Hrmbee OP t1_j3yfe9b wrote on January 11, 2023 at 10:39 PM

From the Abstract:

>Lead-formulated aviation gasoline (avgas) is the primary source of lead emissions in the United States today, consumed by over 170,000 piston-engine aircraft (PEA). The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that four million people reside within 500m of a PEA-servicing airport. The disposition of avgas around such airports may be an independent source of child lead exposure. We analyze over 14,000 blood lead samples of children (≤5 y of age) residing near one such airport—Reid-Hillview Airport (RHV) in Santa Clara County, California. Across an ensemble of tests, we find that the blood lead levels (BLLs) of sampled children increase in proximity to RHV, are higher among children east and predominantly downwind of the airport, and increase with the volume of PEA traffic and quantities of avgas sold at the airport. The BLLs of airport-proximate children are especially responsive to an increase in PEA traffic, increasing by about 0.72 μg/dL under periods of maximum PEA traffic. We also observe a significant reduction in child BLLs from a series of pandemic-related interventions in Santa Clara County that contracted PEA traffic at the airport. Finally, we find that children’s BLLs increase with measured concentrations of atmospheric lead at the airport. In support of the scientific adjudication of the EPAs recently announced endangerment finding, this in-depth case study indicates that the deposition of avgas significantly elevates the BLLs of at-risk children.

It's unfortunate that a full switch from leaded gasoline in all its forms hasn't been implemented since we've understood the dangers over a generation ago. Industry convenience should not trump public health and yet it occurs on a regular basis.

londons_explorer t1_j3z5oe6 wrote on January 12, 2023 at 1:37 AM

> Industry convenience should not trump public health and yet it occurs on a regular basis.

The regulatory body for making this decision is the FAA. The FAA banning leaded fuels is like NASA banning rockets or the Treasury banning dollars.

The real question is why have we the people set the system up so that the regulatory body making this decision doesn't have the people's best interests in mind?

notanaardvark t1_j3zu1gj wrote on January 12, 2023 at 4:39 AM

The FAA did finally approve unleaded fuel for all piston aircraft this past year. It will probably take a minute to get all the refueling infrastructure switched over but it's finally happening. They haven't outright banned 100LL (the current leaded fuel) but lots of pilots have been wanting the FAA to approve unleaded fuel forever. Hopefully the switch comes sooner rather than later.

The other regulatory piece of this is that if we knew for so long that leaded fuels caused health problems, why was the land so close to airports zoned for residential use (or schools)? A huge amount of the time, the airport was built away from everything in the 40s or 50s (or earlier), and then much later people started building houses next to them, then complaining about the noise and the potential health risks, and in some cases getting the airports shut down. Case in point, Santa Monica airport. Opened in the 20s, one of the busiest general aviation airports in the country, and now set to shut down later this decade.