Lead gasoline was put on trial in 1925 by the U.S. Public Health Service for allegedly causing all sorts of health problems to such a degree that it's manufacture was being questionex. This was after the death of many workers in those plants. They decided not to ban it but to investigate further into the matter that came up with nothing, so it were dropped. But what would happen if it had been banned originally (maybe a much higher number of worker deaths)?
WI: No lead gasoline
- Thread starter MrNumbahOne
- Start date
Has some one been watching Cosmos? 
Seeing as how it took the concerted and strenuous effort of and years of struggle against entrenched corporate interests by CC Paterson for whom, we all owe a giant and unimaginable Debt of Undying Gratitude....it would indeed have to have been some kinda of disastrous style event--to wit: they KNEW that leaded gasoline was not healthy or safe and PAID the scientists to willfully reject anything that would show leaded gasoline as anything other than a perfectly safe and harmless product.
Seeing as how it took the concerted and strenuous effort of and years of struggle against entrenched corporate interests by CC Paterson for whom, we all owe a giant and unimaginable Debt of Undying Gratitude....it would indeed have to have been some kinda of disastrous style event--to wit: they KNEW that leaded gasoline was not healthy or safe and PAID the scientists to willfully reject anything that would show leaded gasoline as anything other than a perfectly safe and harmless product.
Cars wouldn't have been as powerful or as efficient. It could also result in less powerful planes, which could have huge effects on WWII (assuming that still happened, which it probably would).
Delta Force
Banned
There might not be restrictions for aviation and military use. Even today a substitute for leaded aviation fuel hasn't been developed, although piston aviation technology has mostly been stagnant since the 1960s.
A ban or restriction on leaded fuels could help alcohol fuels and diesel, but then gasoline might go back to being the volatile waste product it was during the early part of the petroleum industry.
That's a fair point. I could see the military getting an exemption (if not all planes).
Diesel would probably be used a bit more; and possibly ethanol too.
I just read up a bit on the Volstead Act and I was surprised to find out that it didn't prohibit the usage of ethanol in cars. I could see ethanol being used as a fuel more than it had. Ethanol has a higher octane rating, which means that (if added to normal gasoline), the octane rating would be higher than unmixed gasoline, which could make up for the lack of lead.
I'm not sure, but I heard once that he's unintentionally responsible for more harm to people and more deaths than anyone in the world, bypassing even Mao because of all the ungodly deaths from air pollution.
If they could get it to work. They experimented extensively on ethanol but achieved nothing. To give you an idea, we just figured out how to use ethanol. It always seems so close but never getting it right for them. It could end up taking decades.
If Thomas Midgley Jr. dies in the Spanish Flu epidemic, it's possible that tetraethyl lead isn't realised to be an anti-knock agent in the first place, which is a double benfit since it's also possible we don't get lumbered with CFCs either.
What would have happened had we never got tetraethyl lead in gasoline?
Two things: 1) spark plug technology would have to be advanced a lot more to produce better combustion with lower octane gasoline and 2) there would have been a lot more development of alternatives to the carburetor--i.g., mechanical fuel injection could be in widespread use by the late 1950's to promote better control of the fuel-air mixture.
Two things: 1) spark plug technology would have to be advanced a lot more to produce better combustion with lower octane gasoline and 2) there would have been a lot more development of alternatives to the carburetor--i.g., mechanical fuel injection could be in widespread use by the late 1950's to promote better control of the fuel-air mixture.
How would the reduction in crime impact politics?
Lots of butterflies from fewer criminals, fewer victims, and probable generally smarter people.
Lots of butterflies from fewer criminals, fewer victims, and probable generally smarter people.
Sior
Banned
During World War 2, the Royal Air Force needed to run Russian-based Hurricane fighter aircraft on low octane fuel. It tended to explode rather than rapidly burning - an effect known as detonation (aka ‘pinking’). The only quick fixes caused overheating and reduced power. Scientists, and then RAF-engineer, Henry Broquet, are said to have found that tin-based catalysts overcame the fuel problem. A 1989 paper by A T Pearce, (International Tin Research Institute, March 1989), refers.
Broquet eventually moved to South Africa and there marketed a tin-based catalyst called ‘Carbonflo’. He lost the product rights but regained them in 1986. When unleaded fuel was introduced, Carbonflo was promoted as a way of reducing detonation in engines designed for leaded petrol. There is evidence that this worked but a (UK) Automobile Association report raised doubts (that were strongly disputed by the company).
