100 Low Lead availability - cont.

[Bill Daniels]

This is a continuation of the earlier thread about tow plane fuel.

From AVWEB February 11, 2008:

Tetra-Ethyl Lead

If I had an aircraft that required 100LL, I would read every report from
Innospec, the only manufacturer of tetra-ethyl lead (TEL). Here is a quote
from their 2007 third quarter report, available on their Web site:


"In Octane Additives, operating income for the third quarter was $2.3
million, compared with $10.3 million a year ago. The gross profit margin was
50.6 percent, compared with 55.7 percent a year ago. Revenues of $16.2
million were down 49 percent from a year ago. The reduced results in Octane
Additives primarily reflect a shift in certain shipments from the third to
the fourth quarter, as well as the continuing longer-term decline in the
tetra ethyl lead business."

The report also shows that Octane Additives sales were $16.2 million out of
a total revenue of $143 million, about 11 percent.

Given the declining sales, declining profit margin and the large costs to
decommission a [TEL] manufacturing facility, if you were in charge, how long
would you continue production?

Angus J. McCamant



What's the alternate fuel situation for Pawnee's?



Bill Daniels

[[email protected]]

On Mar 3, 3:22*pm, "Bill Daniels" <bildan@comcast-dot-net> wrote:
> This is a continuation of the earlier thread about tow plane fuel.
>
> From AVWEB February 11, 2008:
>
> Tetra-Ethyl Lead
>
> If I had an aircraft that required 100LL, I would read every report from
> Innospec, the only manufacturer of tetra-ethyl lead (TEL). Here is a quote
> from their 2007 third quarter report, available on their Web site:
>
> * "In Octane Additives, operating income for the third quarter was $2.3
> million, compared with $10.3 million a year ago. The gross profit margin was
> 50.6 percent, compared with 55.7 percent a year ago. Revenues of $16.2
> million were down 49 percent from a year ago. The reduced results in Octane
> Additives primarily reflect a shift in certain shipments from the third to
> the fourth quarter, as well as the continuing longer-term decline in the
> tetra ethyl lead business."
>
> The report also shows that Octane Additives sales were $16.2 million out of
> a total revenue of $143 million, about 11 percent.
>
> Given the declining sales, declining profit margin and the large costs to
> decommission a [TEL] manufacturing facility, if you were in charge, how long
> would you continue production?
>
> Angus J. McCamant
>
> What's the alternate fuel situation for Pawnee's?
>
> Bill Daniels

Hi Bill;

There is an autogas TC for the Pawnees. However, we stopped using it
when CA replaced MTBE with alcohol.

If they went out of business, there woulds be 80% of GA affected. I
would not worry about it, or perhaps just use our winch!

aerodyne

[BT]

the STC to bump our O-540 to 250HP does not allow auto fuel
autofuel is not allowed in any STC'd aircraft if the autofuel contains
ethanol
there is not much autofuel that does not contain ethanol

BT

> wrote in message
...
On Mar 3, 3:22 pm, "Bill Daniels" <bildan@comcast-dot-net> wrote:
> This is a continuation of the earlier thread about tow plane fuel.
>
> From AVWEB February 11, 2008:
>
> Tetra-Ethyl Lead
>
> If I had an aircraft that required 100LL, I would read every report from
> Innospec, the only manufacturer of tetra-ethyl lead (TEL). Here is a quote
> from their 2007 third quarter report, available on their Web site:
>
> "In Octane Additives, operating income for the third quarter was $2.3
> million, compared with $10.3 million a year ago. The gross profit margin
> was
> 50.6 percent, compared with 55.7 percent a year ago. Revenues of $16.2
> million were down 49 percent from a year ago. The reduced results in
> Octane
> Additives primarily reflect a shift in certain shipments from the third to
> the fourth quarter, as well as the continuing longer-term decline in the
> tetra ethyl lead business."
>
> The report also shows that Octane Additives sales were $16.2 million out
> of
> a total revenue of $143 million, about 11 percent.
>
> Given the declining sales, declining profit margin and the large costs to
> decommission a [TEL] manufacturing facility, if you were in charge, how
> long
> would you continue production?
>
> Angus J. McCamant
>
> What's the alternate fuel situation for Pawnee's?
>
> Bill Daniels

Hi Bill;

There is an autogas TC for the Pawnees. However, we stopped using it
when CA replaced MTBE with alcohol.

