100LL Debacle

Pi1otguy said:
Wouldn't surprise me if some flavor of look for the sticker gatekeeping doesn't become a req for fuel truck drivers.
Click to expand...


It would surprise me if FBOs try to become the STC police to ensure GAMI makes money, and they probably will be happy to sell you a few hundred dollars worth of fuel regardless. Especially since it’s completely compatible with 100LL.
 
Half Fast said:
It would surprise me if FBOs try to become the STC police to ensure GAMI makes money, and they probably will be happy to sell you a few hundred dollars worth of fuel regardless. Especially since it’s completely compatible with 100LL.
Click to expand...
Where is the incentive for the FBOs? I could see it happening if GAMI asks for stats on G100UL vs 100LL sales or something like that (even if innocently).
 
Half Fast said:
It would surprise me if FBOs try to become the STC police to ensure GAMI makes money, and they probably will be happy to sell you a few hundred dollars worth of fuel regardless. Especially since it’s completely compatible with 100LL.
Click to expand...
I go to local airports with the cheapest AV gas all the time in my truck to fill up my transfer tank. All they care about is does my credit card work. They don’t care if I put in my diesel tractor.
 
Just thought of another advantage of G100UL - aircraft motor oil will be recyclable if it hasn't had 100LL run through it. Aircraft oil run with 1000LL cannot be recycled, and the normal places that take used oil will reject it if you bring it to them.
 
Jeff Oslick said:
Just thought of another advantage of G100UL - aircraft motor oil will be recyclable if it hasn't had 100LL run through it. Aircraft oil run with 1000LL cannot be recycled, and the normal places that take used oil will reject it if you bring it to them.
Click to expand...

I don't know about that. There is an oil waste tank at my home airport and I've seen a recycle truck empty it. Maybe they're incinerating it and not recycing it though.
 
Walboy said:
I don't know about that. There is an oil waste tank at my home airport and I've seen a recycle truck empty it. Maybe they're incinerating it and not recycing it though.
Click to expand...

hmmmm, wouldn't burning such oil release lead into the air?

or am I missing something?
 
Bob Noel said:
hmmmm, wouldn't burning such oil release lead into the air?

or am I missing something?
Click to expand...

:dunno: All I know is that the oil goes somewhere. The tank was put in place for for airport tennants to dispose aircraft engine oil. Hydraulic oil is acceptable too. I know of several airports that do the same thing.

When I had a waste oil tank with my business, the recycling place only cared about PCBs. They tested for them, if none, they didn't care what was in the tank.
 
Walboy said:
I don't know about that. There is an oil waste tank at my home airport and I've seen a recycle truck empty it. Maybe they're incinerating it and not recycing it though.
Click to expand...

If they're recycling it, they're contaminating everything it touches. There is definitely enough lead in aircraft waste oil to be considered a federal hazardous waste (based on what I see in oil analyses, and my professional knowledge of federal haz waste rules). Our airport workers come around an collect the used oil routinely, or we can call them and they'll pick it up.
 
Jeff Oslick said:
If they're recycling it, they're contaminating everything it touches. There is definitely enough lead in aircraft waste oil to be considered a federal hazardous waste (based on what I see in oil analyses, and my professional knowledge of federal haz waste rules). Our airport workers come around an collect the used oil routinely, or we can call them and they'll pick it up.
Click to expand...
I would imagine the local O'Reilly Auto Parts stores near each airport probably have "contaminated" oil frequently. I seriously doubt it even crosses someone's mind that the oil has minescule amounts of lead in it.
 
The important outcome here is G100UL will help secure the 100 octane avgas supply into the future, where the continued availability and desirability of TEL may be in question. If you don't need 100 octane fuel, it doesn't matter so much. But anyone flying higher compression engines, including high compression upgrades for flibs like mine, will be a bit relieved. My engine certainly won't miss the lead deposits.

Another factor to consider is that transportation and delivery costs might be less for UL fuel, because there is no need to dedicate tankard to leaded fuels. Maybe that's not a lot, but it's something.

The main downsides are going to be a small (5%)weight penalty, because of the higher density of the fuel. Fortunately, volumetric energy content is comparable.
 
