5 ms·

Let's not be so dramatic as to say that the general aviation fleet is single handedly responsible for poisoning the world with lead. When leaded car gas was st

by S201 4y ago

Let's not be so dramatic as to say that the general aviation fleet is single handedly responsible for poisoning the world with lead. When leaded car gas was still in use it resulted in 4-5 million tons of lead emissions per year.[1] The use of leaded aviation fuel contributes 500 tons per year according to the EPA[2]. Compared to 5,000,000 tons for cars historically. Of course, any lead is not good and we should be shooting for zero. Which is the goal of the unleaded G100UL aviation fuel. But let's not try to say that personal aviation is evil when it's contributing a fraction of a percent of lead contamination. Frankly, we have bigger pollution problems to worry about than a very small amount of lead emissions from an ever shrinking fleet of piston powered aircraft. Mind you that general aviation is more than rich people flying around in their planes. It's medical flights, it's training future airline pilots, it's aerial surveying, and many more critical tasks for society. 1. https://grist.org/regulation/leaded-gasoline-lead-poisoning-united-nations/ https://grist.org/regulation/leaded-gasoline-lead-poisoning-... 2. http://www.reidhillview.com/EPA_GA_Lead_2002.pdf http://www.reidhillview.com/EPA_GA_Lead_2002.pdf

nawgz 4y ago
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... I in no way imply aviation is the greatest poison emitted by humanity; it is one of the most selfish emissions by any standard. It is not that leased fuels support meaningful industry as suggested, nor is it as if there are not alternatives. Instead, the FAA and pilots of piston driven planes have simply decided lead poisoning is a justifiable price to pay for people living near an airport in exchange for individuals getting to fly their quarter million+ $ aircraft. Everything you suggest it is useful for could be performed with the already proven and no longer new unleaded alternative. Defending this practice is asinine.
- S201 4y ago
  The source you cited conveniently links to a 404 page for the study it cites. But yes, I've read quite a bit about the Reid-Hillview Airport saga. These claims of leaded gas hurting the children around airport is just the newest in a long list of excuses to close airports so their land can be redeveloped into more strip malls and condos. These neighborhood groups are biased towards wanting airports closed. It's textbook NIMBYism and they'll look for any excuse to achieve their goals. If it's not leaded gas, it's something else. > Instead, the FAA and pilots of piston driven planes have simply decided lead poisoning is a justifiable price to pay for people living near an airport in exchange for individuals getting to fly their quarter million+ $ aircraft. Don't buy a house near an airport if you're concerned about it then. The airport was there before the houses were. > Everything you suggest it is useful for could be performed with the already proven and no longer new unleaded alternative. Defending this practice is asinine. Where did I say I liked leaded gas exactly? I'm quite excited about G100UL being rolled out, even if it costs a bit more, so I can stop having this exact argument about how we need to close airports because of leaded gas. Everything with the FAA moves slowly, but it's moving. We're about to have unleaded gas for all planes. By the way, the average Cessna 172 is well under $100k (at least prior to the previous two years before asset prices for everything went through the roof). For every fancy late model Cirrus SR22T there's 10 more shitbox Cessna's from the 1970s barely hanging onto life. You think of private pilots as all extremely wealthy individuals. Most of us are solidly middle class. How many people have boats or RVs that cost the same or more? Small planes fall into that same category.
  - labcomputer 4y ago
    > These claims of leaded gas hurting the children around airport is just the newest in a long list of excuses to close airports so their land can be redeveloped into more strip malls and condos One thing particularly twisted about that is: 1. The airport announced that it is trying to convert to unleaded fuel 2. Immediately after that announcement, the NIMBYs tried to get an emergency judgement to close the airport (because converting to UL fuel would completely undermine their only semi-legitimate argument for closure) 3. If the airport is closed, and if the lead pollution is truly as bad as they claim, then it will be economically infeasible to re-develop the airport as condos (which is what they're actually trying to do, not save the children) because the ground would be too polluted.
    - iamtheworstdev 4y ago
      cleveland and st pete, fl, have awesome airports at risk of closure for no reason other than water front property means expensive condos. only thing saving KSPg right now is that they took FAA grant money and cant be closed for eight years as a result
simne 4y ago
I'm agree with you about lead is bad, but only oldest designs of aircraft engines depend on lead (they use it as lubricant for valves, as it deposits on surfaces when gas evaporate). Because of this, leaded gas still produced in commercial volumes. Modern aircraft engines could work on unleaded gas, and especially Celera use aircraft diesel engine, working on basically aviation kerosene (with tiny addition of lubricants for diesel equipment). BTW diesel add about 30% of Celera range.
- S201 4y ago
  Yup, and I really hope we get G100UL distributed widely soon so we can stop having this asinine discussion about how we need to close airports because we're all going to die from the tiny amount of lead they emit. Ideally we could have the FAA promote the certification of newer engine designs so we didn't need to keep flying around with 1940s engine tech as well that relies on lead, but that's another issue.
  - simne 4y ago
    Agree. Each day,decreased number of old cool planes, which flight from 1940s and still in flight condition. I cry every time see, how good maintained old aviation history in US, comparable to exUSSR. Even more impressive, there are examples of old soviet planes in flight condition in US - you will not see them flight in exUSSR. Unfortunately, not all 1940s engines have modern substitutions. For me this is our history. I think it is acceptable to make for them exclusion from rules.
- TylerE 4y ago
  90% of the world's piston GA fleet is using 80 year old engine designs, so...

