THE PRESS TUESDAY, MAY 18, 1982. Lead in petrol

Press, 18 May 1982, Page 20

THE PRESS TUESDAY, MAY 18, 1982. Lead in petrol

The amount of lead in New Zealand petrol is causing concern in the community. The Government has not ignored this concern. The amount of lead in New Zealand petrol should be about halved by the middle of this decade. Even then the level will still be well above what is permitted in many other countries and is expected to continue to give rise to levels of airborne lead in certain parts of New Zealand cities well above levels that are considered to be safe.

It may be argued that there is no cause £>for concern because the concentrations reach unhealthy levels in only a few places and that high levels of lead are permissible in New Zealand petrol because of the relatively low concentration of vehicles in most parts of New Zealand. The dangerous concentrations of lead occur in cities, and the number of people exposed to them is sufficiently high to warrant concern, even if over the greater part of the country airborne lead is not a serious problem. The problem is that reducing or eliminating lead from New Zealand petrol and still providing cars and other vehicles with a fuel that ensures good engine performance will not be done cheaply. The figure commonly mentioned is ?60 million, the cost of the extra crude oil that would have to be imported to maintain the octane rating of New Zealand petrol without adding lead. There will; however, be savings to offset some at least, of that additional cost. If lead is indeed responsible for the damage that it is believed to cause, the cost of the extra health care and the extra educational costs of children affected by airborne lead must add up to a tidy sum.

The Government’s contention that the costs of reducing the amount of lead in petrol to a much lower level than it has anticipated, or of eliminating lead from petrol altogether, are not worth incurring is a contention that can be accepted only if the case against lead has been exaggerated or is entirely mistaken. The Government’s case rests on an implicit claim that the environmental case against lead is at least not proved. From the nature of the case, absolutely conclusive evidence that even low levels of lead in the air impair the intellectual performance and affect the developing brains of children, will probably never be obtained.

The evidence available is sufficiently disturbing for the Government’s implicit

claim to be questioned. Because the victims are children and the suspected effects are on minds and intellect, it is better to err on the side of caution and not apply a rigidly economic approach to the problem that might be appropriate if the evidence were precise and the consequences of airborne lead were exactly measurable.

The Government’s reluctance to take sufficiently strong action on what many believe is a serious health hazard has prompted speculation that the oil companies have had an undue influence on the Government in this matter. The suspicions are- given added strength because other governments — and not governments which are usually unduly alarmist about environmental hazards — have taken much more rigorous action. The suspicions are given added strength, too, because the pressure on the Government from within New Zealand to do more than it has been willing to so far, is coming not from environmental cranks, but from responsible people and sometimes official bodies. ;

To lay this allegation to rest, the Government must meet the mounting community concern with frank study of the problem. The case against lead in petrol is already suffipiently strong to require the Government to justify its stand, if it can, and not require those pressing for a reduction of the level of lead in petrol, to justify theirs. The requirements are a costbenefit analysis which is sufficiently broad to be free of any charge that the health of children has been subordinated to economic cost; proper monitoring of levels of airborne lead; an assessment of the evidence tending to convict lead as a serious environmental hazard; and a full investigation of the alternative ways of maintaining the octane rating of New Zealand petrol if permissible levels of lead are made much lower than the Government is aiming to make them by 1985. The last requirement is pressing because the best solution to the problem may turn out to be one which will require modifications ,in the design of the extensions to the Marsden Point refinery. It is also a requirement that will mean a higher bill for oil and a higher price for petrol. The consumers must also be persuaded of the good sense of taking action.