Avgas

1
Avgas
Avgas
An American Aviation AA-1 Yankee being refuelled with 100LL avgas.
Avgas (aviation gasoline, also known as aviation spirit in the UK) is an aviation fuel used to power piston-engine
aircraft. Avgas is distinguished from mogas (motor gasoline), which is the everyday gasoline used in cars and some
non-commercial light aircraft. Unlike mogas, avgas contains tetraethyl lead (TEL), a toxic substance used to enhance
combustion stability.
Avgas is used in aircraft that have piston or Wankel engines. Gas turbines are able to operate on avgas, as the
pioneering German Jumo 004 turbojet of World War II was able to do, but typically do not, partially for reasons of
fuel economy. Turbine and diesel engines are designed to use kerosene-based jet fuel.
Avgas properties and varieties
The main petroleum component used in blending avgas is alkylate, which is essentially a mixture of various
isooctanes, and some refineries also use some reformate. Avgas has a density of 6.02lb/U.S. gal at 15 C, or
0.721kg/l, and this density is commonly used for weight and balance computation. Density increases to 6.40lb/US
gallon at -40 C, and decreases by about 0.5% per 5 C (9 F) increase in temperature.
[1]
Avgas has an emission
coefficient (or factor) of 18.355 pounds CO
2
per U.S. gallon (2.1994kg/l)
[2][3]
or about 3.05 units of weight CO
2
produced per unit weight of fuel used. Avgas has a lower and more uniform vapor pressure than automotive gasoline
so it remains in the liquid state despite the reduced atmospheric pressure at high altitude, thus preventing vapor lock.
The particular mixtures in use today are the same as when they were first developed in the 1940s, and were used in
airline and military aero engines with high levels of boost supercharging; notably the Rolls-Royce Merlin engine
used in the Spitfire and Hurricane fighters, Mosquito fighter-bomber and Lancaster bomber (the Merlin II and later
versions required 100-octane fuel), as well as U.S. made liquid-cooled Allison V-1710 engines, and numerous radial
engines from Pratt & Whitney, Wright, and other manufacturers on both sides of the Atlantic. The high octane
ratings are achieved by the addition of tetraethyl lead (TEL), a highly toxic substance that was phased out for car use
in most countries in the late 20th century.
Avgas is currently available in several grades with differing maximum lead concentrations. Since TEL is an
expensive and polluting ingredient, the minimum amount needed to bring the fuel to the required octane rating is
used; actual concentrations are often lower than the permissible maximum. Historically, many post-WW2 developed,
low-powered 4- and 6-cylinder piston aircraft engines were designed to use leaded fuels and a suitable unleaded
replacement fuel has not yet been developed and certified for most of these engines. Numerous current (2010)
Avgas
2
certificated reciprocating-engine aircraft require high-octane (leaded) fuels.
Jet fuel is not avgas. It is similar to kerosene and is used in turbine engines. Confusion can be caused by the terms
Avtur and AvJet being used for jet fuel. In Europe, environmental and cost considerations have led to increasing
numbers of aircraft being fitted with highly fuel-efficient diesel engines; these too run on jet fuel. Civilian aircraft
use Jet-A, Jet-A1 or in severely cold climates Jet-B. There are other classification systems for military turbine and
diesel fuel.
Consumption
The annual U.S. usage of avgas was 186 million US gallons (unknown operator: u'strong' m
3
) in 2008, and was
approximately 0.14% of the motor gasoline consumption. From 1983 through 2008, U.S. usage of avgas declined
consistently by approximately 7.5 million US gallons (unknown operator: u'strong' m
3
) each year.
[4]
Grades
Taking a fuel sample from an American Aviation
AA-1 Yankee under-wing drain using a GATS
Jar fuel sampler. The blue dye indicates that this
fuel is 100LL.
Many grades of avgas are identified by two numbers associated with its
Motor Octane Number (MON).