If they went out of business, there woulds be 80% of GA affected. I
would not worry about it, or perhaps just use our winch!

aerodyne

[Mike Schumann]

They will keep making TEL untill it is no longer profitable.

Mike Schumann

"Bill Daniels" <bildan@comcast-dot-net> wrote in message
. ..
> This is a continuation of the earlier thread about tow plane fuel.
>
> From AVWEB February 11, 2008:
>
> Tetra-Ethyl Lead
>
> If I had an aircraft that required 100LL, I would read every report from
> Innospec, the only manufacturer of tetra-ethyl lead (TEL). Here is a quote
> from their 2007 third quarter report, available on their Web site:
>
>
> "In Octane Additives, operating income for the third quarter was $2.3
> million, compared with $10.3 million a year ago. The gross profit margin
> was 50.6 percent, compared with 55.7 percent a year ago. Revenues of $16.2
> million were down 49 percent from a year ago. The reduced results in
> Octane Additives primarily reflect a shift in certain shipments from the
> third to the fourth quarter, as well as the continuing longer-term decline
> in the tetra ethyl lead business."
>
> The report also shows that Octane Additives sales were $16.2 million out
> of a total revenue of $143 million, about 11 percent.
>
> Given the declining sales, declining profit margin and the large costs to
> decommission a [TEL] manufacturing facility, if you were in charge, how
> long would you continue production?
>
> Angus J. McCamant
>
>
>
> What's the alternate fuel situation for Pawnee's?
>
>
>
> Bill Daniels
>
>



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[Dave Newill]

On Mar 4, 12:32*am, "Mike Schumann" <mike-nos...@traditions-
nospam.com> wrote:
> They will keep making TEL untill it is no longer profitable.
>
I visited GAMA headquarters to understand the situation on AvGAs from
their expert. He said that the tanker (ship) that carries the TEL will
be decommissioned in a few years - that will not stop it from being
shipped from its source (Russia) as it will simply be put into triple
walled sea-tainers - but the amount shipped each time will be smaller
and the insurance - as it is being shipped with other goods - will be
higher.

It will not go away - but it will be very expensive -however there is
so little of it in the fuel that it thankfully does not take much.
Also note that it is not shipped by pipeline - must be shipped by
truck so as not to pollute the pipes! Finally, there is a Friends of
the Earth petition getting hearing in congress to remove lead from all
fuels - if you think we have problems - think about all those outboard
motors out there!

[Bill Daniels]

"Dave Newill" > wrote in message
...
On Mar 4, 12:32 am, "Mike Schumann" <mike-nos...@traditions-
nospam.com> wrote:
> They will keep making TEL untill it is no longer profitable.
>
I visited GAMA headquarters to understand the situation on AvGAs from
their expert. He said that the tanker (ship) that carries the TEL will
be decommissioned in a few years - that will not stop it from being
shipped from its source (Russia) as it will simply be put into triple
walled sea-tainers - but the amount shipped each time will be smaller
and the insurance - as it is being shipped with other goods - will be
higher.

It will not go away - but it will be very expensive -however there is
so little of it in the fuel that it thankfully does not take much.
Also note that it is not shipped by pipeline - must be shipped by
truck so as not to pollute the pipes! Finally, there is a Friends of
the Earth petition getting hearing in congress to remove lead from all
fuels - if you think we have problems - think about all those outboard
motors out there!



The only producer of TEL is the Octane Additives Division of Innospec
(formerly Octel) - A UK based company. I believe, but can't find
referencable sources, that the actual TEL production is at a plant near
Madras, India. I have found no references to Russian production.

