The fatal attraction of lead • Hacker News Board

Re: The fatal attraction of lead

#71

Post by Dylan16807 » Mon, Oct 13, 2014, 4:25 PM UTC

techdragon wrote: post #53

rodgerd wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The health risks of leaded gasoline were also obvious to many, and ethanol was known as a safe alternative anti-knock additive in the 1920s. FTA: "Midgley spent months plagued by the effects of lead poisoning. GM's ethyl plant in New Jersey, meanwhile, was forced to close after several workers went mad and some died. The press renamed ethyl "looney gas". " And yet it continued to be used for decades. A lesson, I gu…

Lookup how he died and you may feel a little more Karmically Balanced

One messy death is not in the same ballpark as balancing.

But retribution is dumb; reparations are far superior.

Re: The fatal attraction of lead

#72

Post by notastartup » Mon, Oct 13, 2014, 6:36 PM UTC

mturmon wrote: post #47

notastartup wrote: post #21

The crime rate correlation with lead tainted gasoline is fascinating. Could it be that in lower socioeconomic areas have older cars that produces lead in to the air, and the population ends up breathing a lot of it?

You have been downvoted, but you have a point. In the 1970s, you could buy both leaded and unleaded gas at service stations. New cars used unleaded gas, but old ones "required" leaded for various reasons that turned out to be mostly wrong ( http://www.stevelinden.com/unleaded-gas-vs-regular-gas-in-cl... ). Unleaded was required to work with the catalytic converters that were newly required in cars. Regular leaded gas…

Not sure why it was downvoted but maybe those people think it was because abortion boom during this time after ruling that legalized it in some states and hence, would be criminals never being borned that attributed to fall in crime rates.

Maybe it's even a combination of both.

Re: The fatal attraction of lead

#73

Post by dghughes » Tue, Oct 14, 2014, 11:09 PM UTC

tobinfricke wrote: post #58

dghughes wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Old being the key since the engines require lead for valve lubrication and most have a carburetor not fuel-injection so power is not as good as fuel-injected. Getting power out of a certain quantity of fuel is also a big plus since the 100 liters of leaded avgas you carry can take you 600km but unleaded maybe only 500km.

We have to weigh these benefits to (piston-powered) general aviation (mostly a hobby?) against toxifying the environment. Frankly I don't think piston-powered GA is vital enough to our economy/society to justify such a long grace period on removing the leaded fuel. If our Cessnas can't climb quite as fast or fly quite as far - that seems a very reasonable cost for removing a known potent neurotoxin from the environme…

That's the thing though they have to climb and go fast since the stall speed is always on your mind as a pilot especially when I was learning to fly.

I just hate to think of all the avgas I got on my hands when checking the fuel before each flight, dip the wood stick in the top tanks to check teh level. But even worse is when you use a small graduated cylinder with a metal spike to drain off a good 100ml of fuel from the under-tank to check for water then throw it on the ground! The taxi area must be loaded with lead.