[5]
The first number indicates the octane
rating of the fuel tested to "aviation lean" standards, which is similar to
the anti-knock index or "pump rating" given to automotive gasoline in
the U.S. The second number indicates the octane rating of the fuel
tested to the "aviation rich" standard, which tries to simulate a
supercharged condition with a rich mixture, elevated temperatures, and
a high manifold pressure. For example, 100/130 avgas has an octane
rating of 100 at the lean settings usually used for cruising and 130 at
the rich settings used for take-off and other full-power conditions.
[6]
Fuel dyes aid ground crew and pilots in identifying and distinguishing
the fuel grades.
[7]
100LL
The most commonly used aviation fuel is 100LL, i.e., "low lead". It is dyed blue and contains a relatively small
amount of tetraethyl leadthough the amount is greater than what was contained in many automotive grades of
leaded fuel before such fuel was phased out. As of Jan 2010, 100LL has a TEL content of 1.2 to 2grams TEL
[8]
per
US gallon (0.30.5 g/l) and is the most commonly available and used aviation gasoline. One gram of TEL contains
600 milligrams of lead. This grade of AVGas is dyed blue.
Many Continental and Lycoming light airplane engines designed for 80/87 remain in production. Engines designed
for 80/87 can use 100LL with special precautions to prevent lead buildup and lead fouling of the spark plugs.
Some of the lower-powered (100-to-150-horsepower or -to-kW) aviation engines that were developed in the late
1990s are designed to run on unleaded fuel, but can run on 100LL if unleaded is not available, an example being the
Rotax 912.
[9]
82UL
82UL is the specification for an unleaded fuel similar to automobile gasoline but without automotive additives. It
could potentially be used in aircraft that have a Supplemental Type Certificate for the use of automobile gasoline
with an aviation lean MON of 82 or less or an antiknock index of 87 or less. The US Federal Aviation
Administration highly recommends installing placards stating the use of 82UL is or is not approved on those
airplanes that specify unleaded autogas (mogas) as an approved fuel.
[10]
As of 2008, 82UL is not being produced and
Avgas
3
no refiner has announced plans to put it into production. If produced its specifications call for it to be dyed
purple.
[7][11]
80/87
80/87, which is dyed red, had the lowest lead content prior to commencing its phase out in the late 20th century, with
a maximum of 0.5g per U.S. gallon (0.13 g/l). It was used in engines with low compression ratio. Currently
commonly called Avgas 80, its availability is now very limited.
100/130
100/130 avgas, now commonly called Avgas 100, is dyed green. It contains a maximum of 4g of lead per US gallon
(1.1 g/l). 100LL has replaced 100/130 in most places, but Avgas 100/130 is still sold in some parts of the USA,
Australia and New Zealand.
91/96 & 115/145
In the past other grades were also available particularly for military use, such as avgas 115/145 (dyed purple) and
91/96 (dyed brown). Limited batches of 115/145, commonly called Avgas 115, are produced for special events such
as unlimited air races; in the past 115/145 was used as the primary fuel for the largest, boost-supercharged radial
engines which needed this fuel's anti-detonation properties.
[12]
Automotive gasoline
An EAA Cessna 150 used for American STC
certification of auto fuel
Automotive gasoline (known as mogas or autogas among aviators) that
does not contain ethanol may be used in certified aircraft that have a
Supplemental Type Certificate for automotive gasoline as well as in
experimental aircraft and ultralights. Some oxygenates other than
ethanol are approved. Most of these applicable aircraft have
low-compression engines which were originally certified to run on
80/87 avgas and require only "regular" 87 anti-knock index automotive
gasoline. Examples of this include the popular Cessna 172 or Piper
Cherokee with the 150hp (unknown operator: u'strong'kW) variant
of the Lycoming O-320. Some aircraft engines were originally certified using a 91/96 avgas and have STC's
available to run "premium" 91 anti-knock index automotive gasoline. Examples of this include some Cherokees with
the 160hp (unknown operator: u'strong'kW) Lycoming O-320 or 180hp (unknown operator: u'strong'kW)
O-360 or the Cessna 152 with the O-235. However, for most aircraft, automotive gasoline is not a viable replacement
for avgas, because many airplane engines require 100 octane fuel and modifications are necessary in order to use
lower octane fuel in high octane engines.
