Dear EarthTalk: Lead was long ago phased out of automobile gasoline, but it is still in aviation fuel and is now the largest source of lead emissions in the U.S. What’s being done?—L. Eber, Rye, N.Y.

Yes, aviation fuel emerged as the largest source of lead emissions in the U.S. once lead was phased out of automotive gasoline beginning in the 1970s. While jets, which comprise the majority of commercial aircraft, don’t use leaded fuel, smaller, piston-engine planes use enough leaded aviation fuel (nicknamed “avgas”) to account for half of the lead pollution in American skies, making it a real air quality issue.

Some of the health effects of repeated exposure to lead include damage to the central nervous system, kidneys and red blood cells, and decreased function in the cardiovascular and immune systems. Lower IQ levels and learning disabilities can also result from lead exposure, especially in children, whose young bodies are more sensitive than those of adults. And scientists at the National Toxicology Program have concluded that lead and lead compounds are “reasonably anticipated to be human carcinogens.”

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recognizes lead as a neurotoxin and in 2008 set tough new standards for how much of it is safe in our air. In 2010 the agency identified 16 U.S. regions that fail to meet clean air standards for airborne lead; all either contained or were near airports where leaded avgas is the norm. But the EPA has not yet restricted lead in avgas, even though unleaded avgas is available.

A 2011 Duke University study found that kids living within 500 meters of an airport where leaded avgas is used have higher blood lead levels than other children, with elevated lead levels in blood found in kids as far as one kilometer away. The EPA estimates that 16 million Americans live close to one of 22,000 airports where leaded avgas is routinely used—and three million children go to schools near these airports.

Friends of the Earth (FoE), a leading green group, filed suit against the EPA in late 2011, demanding that it respond to a petition originally submitted in 2006 asking for regulation of lead emissions from general aviation aircraft under the Clean Air Act. That original petition requested that the EPA issue a finding that emissions from aircraft using leaded avgas endanger public health. “EPA has repeatedly concluded that lead is extremely toxic to humans, wildlife and the environment and causes health effects even at low doses,” says Marcie Keever, FoE’s legal director. “EPA’s continuing failure to do what the law requires and address this pollution leaves us no choice but to take this critical public health issue to the courts.”

According to FoE, 70 percent of small planes could already be using unleaded avgas with no retrofitting needed. The group says that a meaningful plan by the EPA to ban leaded avgas could spark investment in technologies to replace the engines in the rest of the small plane market that relies on leaded avgas.

Some members of the aviation community are taking matters into their own hands. The Aviation Fuel Club, which aims to make aviation fuel affordable for sport aviators, is working to ensure that unleaded avgas is available at many airports across the country. Green groups are pleased with this development, but want the U.S. government to institute binding restrictions on the use of lead in aviation fuel.

CONTACTS: 2011 Duke Study, ehp03.niehs.nih.gov/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1289%2Fehp.1003231; Friends of the Earth, www.foe.org; Aviation Fuel Club, www.aviationfuelclub.org.

EarthTalk® is written and edited by Roddy Scheer and Doug Moss and is a registered trademark of E - The Environmental Magazine (www.emagazine.com). Send questions to: earthtalk@emagazine.com. Subscribe: www.emagazine.com/subscribe. Free Trial Issue: www.emagazine.com/trial.