by S201 4y ago

nawgz 4y ago

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... I in no way imply aviation is the greatest poison emitted by humanity; it is one of the most selfish emissions by any standard. It is not that leased fuels support meaningful industry as suggested, nor is it as if there are not alternatives. Instead, the FAA and pilots of piston driven planes have simply decided lead poisoning is a justifiable price to pay for people living near an airport in exchange for individuals getting to fly their quarter million+ $ aircraft. Everything you suggest it is useful for could be performed with the already proven and no longer new unleaded alternative. Defending this practice is asinine.

S201 4y ago
The source you cited conveniently links to a 404 page for the study it cites. But yes, I've read quite a bit about the Reid-Hillview Airport saga. These claims of leaded gas hurting the children around airport is just the newest in a long list of excuses to close airports so their land can be redeveloped into more strip malls and condos. These neighborhood groups are biased towards wanting airports closed. It's textbook NIMBYism and they'll look for any excuse to achieve their goals. If it's not leaded gas, it's something else. > Instead, the FAA and pilots of piston driven planes have simply decided lead poisoning is a justifiable price to pay for people living near an airport in exchange for individuals getting to fly their quarter million+ $ aircraft. Don't buy a house near an airport if you're concerned about it then. The airport was there before the houses were. > Everything you suggest it is useful for could be performed with the already proven and no longer new unleaded alternative. Defending this practice is asinine. Where did I say I liked leaded gas exactly? I'm quite excited about G100UL being rolled out, even if it costs a bit more, so I can stop having this exact argument about how we need to close airports because of leaded gas. Everything with the FAA moves slowly, but it's moving. We're about to have unleaded gas for all planes. By the way, the average Cessna 172 is well under $100k (at least prior to the previous two years before asset prices for everything went through the roof). For every fancy late model Cirrus SR22T there's 10 more shitbox Cessna's from the 1970s barely hanging onto life. You think of private pilots as all extremely wealthy individuals. Most of us are solidly middle class. How many people have boats or RVs that cost the same or more? Small planes fall into that same category.
- labcomputer 4y ago
  > These claims of leaded gas hurting the children around airport is just the newest in a long list of excuses to close airports so their land can be redeveloped into more strip malls and condos One thing particularly twisted about that is: 1. The airport announced that it is trying to convert to unleaded fuel 2. Immediately after that announcement, the NIMBYs tried to get an emergency judgement to close the airport (because converting to UL fuel would completely undermine their only semi-legitimate argument for closure) 3. If the airport is closed, and if the lead pollution is truly as bad as they claim, then it will be economically infeasible to re-develop the airport as condos (which is what they're actually trying to do, not save the children) because the ground would be too polluted.
  - iamtheworstdev 4y ago
    cleveland and st pete, fl, have awesome airports at risk of closure for no reason other than water front property means expensive condos. only thing saving KSPg right now is that they took FAA grant money and cant be closed for eight years as a result

simne 4y ago

I'm agree with you about lead is bad, but only oldest designs of aircraft engines depend on lead (they use it as lubricant for valves, as it deposits on surfaces when gas evaporate). Because of this, leaded gas still produced in commercial volumes. Modern aircraft engines could work on unleaded gas, and especially Celera use aircraft diesel engine, working on basically aviation kerosene (with tiny addition of lubricants for diesel equipment). BTW diesel add about 30% of Celera range.

S201 4y ago
Yup, and I really hope we get G100UL distributed widely soon so we can stop having this asinine discussion about how we need to close airports because we're all going to die from the tiny amount of lead they emit. Ideally we could have the FAA promote the certification of newer engine designs so we didn't need to keep flying around with 1940s engine tech as well that relies on lead, but that's another issue.
- simne 4y ago
  Agree. Each day,decreased number of old cool planes, which flight from 1940s and still in flight condition. I cry every time see, how good maintained old aviation history in US, comparable to exUSSR. Even more impressive, there are examples of old soviet planes in flight condition in US - you will not see them flight in exUSSR. Unfortunately, not all 1940s engines have modern substitutions. For me this is our history. I think it is acceptable to make for them exclusion from rules.
TylerE 4y ago
90% of the world's piston GA fleet is using 80 year old engine designs, so...