[13][14]
Rotax allow up to 10% ethanol in the fuel for their 912ULS engines. Light sport aircraft that are specified by the
manufacturer to tolerate alcohol in the fuel system can use up to 10% ethanol.
[9]
Avgas compared to other fuels
Many general aviation aircraft engines were designed to run on 80/87 octane, roughly the standard for North
American automobiles today. Direct conversions to run on automotive fuel are fairly common and applied via the
supplemental type certificate (STC) process. However, the alloys used in aviation engine construction are chosen for
their durability and synergistic relationship with the protective features of lead, and engine wear in the valves is a
potential problem on automotive gasoline conversions.
Fortunately, significant history of mogas-converted engines has shown that very few engine problems are actually
caused by automotive gasoline. A larger problem stems from the wider range of allowable vapor pressures found in
Avgas
4
automotive gasoline; this can pose some risk to aviation users if fuel system design considerations are not taken into
account. Automotive gasoline can vaporize in fuel lines causing a vapor lock (a bubble in the line), starving the
engine of fuel. This does not constitute an insurmountable obstacle, but merely requires examination of the fuel
system, ensuring adequate shielding from high temperatures and maintaining sufficient pressure in the fuel lines.
This is the main reason why both the specific engine model as well as the aircraft in which it is installed must be
supplementally certified for the conversion. A good example of this is the Piper Cherokee with high-compression
160 or 180 hp (unknown operator: u'strong' or unknown operator: u'strong' kW) engines. Only later versions of
the airframe with different engine cowling and exhaust arrangements are applicable for the automotive fuel STC, and
even then require fuel system modifications.
Vapor lock typically occurs in fuel systems where a mechanically driven fuel pump mounted on the engine draws
fuel from a tank mounted lower than the pump. The reduced pressure in the line can cause the more volatile
components in automotive gasoline to flash into vapor, forming bubbles in the fuel line and interrupting fuel flow. If
an electric boost pump is mounted in the fuel tank to push fuel toward the engine, as is common practice in
fuel-injected automobiles, the fuel pressure in the lines is maintained above ambient pressure, preventing bubble
formation. Likewise, if the fuel tank is mounted above the engine and fuel flows primarily due to gravity, as in a
Cessna high-wing airplane, vapor lock cannot occur, using either aviation or automotive fuels.
In addition to vapor locking potential, automotive gasoline does not have the same quality tracking as aviation
gasoline. To help solve this problem, the specification for an aviation fuel known as 82UL has recently been
developed. This fuel would be essentially automotive gasoline that has additional quality tracking and restrictions on
permissible additives. This fuel is not currently in production and no refiners have committed to producing it.
[11]
The main consumers of avgas at present (mid-2000s) are in North America, Australia, Brazil, and Africa (mainly
South Africa). Care must be taken by small airplane pilots to select airports with avgas on flight planning. For
example, U.S. and Japanese recreational pilots ship and depot avgas before flying into Siberia. Shrinking availability
of avgas drives usage of small airplane engines that can use jet fuel.
In Europe, avgas prices are so high that there have been a number of efforts to convert the industry to diesel instead,
which is common, inexpensive and has a number of advantages for aviation use. However, avgas remains the most
common fuel in Europe as well.
Environmental regulation
The tetra-ethyl lead found in leaded avgas and its combustion products are potent neurotoxins that have been shown
in scientific research to interfere with brain development in children. The United States Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) has noted that exposure to even very low levels of lead contamination has been conclusively linked to
loss of IQ in children's brain function tests, thus providing a high degree of motivation to eliminate lead and its
compounds from the environment.