From reading press releases in financial publications, it appears that
revenue and profitability of the OA division is in a steep decline
(>50%/year). The parent company is loading accounting charges onto the
Octane Additives Division in the form of "Goodwill Impairments". They are
also making statements to the effect that the future business of the
division will be "environmental remediation activities". The company is now
accepting bids in India for the dismantling and desposal of the worlds only
TEL tanker ship. This looks like an imminent shutdown of TEL production.

I did find a comment that there is a six months supply of TEL in the US. It
appears to a casual reader that the end for TEL may indeed very near.

Bill D

[Mike Schumann]

I can't imagine that happening. Until there is a replacement for 100LL,
with the number of aircraft flying in the US, there will be a supply from
somewhere. The big question will be the cost.

Mike Schumann

"Bill Daniels" <bildan@comcast-dot-net> wrote in message
. ..
>
> "Dave Newill" > wrote in message
> ...
> On Mar 4, 12:32 am, "Mike Schumann" <mike-nos...@traditions-
> nospam.com> wrote:
>> They will keep making TEL untill it is no longer profitable.
>>
> I visited GAMA headquarters to understand the situation on AvGAs from
> their expert. He said that the tanker (ship) that carries the TEL will
> be decommissioned in a few years - that will not stop it from being
> shipped from its source (Russia) as it will simply be put into triple
> walled sea-tainers - but the amount shipped each time will be smaller
> and the insurance - as it is being shipped with other goods - will be
> higher.
>
> It will not go away - but it will be very expensive -however there is
> so little of it in the fuel that it thankfully does not take much.
> Also note that it is not shipped by pipeline - must be shipped by
> truck so as not to pollute the pipes! Finally, there is a Friends of
> the Earth petition getting hearing in congress to remove lead from all
> fuels - if you think we have problems - think about all those outboard
> motors out there!
>
>
>
> The only producer of TEL is the Octane Additives Division of Innospec
> (formerly Octel) - A UK based company. I believe, but can't find
> referencable sources, that the actual TEL production is at a plant near
> Madras, India. I have found no references to Russian production.
>
> From reading press releases in financial publications, it appears that
> revenue and profitability of the OA division is in a steep decline
> (>50%/year). The parent company is loading accounting charges onto the
> Octane Additives Division in the form of "Goodwill Impairments". They are
> also making statements to the effect that the future business of the
> division will be "environmental remediation activities". The company is
> now accepting bids in India for the dismantling and desposal of the worlds
> only TEL tanker ship. This looks like an imminent shutdown of TEL
> production.
>
> I did find a comment that there is a six months supply of TEL in the US.
> It appears to a casual reader that the end for TEL may indeed very near.
>
> Bill D
>
>
>



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[Bill Daniels]

"Mike Schumann" > wrote in message
.. .
>I can't imagine that happening. Until there is a replacement for 100LL,
>with the number of aircraft flying in the US, there will be a supply from
>somewhere. The big question will be the cost.
>
> Mike Schumann

The volume of fuel consumed by the US piston fleet is miniscule - less than
1% of all gasoline production and thus doesn't even appear on the radar of
fuel producers. I think the idea that "supply will meet demand" is a risky
one. As far as they are concerned, anything less than 1% is no demand at
all. The liabilities involved in handling TEL far outweigh potential
profits.

I think we are in the last stages of an economic "death spiral" for AVGAS.
High prices mean lower demand. Lower demand means higher price per gallon
since fixed overhead is spread over fewer gallons. Still higher prices
further reduces demand. In effect, it's "economies of scale" working in
reverse.

However, there may be hope. See:
http://www3.baylor.edu/bias/publications/agriculturalsprayaircraft.pdf

This paper describes obtaining an STC for operating a Pawnee on ethanol.
Note that the engine described is the fuel injected Lycoming IO-540 and not
the more common carburated O-540.

Nonetheless, given enough money, it's possible to convert a O-540 to fuel
injection since the injector bosses are cast into the cylinder heads - one
need only drill them for injectors. Converting a fuel injected engine to
ethanol is relatively easy. The modifications required to use ethanol with
a carburator are not really feasable.

