5y ago
        Cash for clunkers was only tenable because the recipients of the cash were predominantly the working poor. Even then, economic conservatives howled at the program for its destruction of capital.
mrfusion 5y ago
I just looked at a house next to a small airport. I was wondering about the lead exposure?
- opwieurposiu 5y ago
  The only way to know for sure is to test a few soil samples from the yard and dust samples from inside the house. Also test the water, especially if it is well water. If you plan to have kids there, the test might be worth it for your peace of mind. If there are no kids I would not bother.
  - bell-cot 5y ago
    This, plus: - Which way does the prevailing wind blow? (Toward your prospective house, or away?) - If the airport had leaky underground storage tanks, in which directions might the gas (& lead) seep?
    - jimmyswimmy 5y ago
      Also, a quick way to estimate local prevailing winds near an airport is to look at the runway direction. Planes like to land into head winds so if there's only a single runway, those winds are mostly in one direction down the runway.
      - Scoundreller 5y ago
        But which direction???
- thesausageking 5y ago
  It's a concern, especially if you have kids. > children living within 1.5 miles of the Reid-Hillview Airport have elevated levels of lead in their blood, and that the problem gets much worse for those who live closer to or downwind from the airport. > ...children under the age of 18 living close to Reid-Hillview had blood lead levels over 1.8 micrograms per deciliter. In 3.2% of the children surveyed, that number was as high as 3.5 micrograms, and in 1.7% of children it was 4.5 micrograms. Average baseline lead levels in children across the U.S. are closer to 0.84 micrograms. https://paloaltoonline.com/news/2021/08/06/new-study-finds-local-airports-are-raising-blood-lead-levels-in-children https://paloaltoonline.com/news/2021/08/06/new-study-finds-l...
comeonseriously 5y ago
I'm not. There's lots of money in those two industries.

purple_ferret 5y ago

Household lead paint is still allowed in much of the world. India only banned* it in 2016(it is still poorly regulated, so still widely used). China the same in 2020. *reduced to max level to 90 ppm

dredmorbius 5y ago
Note that concentrations matter, that there is a dose-response curve (more lead => greater impacts), and that the quantities of lead in common products such as paint were insane. Lead wasn't simply some trace component of paint, but was up to half by weight (dried), or 500,000 ppm in the US (and probably comparable if not worse elsewhere: White house paint contained up to 50% lead before 1955. Federal law lowered the amount of lead allowable in paint to 1% in 1971. In 1977, the Consumer Products Safety Commission limited the lead in most paints to 0.06% (600 ppm by dry weight). Since 2009, the lead allowable in most paints is now 0.009%. Paint for bridges and marine use may contain greater amounts of lead. https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/csem/leadtoxicity/safety_standards.html https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/csem/leadtoxicity/safety_standards... Leaded petrol had on the order of 0.5 -- 1 g/l lead, again, not trace amounts, which were discharged directly into the air. Much settled out relatively quickly, within a few hundred metres, as lead is heavy. Still, lead permeated cities and land adjoining roadways and expressways. And still does. Remediation is expensive, natural remediation takes centuries. At 90 ppm, India's regulations seem to impose a maximum upper bound, and controls for incidental introduction. Given that total elimination is impossible, setting a maximum standard. The US standard is also 90 ppm: https://www.cpsc.gov/Business--Manufacturing/Business-Education/Lead/Lead-in-Paint https://www.cpsc.gov/Business--Manufacturing/Business-Educat...
- throwaway946513 5y ago
  Partly though, if I'm remembering correctly, is that no amount of lead is considered 'safe'. Obviously that's very difficult, and many people will be exposed to lead at some point. End goal should be to minimize, and make the ppm as near zero as possible.
  - dredmorbius 5y ago
    Again: it's a matter of quantity, background or other source rates, costs of reduction, measurement capability, and alternative harms, etc. All quality standards are specified on some acceptable deviation. The goal is to not exceed the standard. Equipment, water supply, source materials, packaging, extant air containation (if in an area in which, say, leaded fuels remain in use), etc., might all contribute to trace contamination. If you have an interest in the reasoning / conditions, rulemaking hearings and evidence likely refer to this. I'm not about to dive into this, but if you have a genuine interest, the US regulation is in 16 CFR 1303.1, created in 1977, amended in 2008. Hearings reports are likely available and will have scientific, industry, and public-interest statements. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-16/chapter-II/subchapter-B/part-1303/section-1303.1 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-16/chapter-II/subchapter-... https://www.cpsc.gov/Regulations-Laws--Standards https://www.cpsc.gov/Regulations-Laws--Standards
- hallarempt 5y ago
  When I was a teen, copper and tin were too expensive, and I was a bright, precocious teen sculptor. So picture eleven, twelve year old me melting lead in a crucible, taking the crucible in flaking asbestos gloves and pouring it into my casting form. I was a productive little sculptor, too, making many pieces a year.