Is the G100UL approved for the big radial engines?
 
SoonerAviator said:
I would imagine the local O'Reilly Auto Parts stores near each airport probably have "contaminated" oil frequently. I seriously doubt it even crosses someone's mind that the oil has minescule amounts of lead in it.
Click to expand...

Might be the case around you, but anywhere near our airport and they will both look at the oil to see if it looks like regular car oil, and ask you if it is from an airplane. I suspect they've had some batches rejected at substantial expense and don't want a repeat.
 
Bell206 said:
Is the G100UL approved for the big radial engines?
Click to expand...

According to the AOPA video from Braly, yes. In fact, he said if a piston engine isn't on the AML list, it is from an oversight that GAMI has the authority to change themselves.
 
asicer said:
EPA: "So you aviation guys have a G100UL available? Ok, we'll go ahead and outlaw leaded fuel now."
Click to expand...
FAA and EPA says that would take 4 years, plus implementation time… IOW ~2030. 100UL availability is more an issue for local regulations.

Paul
 
Dave Anderson said:
I'm curious what happens when in 50 yrs, we find out some chemical additive causes cancer from these new fuels, do we go back to 100LL?
Click to expand...
Do you think they'll still let us have our infernal combustion engines in 50 years?
 
Jeff Oslick said:
Might be the case around you, but anywhere near our airport and they will both look at the oil to see if it looks like regular car oil, and ask you if it is from an airplane. I suspect they've had some batches rejected at substantial expense and don't want a repeat.
Click to expand...
90% of the time it's me dumping it into the oil waste tank in the back, not the store clerk. Not sure what would give the oil away that it looks like "airplane oil". My point is that it's more probable than not that their oil recycling tanks are already contaminated. I doubt anyone is making a stink about it.
 
Dave Anderson said:
I'm curious what happens when in 50 yrs, we find out some chemical additive causes cancer from these new fuels, do we go back to 100LL?
Click to expand...

Don't know, but the environmental remediation business relies on stuff like this happening (PFAS being the latest hot-item). Disclaimer - environmental remediation is my career... and yes, the science on some (not all, by any means) is thin for making multi-billion dollar decisions.
 
Dave Anderson said:
I'm curious what happens when in 50 yrs, we find out some chemical additive causes cancer from these new fuels, do we go back to 100LL?
Click to expand...

First of all, it’s gasoline and is nasty to start with.

But I think that’s part of what was unique about Gami’s formulation, it’s all refinery fractions and not special additives.

From an older article:

General Aviation Modifications Inc. (GAMI) of Ada, Oklahoma, has developed a petroleum-centered plan for producing the new avgas: Add aro- matic compounds such as mesitylene and/or one of the xylene offshoots to the high-quality alkylate base stock (94 octane) that’s already in production as the base stock for today’s TEL-laced 100LL. Xylene is a plastic precursor and is plentiful. Ta-da! An avgas that can be put into production using exist- ing production facilities and matching up very well with almost all D-910 performance mandates.
Modifications must be implemented at the production plants, but George Braly, chief engineer at GAMI, said the fuel can be made with components “that are found inside the fence of any refinery.” Braly predicted a price of $5 to $6 a gallon for G100UL, the com- pany’s replacement fuel. Braly added, “G100UL can be made at any of the seven or eight refineries around the country that produce 100LL avgas.”

Swift Technologies of West Lafay- ette, Indiana, has a different plan.

The Swift formulation is a binary (two-part) fuel consisting mostly of mesitylene mixed with a small amount of isopentane (2-methylbutane). The difference is that the Swift supply of mesitylene will be extracted from biomass through a catalytic process

https://gami.com/g100ul/AvGas0211.pdf
 
Dave Anderson said:
I'm curious what happens when in 50 yrs, we find out some chemical additive causes cancer from these new fuels, do we go back to 100LL?
Click to expand...


I’m 61. In 50 years I doubt I’ll care. But if I’m still flying at age 111, I’ll sell my 103 year old Beech and switch to something that can use mogas assuming it still exists.
 