Note the large increase in fuel consumption - ~40%. This probably
eliminates ethanol as a fuel for long range cross country airplanes but for
"fixed point" operators like crop dusters and glider towing operations, it's
a PITA but workable.

The total modifications required would be to convert the O-540 to fuel
injection using injectors suitable for ethanol and, since the cylinders have
to be removed anyway, it would be desirable to replace the pistons to
achieve a higher compression ratio. If it were desired to keep refueling
stops to the same intervals as with AVGAS, larger tanks would be needed.

The downside is that the conversion will be costly. The upside is that we
maintain the availability of aero tows, we get more performance from the
Pawnee and, possibly, greater engine life due to cooler running cylinders.

Bill Daniels




>
> "Bill Daniels" <bildan@comcast-dot-net> wrote in message
> . ..
>>
>> "Dave Newill" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> On Mar 4, 12:32 am, "Mike Schumann" <mike-nos...@traditions-
>> nospam.com> wrote:
>>> They will keep making TEL untill it is no longer profitable.
>>>
>> I visited GAMA headquarters to understand the situation on AvGAs from
>> their expert. He said that the tanker (ship) that carries the TEL will
>> be decommissioned in a few years - that will not stop it from being
>> shipped from its source (Russia) as it will simply be put into triple
>> walled sea-tainers - but the amount shipped each time will be smaller
>> and the insurance - as it is being shipped with other goods - will be
>> higher.
>>
>> It will not go away - but it will be very expensive -however there is
>> so little of it in the fuel that it thankfully does not take much.
>> Also note that it is not shipped by pipeline - must be shipped by
>> truck so as not to pollute the pipes! Finally, there is a Friends of
>> the Earth petition getting hearing in congress to remove lead from all
>> fuels - if you think we have problems - think about all those outboard
>> motors out there!
>>
>>
>>
>> The only producer of TEL is the Octane Additives Division of Innospec
>> (formerly Octel) - A UK based company. I believe, but can't find
>> referencable sources, that the actual TEL production is at a plant near
>> Madras, India. I have found no references to Russian production.
>>
>> From reading press releases in financial publications, it appears that
>> revenue and profitability of the OA division is in a steep decline
>> (>50%/year). The parent company is loading accounting charges onto the
>> Octane Additives Division in the form of "Goodwill Impairments". They
>> are also making statements to the effect that the future business of the
>> division will be "environmental remediation activities". The company is
>> now accepting bids in India for the dismantling and desposal of the
>> worlds only TEL tanker ship. This looks like an imminent shutdown of TEL
>> production.
>>
>> I did find a comment that there is a six months supply of TEL in the US.
>> It appears to a casual reader that the end for TEL may indeed very near.
>>
>> Bill D
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
>

[HL Falbaum]

"Bill Daniels" <bildan@comcast-dot-net> wrote in message
...
>
> "Mike Schumann" > wrote in message
> .. .
>>I can't imagine that happening. Until there is a replacement for 100LL,
>>with the number of aircraft flying in the US, there will be a supply from
>>somewhere. The big question will be the cost.
>>
> However, there may be hope. See:
> http://www3.baylor.edu/bias/publications/agriculturalsprayaircraft.pdf
>
> This paper describes obtaining an STC for operating a Pawnee on ethanol.
> Note that the engine described is the fuel injected Lycoming IO-540 and
> not the more common carburated O-540.
>
.. The modifications required to use ethanol with
> a carburator are not really feasable.
>

We should have Autogas for a long time, albeit with some amount of Ethanol.
We should not need to use pure Ethanol-no?

Forgive my naievte, but what is so hard about a "Gasohol" conversion for a
Carbureted Pawnee, other than the STC itself. Ethanol resistant fuel lines
are a reality, Viton, or Silicon Blue O-rings are available. If anything in
the carburetor is not ethanol proof it can be changed, no? So--new carb,
with properly sized ports and resistant seals, new fuel lines and fittings
and there we are. Getting the blessing of the FAA could be harder, but the
Autogas STC is done, so there is some history.
I would think that is easier than a full fuel injection conversion.