[15][16]

While lead concentrations in the air have declined, scientific studies have demonstrated that children's neurological development is harmed by
much lower levels of lead exposure than previously understood. Low level lead exposure has been clearly linked to loss of IQ in performance
testing. Even an average IQ loss of 1-2 points in children has a meaningful impact for the nation as a whole, as it would result in an increase in
children classified as mentally challenged, as well as a proportional decrease in the number of children considered "gifted."
[16]

On 16 November 2007, the environmental group Friends of the Earth formally petitioned the EPA, asking them to
regulate leaded avgas. The EPA responded with a notice of petition for rulemaking.
[11]
The notice of petition stated:
Avgas
5

Friends of the Earth has filed a petition with EPA, requesting that EPA find pursuant to section 231 of the Clean Air Act that lead emissions
from general aviation aircraft cause or contribute to air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare and
that EPA propose emissions standards for lead from general aviation aircraft. Alternatively, Friends of the Earth requests that EPA commence
a study and investigation of the health and environmental impacts of lead emissions from general aviation aircraft, if EPA believes that
insufficient information exists to make such a finding. The petition submitted by Friends of the Earth explains their view that lead emissions
from general aviation aircraft endanger the public health and welfare, creating a duty for the EPA to propose emission standards.
[17]

The public comment period on this petition closed on 17 March 2008.

[17]
Under a federal court order to set a new standard by 15 October 2008, the EPA cut the acceptable limits for
atmospheric lead to 0.15 micrograms per cubic meter from the previous standard of 1.5g/m
3
. This was the first
change to the standard since 1978 and represents an order of magnitude reduction over previous levels. The new
standard requires the 16,000 remaining U.S. sources of lead, which includes lead smelting, airplane fuels, military
installations, mining and metal smelting, iron and steel manufacturing, industrial boilers and process heaters,
hazardous waste incineration and production of batteries, to reduce their emissions by October 2011.
[15][16][18]
The EPA's own studies have shown that to prevent a measurable decrease in IQ for children deemed most
vulnerable, the standard needs to be set much lower, to 0.02g/m
3
.
[16]
The EPA has previously named avgas as one of the most "significant sources of lead", but it was not clear how this
current change in standards will affect aircraft burning 100LL fuel.
[15][16]
At an EPA public consultation held in June 2008 on the new standards, Andy Cebula, the Aircraft Owners and Pilots
Association's Executive Vice President of Government Affairs stated that general aviation plays a valuable role in
the US economy and any changes in lead standards that would change the current composition of avgas would have
a "direct impact on the safety of flight and the very future of light aircraft in this country."
[19]
In December 2008 AOPA filed formal comments to the new EPA regulations. AOPA indicated that piston-powered
aircraft produce "one-tenth of 1 percent" of national lead emissions and that they are 0.55% of all transportation
emissions. AOPA has asked the EPA to account for the cost and the safety issues involved with removing lead from
avgas. They cited that the aviation sector employs more than 1.3 million people in the USA and has an economic
"direct and indirect effect that "exceeds $150 billion annually." AOPA interprets the new regulations as not affecting
general aviation as they are currently written.
[20]
Publication in the US Federal Register of an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking by the US EPA occurred in
April 2010. The EPA indicated: "This action will describe the lead inventory related to use of leaded avgas, air
quality and exposure information, additional information the Agency is collecting related to the impact of lead
emissions from piston-engine aircraft on air quality and will request comments on this information."
[21][22]
Despite assertions in the media that leaded avgas will be eliminated in the USA by 2017 at the latest date, the EPA
confirmed in July 2010 that there is no phase-out date and that setting one would be an FAA responsibility as the
EPA has no authority over avgas. The FAA administrator stated that regulating lead in avgas is an EPA
responsibility, resulting in widespread criticism of both organizations for causing confusion and delaying
solutions.
[23][24][25][26][27]
At Sun 'n Fun in April 2011, Pete Bunce, head of the General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA) and
Craig Fuller, President and CEO of the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association indicated that they are both confident
that leaded avgas would not be eliminated until a suitable replacement is in place. "There is no reason to believe 100
low-lead will become unavailable in the foreseeable future," Fuller stated.
