I don’t mind being corrected. Please enlighten me on the other producers of TEL!
does that also apply to the interstate highway system, rail system, federal waterways?
Yes to the highways, dunno about the others. See: California Vehicle Emission Standards for more info, including challenges.
So you know that theyh are “producing it illegally” suggest that you do a bit more research and watch what you say. I’m involved with production of leaded avgas in Europe and have been for many years now. The TEL comes from China and it produces better results than the Innospec product. Tens of millions of litres a year is shipped to dozens of countries all over the world (both hemispheres) , so perhaps before you go ‘big noting’ yourself next time you might do a bit more research that a bloody ‘Google search’… seriously this forum is full of ‘know nothing’ pretend experts.
From Russ:
I’d be very interested in knowing who’s making leaded avgas with Chinese TEL. By all means email me at rniles@avweb.com so we can look into this further. If there’s another viable source for TEL it changes the fuel landscape considerably. Thanks.
Russ
See my reply to ‘expert Gary B’
See my reply to ‘expert Gary B’ and perhaps you too can take the same advice. I’ve been in the oil industry for almost 40 years, directly involved with avgas, and directly involved with the production of avgas using TEL produced by the country that is now the MOST IMPORTANT economy in the world, and you’ll be able to deduce that this is certainly NOT the USA.
I never claimed to be an “expert”, nor did the other commenter who also asked the same legitimate question I asked. Going around using words that others never used or claimed doesn’t exactly make your argument very convincing.
We would still like to know which other legal TEL producers you are referring to.
All commercial producers of TEL are legal producers. They don’t need your, or the USA’s permission to do anything. There is nothing else that you need to know nor will you be told. If your google university can’t help you any more then maybe you are best to continue your discussions about saving the world with your mates at the pub.
If you are unwilling to provide facts to support your argument, then it’s just an argument for argument’s sake and there is no more point in continuing this discussion.
1 Like
As Rpstrong has already answered, yes, the state of California (or any other state) can impose stricter standards for the use of federal facilities than the feds do. They are not restricting the actual use of the facility, only requiring the user to meet more restrictive environmental standards. When you drive on the California interstate system, you must use CARB gasoline or ULS diesel in your vehicle. Obviously, if you drove (or flew) in from another less restrictive state, they won’t stop you at the border and drain your fuel tank(s), but when you fill up, your only choices are those fuels that meet the California standard. And, yes, the same can apply to federal rail and waterway use. They are not restricting the use of, or access to, the federally funded facilities, just telling you what air quality standards you must meet to do so. As for the sale of aviation gasoline, the whole issue centers around the terms “approved”, and “readily available”. California’s interpretation obviously differs from that of the FAA. Since the FAA has already “approved” G100UL for all spark ignition engines and most airframes without modifications, their argument here is a little weak. HOWEVER, if the whole thing ends up in court, who knows what, or when, the final outcome will be…
I hate to go off aviation subjects but…what is your definition of “the most important economy in the world”
I’m no lawyer here, but I’m pretty sure that the constitution prohibtd both local and states from banning 100LL according to the interstate commerce clause found in Article I, Section 8, Clause 3. My engine (Cont IO-360K) is prohibited from using anything other than 100LL. If I fly into a California airport from outside of California while flying commercially and can’t get fuel because of a local/state ordinance, my ability to conduct interstate commerce has been illegally limited by the state in violation of the constitution. Just saying.
As a federal republic, the founding fathers were all about ensuring equal states rights, but at the same time making sure no state gets to bully another one.
If lead is such a bad thing that must be eliminated, then it’s worth spending money to make it go away. If you can’t make a fuel without lead that I can use in my $175,000 airplane, either buy my airplane back or pay me to convert me to diesel/jet A. If you aren’t willing to pay, then I guess the lead in 100LL must not be bad enough.
Just like in the airlines— if it’s too expensive to make design changes to correct a problem to save lives, then people will keep dying because it costs less to pay the litigation than it does to fix the root cause.
This topic was automatically closed after 7 days. New replies are no longer allowed.