13 Comments

1. 1. ruspert 12:40 PM 9/3/12

   I am a private pilot and former aircraft owner.
   Some aircraft engines reqiure lead, for valve lubrication In the 1970's, 100 octane Low Lead gasoline(100LL), was made available at airports to replace the fuel for engines that need at least 87 octane fuel and up to 100 octane. The higher the compression ratio, (that results in more power for size and weight), of an engine the more octane is required to prevent pre-ignition, which will damage or destroy the engine. Most all of the airports stopped having the 87 octane full leaded fuel available, and had only the 100 octane low lead fuel, how so ever, this fuel contained more lead than the 87 octane full leaded gasoline per gallon. This clearly was not the correct answer to the lead polution problem, as it put more lead into the enviroment than previously. Aircraft engines are much more costlier than automotive engines due to their being, certified as airworthy and the liabilty insurance carried by the manufacturer and passsed on to the buyer, so cost as much as an entire automobile or more for one engine alone, and a lot of aircraft have more than one engine, so the solution is going to be costly to aircraft owners, what ever it is, and most of which are not in the catagory of being wealthy. In the interest of public health, the answer may be in the form of some form of government monetary support as an incentative for conversion to the more enviroment friendly engines and fuel requirements. The petroleum industry will follow the market. The use of automotive fuel could be the normal for aircraft engines, resulting in less costly production of fuel, because not as many different types have to be produced. The quality control of automotive gasoline is presently more strict than that of Avgas, which is in fact almost non-existant. After much testing and trials, carried out by the Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA), a private organization, there have been Supplemental Type Certification (STC's) issued by the Fedreral Aviation Administration,(FAA), and sold to owners, allowing for some aircraft, (which I purchased, for both my aircraft), so that they are able to legally use either Avgas or Automotive gasoline with out the added ethenal alcohol, Automotive gasoline proved to be safe, less costly and more enviromently friendly. Some airports, also have had it available. The solutions are available, it is just the implementation, that is not. The FAA has the power to require compliance with Directives for aircraft owners, and may now have the authority to address the lead issue.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

2. 2. Stubbleduck 05:34 PM 9/3/12

   Your aircraft engine in the photograph is a turboprop engine that, while it can for short periods of time, really doesn't like to run on gasoline leaded or otherwise.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

3. 3. geojellyroll 06:18 PM 9/3/12

   I have no idea
   
   However, this article is apples and oranges.
   
   quote "A 2011 Duke University study found that kids living within 500 meters of an airport where leaded avgas is used have higher blood lead levels than other children, with elevated lead levels in blood found in kids as far as one kilometer away. The EPA estimates that 16 million Americans live close to one of 22,000 airports where leaded avgas is routinely used—and three million children go to schools near these airports."
   
   This is meaningless sensationalism. It would only have meaning in some context.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

4. 4. GasMeUp 06:26 PM 9/3/12

   Leaded AvGas is also used by propeller aircraft, such as:
   HELICOPTERS.
   Interesting that helicopters seem to be left out in EPA final lead emission assessments re airports. And therefore receive almost no attention in subsequent follow-up reviews, memos, etc. (Readily verified via EPA online documents.)
   Therefore, it seems: helicopters inadvertently have escaped emission pollution scrutiny by the FoE lawsuit vs. the EPA; by most of the media including this SA article; and by politicians and legislators. The public needs to be alerted, repeatedly, about these factors.
   Either that, or continue to remain passive.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

5. 5. candide 07:11 PM 9/3/12

   I am so tired of hearing how we can never do the right thing because it costs too much.
   
   Every time I hear that I just think how exponentially greater costs are being pushed into the future.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

6. 6. ruspert in reply to GasMeUp 08:09 PM 9/3/12

   You are correct, and though the article refers to "planes" and "a small plane market", this is a poor description choice for the aircraft types, it would seem that the intent is meant to apply for all aircraft that use leaded gasoline as an engine fuel, and if so should have stated that, to be exact.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

7. 7. jtdwyer 10:48 PM 9/3/12

   I hate to suggest this, but if ruspert is correct above, the simplest, most effective and least disruptive solution would be to allow gasoline engine aircraft to use unleaded automotive fuel and (presuming there's no significant price differential between it and AVGAS), tax leaded AVGAS. This will provide incentive to those whose engine's can use unleaded fuels to do so and those who can to replace their engines with ones that can.
   
   Lead is horribly toxic, especially for children, but for perspective, I grew up going to schools just feet from high traffic streets with lots of automobiles burning lots of very cheap, high-lead gas (please, no comments about its effect on me - that'd be speculation since I haven't been clinically evaluated)...