Besides--imagine the fun on a nice hot soaring day, with the Tow pilot
taking a water (dump) break, with 6 more ships to launch, and the FI "hot
start" technique doesn't work.

Hartley Falbaum
USA

[BT]

Bill.. our STC to bump the O-540 from 235HP to 250HP with a piston change
negates the autofuel STC.. 100LL required.
That STC would also need to be reworked or the STC to allow the IO-540 to
use Ethanol would need to include the option for higher HP.

Current auto engines that are "flex" fuel can burn regular auto low lead or
E-85 fuels. The E-85 fuel is cheaper than standard fuel, but the resulting
mpg is lower, the E-85 is less efficient and your total dollars spent to
complete the same work (travel the same distance) is higher with more fuel
stops.

BT

"Bill Daniels" <bildan@comcast-dot-net> wrote in message
...
>
> "Mike Schumann" > wrote in message
> .. .
>>I can't imagine that happening. Until there is a replacement for 100LL,
>>with the number of aircraft flying in the US, there will be a supply from
>>somewhere. The big question will be the cost.
>>
>> Mike Schumann
>
> The volume of fuel consumed by the US piston fleet is miniscule - less
> than 1% of all gasoline production and thus doesn't even appear on the
> radar of fuel producers. I think the idea that "supply will meet demand"
> is a risky one. As far as they are concerned, anything less than 1% is no
> demand at all. The liabilities involved in handling TEL far outweigh
> potential profits.
>
> I think we are in the last stages of an economic "death spiral" for AVGAS.
> High prices mean lower demand. Lower demand means higher price per gallon
> since fixed overhead is spread over fewer gallons. Still higher prices
> further reduces demand. In effect, it's "economies of scale" working in
> reverse.
>
> However, there may be hope. See:
> http://www3.baylor.edu/bias/publications/agriculturalsprayaircraft.pdf
>
> This paper describes obtaining an STC for operating a Pawnee on ethanol.
> Note that the engine described is the fuel injected Lycoming IO-540 and
> not the more common carburated O-540.
>
> Nonetheless, given enough money, it's possible to convert a O-540 to fuel
> injection since the injector bosses are cast into the cylinder heads - one
> need only drill them for injectors. Converting a fuel injected engine to
> ethanol is relatively easy. The modifications required to use ethanol
> with a carburator are not really feasable.
>
> Note the large increase in fuel consumption - ~40%. This probably
> eliminates ethanol as a fuel for long range cross country airplanes but
> for "fixed point" operators like crop dusters and glider towing
> operations, it's a PITA but workable.
>
> The total modifications required would be to convert the O-540 to fuel
> injection using injectors suitable for ethanol and, since the cylinders
> have to be removed anyway, it would be desirable to replace the pistons to
> achieve a higher compression ratio. If it were desired to keep refueling
> stops to the same intervals as with AVGAS, larger tanks would be needed.
>
> The downside is that the conversion will be costly. The upside is that we
> maintain the availability of aero tows, we get more performance from the
> Pawnee and, possibly, greater engine life due to cooler running cylinders.
>
> Bill Daniels
>
>
>
>
>>
>> "Bill Daniels" <bildan@comcast-dot-net> wrote in message
>> . ..
>>>
>>> "Dave Newill" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>> On Mar 4, 12:32 am, "Mike Schumann" <mike-nos...@traditions-
>>> nospam.com> wrote:
>>>> They will keep making TEL untill it is no longer profitable.
>>>>
>>> I visited GAMA headquarters to understand the situation on AvGAs from
>>> their expert. He said that the tanker (ship) that carries the TEL will
>>> be decommissioned in a few years - that will not stop it from being
>>> shipped from its source (Russia) as it will simply be put into triple
>>> walled sea-tainers - but the amount shipped each time will be smaller
>>> and the insurance - as it is being shipped with other goods - will be
>>> higher.
>>>
>>> It will not go away - but it will be very expensive -however there is
>>> so little of it in the fuel that it thankfully does not take much.
>>> Also note that it is not shipped by pipeline - must be shipped by
>>> truck so as not to pollute the pipes! Finally, there is a Friends of
>>> the Earth petition getting hearing in congress to remove lead from all
>>> fuels - if you think we have problems - think about all those outboard
>>> motors out there!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The only producer of TEL is the Octane Additives Division of Innospec
>>> (formerly Octel) - A UK based company. I believe, but can't find
>>> referencable sources, that the actual TEL production is at a plant near
>>> Madras, India. I have found no references to Russian production.
>>>
>>> From reading press releases in financial publications, it appears that
>>> revenue and profitability of the OA division is in a steep decline
>>> (>50%/year). The parent company is loading accounting charges onto the
>>> Octane Additives Division in the form of "Goodwill Impairments". They
>>> are also making statements to the effect that the future business of the
>>> division will be "environmental remediation activities". The company is
>>> now accepting bids in India for the dismantling and desposal of the
>>> worlds only TEL tanker ship. This looks like an imminent shutdown of
>>> TEL production.
>>>
>>> I did find a comment that there is a six months supply of TEL in the US.
>>> It appears to a casual reader that the end for TEL may indeed very near.
>>>
>>> Bill D
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
>>
>
>

