THE ETHYL CONTROVERSY

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume LXXXIII, Issue 20110, 31 March 1928, Page 23 (Supplement)

THE ETHYL CONTROVERSY

BRITISH EXPERTS’ VIEWS Doctors’ Evidence Disagrees

A controversy which has had but faint echoes in New Zealand has been the cause of much heate < argument in English and American motoring circles, and although hardly mentioned here has an important bearing on the oil and mo cor industries- It concerns the use of the fuel known as Tetra Ethyl petrol. The advice of doctors well v~ sed in the detection and classification of poisonous gases has been iiawn .upon and expert mechanics have given their opinions on the effects of the exhaust gases of Tetra Ethyl fuel upon the human system, and upon the engine. But despite all the excellent advice ic.eived thc principals concerned in the controversy could not agreeIn the interesting article below, Mr Edwin Campbell, who is well known in professional motoring ciiuies in England, gives a disinterested view of the arguments used lor and against the use of the Ethyl petrol.

Concerning thc disputes between two rival petrol companies it is alleged that by the constant use of Ethyl pct , rol lead is deposited on thc walls of the combustion chamber, and inside thc body of every sparking plug, while thc emanations from the doped spirit, before and after combustion, are injurious to health to a degree which is sufficiently serious to impel Shell-Mex to refuse to use it in conjunction with their motor spirits. The position, it will be seen, docs nor. admit of any adjustment so far as these two rival ven dors of spirit arc concerned, and we arc now awaiting the pronouncementsof the other petrol companies on tlu matter. it is admitted that lead tetra ethyl does eliminate all tendency in the eugiuc to pink but thc admission scenib to be accompanied by an insinuation that tl e pinking is as mucn due to the ; character of the petrol as to any fault ' inherent in the engine design. It is definitely asserted that • doped petrol leads to increased ; valve pitting and scaring, heavier i carbon deposits—not necessarily in i quantity but in character —greater | heat ip the engine, and a contami- i nation of the lubricant in the sump plainly suggestive of a lower lubricating value. ►Summed up these disadvantages, if as acute and as serious as is alleged, cannot fail to result in a definite me chanical deterioration of the engine in which Ethyl petrol is consistently used. Then to give the coup do grace fo it the anti-hygienic effects to wrAh I have referred are ngjrshalled up, reinforced by the admissions of tn e ven- , dors, some statistics from U.S.A, of lead poisoning troubles stated to have ’ been caused in the course of manufacture and handling lead tetra ethyl, and ! the testimony of Professor Frederick ; B. Flynn of Columbia University, cou- • corning the cumulative physical effects of lead absorption from the dope. Presented as it is this attack prob . ably will cause a considerable section of motor car owners to decide to have

nothing to do with doped spirit, and will induce those who may elect to test! nr use it, to be extremely careful iu handling it —which will be all to the ' good. 1 think I am right in stating ■ that discussion on entirely similar i lines raged in the American press soni-?' years back, when lead tetra ethyl first was blended with motor spirit. Every “gasolene” company that did not u.«u it attacked it and, as these things are handled in the American press, succeeded in causing what we would term panic legislation by local authorities on j hygienic groundsOfficial investigations were held the! results of which were that for a time its use was banned in many places ano | the dope was withdrawn for further experiment. Later it was re-issued and was given a clean bill of health by the body corresponding to our Ministry of Health. Interdiction was withdrawn iby all except thc State of New York authorities, if I remember aright, because it was feared that the exhaust [from it if in general use on thousands/ lof cars passing through the tunnel I under the Hudson, despite the extremely efficient ventilation scheme ’ni -stalled might, through accident or fail ure lead to catastrophe. It is only fair to point out. too, that the lead poisoning statistics quoted were not recent and were not concerned with the handling of ethyl petrol, but of lead tetraethyl in its “neat” form —a very j different affair. That, there;, an cl - <1 • '■ r im ["‘-i’ mtr L- t lT.'i 1,1 i,!i! ' '■ nr ..!■ ;:s ! ' ,n ‘ I'- i '.T'A ■ l ; : ‘ " r 'i : i:: v ' - :! ' in ''S a fuel IK ' :■