>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.
Unfortunately these numbers are skewed by the fact that lead was removed
from several other common sources at about the same time, or a little
before. One very prominent case is lead based paints in the home and
school environments. There have been some indications that this alone
has accounted for 60% of the blood lead level reduction in children.
Also the shift to plastic based plumbing in many areas is heralded
as a great reducer of lead.
>
>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.
So Long,
Darrell Leach, KD6LRC DM-15, Ridgecrest, Ca
email: Triumph_TR4@ridgecrest.ca.us
http://www.ridgenet.net/~token/PAGE1.html
1962 TR-4 (CT5368LO) Every Day
1962 TR-4 (CT13108L)
1965 Spitfire Mk.II
1967 Spitfire Mk.III (In work, lots of 1500 stuff)
Keeper of the TR-4 List. Version 1.4 availible.
|