[Bill Daniels]

There are various possibilities but none are likely to be as good as 100LL
and all will be costly. It nonetheless seems like a good time to start
thinking about the options in a post 100LL world.

It's true that much more ethanol than 100LL is required so even if it's
cheaper per gallon, the cost per engine hour is likely to be nearly the
same - maybe even higher. I really don't think ethanol is a workable
solution for those who want to fly their airplanes cross country. That
probably means AGE85 fuel pumps will be rare so if you want to take your tug
to an encampment, you may have to bring along your own fuel supply.

As for carburetors and ethanol, there seems to be some disagreement. The
AGE85 (Aviation Grade Ethanol 85% See: http://www.age85.org/ ) people say
that carburetors at full rich provide a stochimetric fuel/air ratio at sea
level and that's good enough. Other's say that the old Marvel Schrieber
carburetors can't work with ethanol due to the fuel passages being too small
for the additional 40% fuel flow that ethanol requires. It makes me
nervious to think of being lean of peak EGT for a sea level takeoff so I
tend to agree with the detractors. Still, it might work for operation at
high altitudes.

Fuel injection is easier since there are fewer elastomer seals in the system
and you only need to select injectors with 40% greater fuel flow.

As for MOGAS, any STC will specify exactly what fuel is allowed but the
stuff at the nearest pump is not likely to match the STC. Every state and
locality seems to have laws specifying a different fuel blend. That makes
MOGAS problematic.

Higher compression ratios are allowed with ethanol since it has an octane
equivalent of about 115 - 145. Higher compression + some ignition advance
recovers some of the fuel economy lost to the lower energy content.