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

8. 8. jtdwyer in reply to jtdwyer 10:51 PM 9/3/12

   Sorry - I should have typed:
   "This will provide incentive to those whose engines can use unleaded fuels to do so and those whose engines can't to replace them with ones that can."

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

9. 9. GasMeUp 12:11 AM 9/4/12

   Van Nuys Airport's helicopter traffic has stirred up, reportedly, public furor about their alleged heavy duty NOISE POLLUTION.
   
   Now isn't this odd: that not a peep has sounded there (of record) about the very high reading of 1.4 tons/year of leaded fuel emissions assessed at V.N. Airport --(EPA's 2002 study then the 2008 Technical Data Report).
   
   Add: Why no attention there about a non-profit enviro group's lawsuit filed recently vs. the EPA about LEAD in AvGAS?
   
   Can you figure out the LACK of NOISE about all this? I certainly can't.
   

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

10. 10. KotMaya in reply to GasMeUp 05:36 AM 9/4/12

    Nowadays most helicopters are powered by turbine engines, so use jet fuel - these include all the police/news/corporate jetrangers, eurocopters & so on. Only small, lightweight machines are powered by piston engines, and they make up only a small portion of all helicopter traffic.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

11. 11. Flyunleaded 07:05 PM 9/4/12

    I am a member of the board of directors of the Aviation Fuel Club that is mentioned in the article.
    
    This statement is almost true: "The Aviation Fuel Club, which aims to make aviation fuel affordable for sport aviators, is working to ensure that unleaded avgas is available at many airports across the country." The problem is that there is no "unleaded avgas" currently approved in the U.S. even though we have been searching for it for three decades. Unleaded auto fuel conforming to ASTM D4814 without ethanol is an aviation fuel approved by the FAA for many aircraft through the Supplement Type Certificate (STC) program. AFC has done a study which indicates that more than 80% of General Aviation (GA) aircraft could be flying on auto fuel, which we call "mogas". However the unintended consequences of the federal RFS mandate in EISA 2007 is going to take all of the auto gasoline in the country E10, which is gasoline with 10% ethanol blended into it, in the next year or so. Ethanol blended gasoline is not allowed in any aircraft with an FAA approved STC.
    
    What is ironic is that TEL will probably disappear withing a couple of years anyway because the only company in the world that makes it will probably only have one customer after next year, General Aviation, and we use less avgas every year because of the world wide economic conditions and the switch to turbine aircraft by the commercial users that used the majority of leaded avgas. Overall, about 200 million gallons of leaded avgas need be produced in a year anymore, and the amount of TEL needed to make it is about 100,000 gallons / yr. and declining. Obviously this is a ludicrous and untenable business model. So the perfect storm is brewing for GA. We will probably see the disappearance of leaded avgas, with no 100 octane unleaded replacement about the same time all of the auto gas will have ethanol in it, RIP GA.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

12. 12. GasMeUp 03:29 AM 9/6/12

    Thanks to all for your helpful comments.
    
    Most piston-aircraft folks I've met say that
    
    leaded AvGas is expected to remain in heavy demand
    
    for decades. Some claim the pistons burn up before long
    
    if auto fuel is used, with or w/o ethanol.
    
    Whatever, reputable toxicologists (when asked)
    
    tell us that there are NO safe levels for lead in the
    
    human body. And that lead is nearly as toxic as arsenic.
    
    So the sooner lead is removed from all fuels,
    
    the better. Health and environ. considerations need to
    
    come first. Even in the U.S. where money interests
    
    now seem to reign over everything else.
    
    (Sorry, I just had to get in that dig.)

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

13. 13. Kartracer 05:15 PM 1/8/13

    The lead in the fuel is only part of the problem the
    bigger issue is how to get it out. Alcohol is not
    a good option as it causes corrosion and vapor lock in aircrafts. We seem to have the belief that burning of food supply is better than finding a good option for
    the gas problem.
    

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this