Half Fast said:
I’m 61. In 50 years I doubt I’ll care. But if I’m still flying at age 111, I’ll sell my 103 year old Beech and switch to something that can use mogas assuming it still exists.
Click to expand...

:yeahthat:

I'm 73. I am planning on flying when I'm 123, assuming I don't run out of money putting G100UL in the plane. :aureola:
 
  • Like
Reactions: WDD
Dave Anderson said:
I'm curious what happens when in 50 yrs, we find out some chemical additive causes cancer from these new fuels, do we go back to 100LL?
Click to expand...

Doesn't in California everything cause cancer already? Seems like anything and everything you buy down there has a label saying it could cause cancer. They'll probably just require a new placate for our planes saying "flying this aircraft might cause cancer to you, or anyone near the aircraft".
 
Chrisgoesflying said:
Doesn't in California everything cause cancer already? Seems like anything and everything you buy down there has a label saying it could cause cancer. They'll probably just require a new placate for our planes saying "flying this aircraft might cause cancer to you, or anyone near the aircraft".
Click to expand...
I wish they would figure out that government regulations and employees cause cancer. Love to get rid of those problems.
 
charheep said:
https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2022/september/01/closer-to-an-unleaded-future

The FAA signed on September 1 supplemental type certificates that allow General Aviation Modifications Inc.’s 100-octane unleaded fuel (G100UL) to be used in every general aviation spark-ignition engine and every airframe powered by those engines.
Click to expand...
I hate to see what even 10% ethanol is going to do to those very expensive and more than a little temperamental engines. If I remember right they only have to label it if it exceeds 10% ethanol.

We don't need the lead or the ethanol, methanol can raise the octane levels more than adequately and it isn't hydrophilic.
Walboy said:
I don't know about that. There is an oil waste tank at my home airport and I've seen a recycle truck empty it. Maybe they're incinerating it and not recycing it though.
Click to expand...
Used oil is used to treat roads and some trucking companies mix it with fresh diesel and run it in their trucks. Not sure what all the other uses for it would be.
 
Tarheelpilot said:
I wish they would figure out that government regulations and employees cause cancer. Love to get rid of those problems.
Click to expand...
They certainly cause a lot of anxiety and depression so clearly regulators are a threat to human health.
 
O2 Birddog said:
I hate to see what even 10% ethanol is going to do to those very expensive and more than a little temperamental engines. If I remember right they only have to label it if it exceeds 10% ethanol.

We don't need the lead or the ethanol, methanol can raise the octane levels more than adequately and it isn't hydrophilic.
Click to expand...
Are you saying that G100UL contains ethanol?
 
O2 Birddog said:
Used oil is used to treat roads and some trucking companies mix it with fresh diesel and run it in their trucks. Not sure what all the other uses for it would be.
Click to expand...

Look for “re-refined” on motor oil labels on the lower tier shelves.

FLTRR15W40G.jpg
 
charheep said:
https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2022/september/01/closer-to-an-unleaded-future

The FAA signed on September 1 supplemental type certificates that allow General Aviation Modifications Inc.’s 100-octane unleaded fuel (G100UL) to be used in every general aviation spark-ignition engine and every airframe powered by those engines.
Click to expand...
I hate to see what even 10% ethanol is going to do to those very expensive and more than a little temperamental engines. If I remember right they only have to label it if it exceeds 10% ethanol.

We don't need the lead or the ethanol, methanol can raise the octane levels more than adequately and it isn't hydrophilic.
 
farmrjohn said:
Well the forces working to get rid of 100LL are alive and well in S. Cali. This sign is posted on the entrance to my city owned airport. Note the organization named at the bottom. It's not a governmental organization but I suspect it gets quite a bit of public funding, and interesting CV of its board. I suspect more and more airports will follow the lead of Santa Clara County well before there are any results form EAGLE.View attachment 109828
Click to expand...
Somebody playing politics with that sign, it has no place at the Airport.
 
Palmpilot said:
Are you saying that G100UL contains ethanol?
Click to expand...
No, I'm saying I don't know that they'd be required to list it at levels below 10%. With what ethanol does to small engines I'd hate to see what it could do to ours.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top