Bill D


"BT" > wrote in message
...
> Bill.. our STC to bump the O-540 from 235HP to 250HP with a piston change
> negates the autofuel STC.. 100LL required.
> That STC would also need to be reworked or the STC to allow the IO-540 to
> use Ethanol would need to include the option for higher HP.
>
> Current auto engines that are "flex" fuel can burn regular auto low lead
> or E-85 fuels. The E-85 fuel is cheaper than standard fuel, but the
> resulting mpg is lower, the E-85 is less efficient and your total dollars
> spent to complete the same work (travel the same distance) is higher with
> more fuel stops.
>
> BT
>
> "Bill Daniels" <bildan@comcast-dot-net> wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Mike Schumann" > wrote in message
>> .. .
>>>I can't imagine that happening. Until there is a replacement for 100LL,
>>>with the number of aircraft flying in the US, there will be a supply from
>>>somewhere. The big question will be the cost.
>>>
>>> Mike Schumann
>>
>> The volume of fuel consumed by the US piston fleet is miniscule - less
>> than 1% of all gasoline production and thus doesn't even appear on the
>> radar of fuel producers. I think the idea that "supply will meet demand"
>> is a risky one. As far as they are concerned, anything less than 1% is
>> no demand at all. The liabilities involved in handling TEL far outweigh
>> potential profits.
>>
>> I think we are in the last stages of an economic "death spiral" for
>> AVGAS. High prices mean lower demand. Lower demand means higher price
>> per gallon since fixed overhead is spread over fewer gallons. Still
>> higher prices further reduces demand. In effect, it's "economies of
>> scale" working in reverse.
>>
>> However, there may be hope. See:
>> http://www3.baylor.edu/bias/publications/agriculturalsprayaircraft.pdf
>>
>> This paper describes obtaining an STC for operating a Pawnee on ethanol.
>> Note that the engine described is the fuel injected Lycoming IO-540 and
>> not the more common carburated O-540.
>>
>> Nonetheless, given enough money, it's possible to convert a O-540 to fuel
>> injection since the injector bosses are cast into the cylinder heads -
>> one need only drill them for injectors. Converting a fuel injected
>> engine to ethanol is relatively easy. The modifications required to use
>> ethanol with a carburator are not really feasable.
>>
>> Note the large increase in fuel consumption - ~40%. This probably
>> eliminates ethanol as a fuel for long range cross country airplanes but
>> for "fixed point" operators like crop dusters and glider towing
>> operations, it's a PITA but workable.
>>
>> The total modifications required would be to convert the O-540 to fuel
>> injection using injectors suitable for ethanol and, since the cylinders
>> have to be removed anyway, it would be desirable to replace the pistons
>> to achieve a higher compression ratio. If it were desired to keep
>> refueling stops to the same intervals as with AVGAS, larger tanks would
>> be needed.
>>
>> The downside is that the conversion will be costly. The upside is that
>> we maintain the availability of aero tows, we get more performance from
>> the Pawnee and, possibly, greater engine life due to cooler running
>> cylinders.
>>
>> Bill Daniels
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> "Bill Daniels" <bildan@comcast-dot-net> wrote in message
>>> . ..
>>>>
>>>> "Dave Newill" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>> On Mar 4, 12:32 am, "Mike Schumann" <mike-nos...@traditions-
>>>> nospam.com> wrote:
>>>>> They will keep making TEL untill it is no longer profitable.
>>>>>
>>>> I visited GAMA headquarters to understand the situation on AvGAs from
>>>> their expert. He said that the tanker (ship) that carries the TEL will
>>>> be decommissioned in a few years - that will not stop it from being
>>>> shipped from its source (Russia) as it will simply be put into triple
>>>> walled sea-tainers - but the amount shipped each time will be smaller
>>>> and the insurance - as it is being shipped with other goods - will be
>>>> higher.
>>>>
>>>> It will not go away - but it will be very expensive -however there is
>>>> so little of it in the fuel that it thankfully does not take much.
>>>> Also note that it is not shipped by pipeline - must be shipped by
>>>> truck so as not to pollute the pipes! Finally, there is a Friends of
>>>> the Earth petition getting hearing in congress to remove lead from all
>>>> fuels - if you think we have problems - think about all those outboard
>>>> motors out there!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The only producer of TEL is the Octane Additives Division of Innospec
>>>> (formerly Octel) - A UK based company. I believe, but can't find
>>>> referencable sources, that the actual TEL production is at a plant near
>>>> Madras, India. I have found no references to Russian production.
>>>>
>>>> From reading press releases in financial publications, it appears that
>>>> revenue and profitability of the OA division is in a steep decline
>>>> (>50%/year). The parent company is loading accounting charges onto the
>>>> Octane Additives Division in the form of "Goodwill Impairments". They
>>>> are also making statements to the effect that the future business of
>>>> the division will be "environmental remediation activities". The
>>>> company is now accepting bids in India for the dismantling and desposal
>>>> of the worlds only TEL tanker ship. This looks like an imminent
>>>> shutdown of TEL production.
>>>>
>>>> I did find a comment that there is a six months supply of TEL in the
>>>> US. It appears to a casual reader that the end for TEL may indeed very
>>>> near.
>>>>
>>>> Bill D
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
>>>
>>
>>
>
>