triumphs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Chemistry? Was: SB42

To: Tom Tweed <ak627@dayton.wright.edu>
Subject: Re: Chemistry? Was: SB42
From: Bollen <bollen@ibm.net>
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 1997 20:18:17 -0400
Cc: triumphs@Autox.Team.Net
References: <9709251346.AA14217@dayton.wright.edu>
Tom Tweed wrote:
> 
> Hello Bill, you responded to my post -
> 
>  >Tom Tweed wrote:
>  >>
>  >> Well, you really don't need no stinkin' lead, either.  Its addition
>  >> to gasoline dates from the 1920's, before modern chemistry had
>  >> managed to get the octane number up high enough through refining alone.
>  >>
>  >
>  >Hi All,
>  >        I'm not a Chemist, but I thought the level of pollutants produced by
>  >Unleaded fuel was considered more dangerous than those produced by
>  >leaded, because of the high level of carcinogenic aromatics necessary to
>  >raise the Octane to the same level as leaded. The only advantage of the
>  >unleaded is the ability it gives to use a catalytic converter, which
>  >once warm, Genuinely gives a reduction in pollutants.
>  >
>  >Comments from any Chemists on the list would be welcome.
>  >
>  >        Bill.
>  >--
> 
> Well, I'm not a chemist either, but I work with a few of them here
> at a Toxic Hazard research lab, and from our discussions, it seems
> that the lead itself is the problem, and since the catalytic con-
> vertor would be ruined by lead and is also necessary to reduce the
> total emissions, those are two very good reasons to abandon the
> lead content.  The blood lead levels of children have come down
> significantly in the years since the lead phase-out, can't give
> you hard numbers off the bat, but this seems to be common know-
> ledge among some health/environmental chemists, and a sure sign
> of the success of the decision, it seems to me.
> 
> Surely you have heard of the blame for the downfall of the Roman
> Empire being placed on their use of lead water pipes for plumbing,
> which in fact gives plumbing its English name and lead its chemical
> abbreviation, Pb.  8-)  Not that I'd care to argue the above, es-
> pecially on this Triumph list, but since lead is such a well-known
> health hazard, especially to the young, I just can't see any good
> reason for spewing tons of it into the air for the gratification
> of a few LEAD-footed motorheads !
> 
> Horse-hair lined, fiberglass-reenforced asbestos undies at the
> ready,
> Tom Tweed
> SW Ohio
> Brehm Research Lab, Wright State U. Chem. dept.

The strange thing is that I grew up in England in a house built in the
20's which had lead water pipes, and alkaline water, which dissolves
lead. While I do not lay claim to be completely sane, since I buy LBC's,
I was at one time a member of MENSA, and coming up to 60 haven't yet
gone completely ga-ga. I also played with mercury, and worked in chem
labs where asbestos insulated our heating vessels, and worked
extensively with undiluted agent orange in the late 50s. I used
Chlordane to kill ants inside my house, and had extensive exposure to
benzene, vinyl chloride to name but a few. There's a lot of bullshit
science out there that people are making a lot of bucks from.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>