A Broquet company still exists (in the UK) but the manufacturing details have long been in the public domain. Now innumerable companies world-wide produce generally similar catalytic products – but detonation no longer being an issue with fuel sold in developed countries, the claims have changed.
http://tralvex.com/pub/cars/zip/broquet.pdf
Broquet eventually moved to South Africa and there marketed a tin-based catalyst called ‘Carbonflo’. He lost the product rights but regained them in 1986. When unleaded fuel was introduced, Carbonflo was promoted as a way of reducing detonation in engines designed for leaded petrol. There is evidence that this worked but a (UK) Automobile Association report raised doubts (that were strongly disputed by the company).
A Broquet company still exists (in the UK) but the manufacturing details have long been in the public domain. Now innumerable companies world-wide produce generally similar catalytic products – but detonation no longer being an issue with fuel sold in developed countries, the claims have changed.
http://tralvex.com/pub/cars/zip/broquet.pdf
Last edited:
If we assume WWII still occurs (the Treaty of Versailles pretty much made it inevitable), and if nobody discovers tetraethyl lead before WWII, that means no high-octane avgas for fighter planes. This is going to be a huge tactical disadvantage for the Allies (the Germans and Japanese are unaffected because they lacked tetraethyl lead in OTL), and will mean a longer war with much more fighting on the ground.
Also, if nobody discovers CFC's before WWII, that means no accidental discovery of tetrafluroethane. The Manhattan project might probably still discover it (or some other barrier material for gaseous diffusion), but likely not in time to produce an A-Bomb for the war. Teflon and CFC's probably remain classified until the 1970's and are not commercialized until the 90's.
So, we probably end up with a longer, bloodier war, a Red Europe all the way to the Channel, and a divided Japan.
After the war, the southern U.S. (and the rest of the subtropical world) remain economically stagnant, due to the lack of affordable air-conditioning -- a typical summer day in Houston, Texas is 90 degrees and 90% humidity. Cities like Las Vegas and Phoenix never develop.
I agree that taking away Thomas Midgley might take leaded gasoline out of the picture. It is not intuitively obvious to put a heavy metal into liquid fuel, let alone a toxic one like lead. The American fuel industry would simply have to get along without it. As mentioned, Germany and Japan did not have it. The unleaded fuel era simply becomes industry standard as effort goes into earlier fuel injection, along with blending of aromatic hydrocarbons and ethanol. Aviation fuel in WWII without lead? Gasoline was rationed and refineries were controlled. Petroleum engineers would figure it out. In the strategy of fuel technology, lead was more of a short cut than a game changer.
What about refrigeration without Midgley? Too many researchers would be looking for better refrigerants and it would only be a matter of time before halogenated hydrocarbons would come along. In OTL, Frigidaire and DuPont were first in line. In the meantime, what was Dow Chemical doing? Union Carbide, American Cyanamid, Norsk Hydro, Rhone-Poulenc, Bayer, BASF?
If the Germans made the discovery, it would be “liberated” after World War II. BASF invented tape recording in the thirties but never exported it. Americans brought the machines back after the war, reverse engineered them, and revolutionized entertainment technology.
What about refrigeration without Midgley? Too many researchers would be looking for better refrigerants and it would only be a matter of time before halogenated hydrocarbons would come along. In OTL, Frigidaire and DuPont were first in line. In the meantime, what was Dow Chemical doing? Union Carbide, American Cyanamid, Norsk Hydro, Rhone-Poulenc, Bayer, BASF?
If the Germans made the discovery, it would be “liberated” after World War II. BASF invented tape recording in the thirties but never exported it. Americans brought the machines back after the war, reverse engineered them, and revolutionized entertainment technology.
My grandfather's Peugot wouldn't have gotten knocked out of commission because he accidentally put unleaded petrol into it, that's one consequence.
Sior
Banned
http://www.efficient-mileage.com/water-injection.html
When water/methanol injection is properly used in a gasoline engine the combined fuel behaves like 120 octane.
When water/methanol injection is properly used in a gasoline engine the combined fuel behaves like 120 octane.
Delta Force
Banned
Water injection is rather heavy and bulky though, which is why it hasn't been used since the 1960s.