Leaded Gasoline Was a Dumb Idea

From 1923 through 1996, America’s automobiles ran on leaded gasoline. It was not just a dumb idea, says Jason Fenske of Engineering Explained. It made Americans dumber, too.

 

The gasoline additive known as tetraethyl lead, often abbreviated as TEL, has a complicated and controversial history. Developed by Thomas Midgley of General Motors, TEL is a powerful octane booster, enabling gasoline engines to run higher compression ratios to increase power and efficiency. And for decades, the petroleum industry marketed leaded gasolines and production automobiles almost universally ran on them, even though the dangers to public health were already understood.

And ironically, although TEL was known to be extremely toxic to humans, ultimately it was removed from gasoline because it is toxic to catalytic converters. For more background on TEL, we highly recommend the seminal work on the subject, “The Secret History of Lead,” by our friend Jamie Kitman. More recently, he wrote a multi-part series for Jalopnik on leaded fuel that starts here. 

Decades from now, people will be scratching their heads in wonder at just what we were thinking when we allowed millions of cars to run on leaded gasoline. Meanwhile, noted automotive expert Jason Fenske of Engineering Explained is already scratching his head. Not only did we use leaded gasoline for decades, he observes, we still use it in light aircraft to this day, despite its devastating effects on human health—including child brain development. Fenske, a trained engineer, has a talent for handling sensitive issues in a straightforward manner, and he backs up his observations with solid technical materials. Here’s why leaded gasoline was a dumb idea. Video below.

 

6 thoughts on “Leaded Gasoline Was a Dumb Idea

  1. The parallels with the tobacco industry are remarkable, how public opinion and public policy were manipulated.

  2. Funny when they quit adding lead, gas prices starting going up. Looks like it should be cheaper by not adding something than putting it in. Same thing happened with diesel, they took out the Sulphur, prices went up.

    • “Looks like it should be cheaper by not adding something than putting it in. Same thing happened with diesel, they took out the Sulphur, prices went up.”

      I used to say exactly the same thing about lead. At the time I lived a city that was home to a university with one of the largest petroleum engineering programs in the U.S. and a major oil refinery. One of my neighbors also happened to hold a PhD in petroleum engineering, and both taught and served as a consultant to a major oil company.

      Simply stated, he explained that lead is an inexpensive way to raise octane. Without it, gasoline must go through additional processes to reach the same level of octane – and those processes are more expensive than adding lead.

      Hope this helps.

      • Exactly. It cost more to increase octane without lead.

        And it also costs more to take naturally occurring sulphur out of diesel, because it means adding a new unit to the refinery.

  3. I have for years pondered the matter of American Business “charging more for less??!!!”
    I now suspect why my peanut butter and almond milk have been on the list???

Comments are closed.