TimTheTinker 5y ago

According to the FAA, "TEL has not yet been banned for use in avgas, because no operationally safe alternative is currently available."

deepsun 5y ago
Well, they can outlaw operating older private planes. Newer private planes often use kerosene (aka Jet-A) fuel, just like airlines. But that would be unjust. Imagine your car suddenly gets outlawed.
- brandmeyer 5y ago
  Even cheap used small private planes cost > $100k. Since they are exclusively owned by wealthy people, it is a political impossibility to outlaw them.
  - Eugr 5y ago
    Most of the planes flying were made in 60's and 70's. Most of them can be bought below $100K. Most owners of 100LL burning planes are middle class. Wealthy people fly jets or at least turboprops and burn Jet-A.
  - toomuchtodo 5y ago
    We could buy them up and scrap them as their value declines while also working to outlaw 100LL at the ~4000 FBOs in the US that still carry the fuel. At some point, demand decline encounters an inflection point where it's no longer economically feasible ("death spiral") to continue to provide 100LL fuel to FBOs. Cash for clunkers sort of thing.
    - brandmeyer 5y ago
      Cash for clunkers was only tenable because the recipients of the cash were predominantly the working poor. Even then, economic conservatives howled at the program for its destruction of capital.

mrfusion 5y ago

I just looked at a house next to a small airport. I was wondering about the lead exposure?

opwieurposiu 5y ago
The only way to know for sure is to test a few soil samples from the yard and dust samples from inside the house. Also test the water, especially if it is well water. If you plan to have kids there, the test might be worth it for your peace of mind. If there are no kids I would not bother.
- bell-cot 5y ago
  This, plus: - Which way does the prevailing wind blow? (Toward your prospective house, or away?) - If the airport had leaky underground storage tanks, in which directions might the gas (& lead) seep?
  - jimmyswimmy 5y ago
    Also, a quick way to estimate local prevailing winds near an airport is to look at the runway direction. Planes like to land into head winds so if there's only a single runway, those winds are mostly in one direction down the runway.
    - Scoundreller 5y ago
      But which direction???
thesausageking 5y ago
It's a concern, especially if you have kids. > children living within 1.5 miles of the Reid-Hillview Airport have elevated levels of lead in their blood, and that the problem gets much worse for those who live closer to or downwind from the airport. > ...children under the age of 18 living close to Reid-Hillview had blood lead levels over 1.8 micrograms per deciliter. In 3.2% of the children surveyed, that number was as high as 3.5 micrograms, and in 1.7% of children it was 4.5 micrograms. Average baseline lead levels in children across the U.S. are closer to 0.84 micrograms. https://paloaltoonline.com/news/2021/08/06/new-study-finds-local-airports-are-raising-blood-lead-levels-in-children https://paloaltoonline.com/news/2021/08/06/new-study-finds-l...

comeonseriously 5y ago

I'm not. There's lots of money in those two industries.