[28]
Final Results from EPAs Lead Modeling Study at the Santa Monica Airport shows off airport levels below current
150ng/m
3
and possible future 20ng/m
3
levels.
[29]
Avgas
6
Phase-out of leaded aviation gasolines
The 100LL phase-out has been called "one of modern GA's most pressing problems",
[30]
because 70% of 100LL
aviation fuel is used by the 30% of the aircraft in the general aviation fleet that cannot use any of the existing
alternatives.
[31][32][33]
In 1979 Swedish Hjelmco Oil developed and introduced unleaded AVGAS 80/87 to the Scandinavian market. This
fuel met the US standard for AVGAS ASTM D910 valid at that time. This fuel was extensively used by the Swedish
Air Force for about 10 years. In 1991 Hjelmco Oil introduced an unleaded AVGAS 91/96 UL meeting leaded grade
91/98 also in standard D910 with the exception of transparent colour and no lead. Engine manufacturers Teledyne
Continental Motors, Textron Lycoming, Rotax and radial engine manufacturer Kalisz have cleared the Hjelmco
AVGAS 91/96 UL which in practise means that the fuel can be used in more than 90% of the entire world piston
aircraft fleet.
[9][34][35][36]
AVGAS 91/96 UL has been produced in Sweden since 1991 and used in thousands of
aircraft for many million flight hours. In November 2010 the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA)based on
about 20 years of troubble free operations with unleaded AVGAS 91/96 UL produced by Hjelmco Oil cleared this
fuel for all aircraft where the aircraft engine manufacturer has approved this fuel.{cite web|url = http:/ / ad. easa.
europa. eu/ ad/ 2010-31}
In February 2008, Teledyne Continental's new president, Rhett Ross, announced that the company is very concerned
about future availability of 100LL avgas, and as a result, they would develop a line of diesel engines.
[37]
In a
February 2008 interview, Ross indicated that Continental Motors believes that the aviation industry will be "forced
out" of using 100LL avgas in the near future, leaving automotive fuel and jet fuel as the only alternatives. In May
2010 Continental announced that they had licenced development of the SMA SR305 diesel engine.
[38][39][40]
In November 2008 National Air Transportation Association President Jim Coyne indicated that the environmental
impact of aviation is expected to be a big issue over the next few years and will result in the phasing out 100LL, due
to its lead content.
[41]
Swift fuel
Purdue University Swift Fuel demonstrator
John and Mary-Louise Rusek founded Swift Enterprises in 2001 to
develop renewable fuels and hydrogen fuel cells.
[42]
By 2006, they had
submitted a sample of "Swift 142" to Oracle Airmotive Research &
Development of Delphi, Indiana, which found that the fuel gave a 10%
longer runtime than an equal volume of 100LL fuel in the 100hp
(unknown operator: u'strong'kW) engine of a Bakeng Deuce
aircraft.
[43]
The following year, Swift Enterprises filed US and
international patent applications for non-alcoholic Renewable Engine
Fuels of a variety of octane ratings, to be blended from "one or more
low carbon number esters, one or more pentosan-derivable furans, one or more aromatic hydrocarbon, one or more
C4-C10 straight chain alkanes derivable from polysaccharides, and one or more bio-oils... [and, optionally,]
triethanolamine", which could be derived from biomass fermentation.
[44]
Swift Enterprises initiated "Carroll County
Swift Development Inc.",
[45]
to plan a 2500-square-foot (unknown operator: u'strong'm
2
) pilot plant at the Delphi
Municipal Airport in Indiana,
[46]
and submitted fuel to the FAA for testing.
[47][48][49][50]
In 2008, an article by technology writer and aviation enthusiast Robert X Cringely, stating that the fuel was
renewable, cleaner-burning, and potentially cheaper than avgas or even mogas, attracted popular attention to the
fuel.
[51]
AOPA's Dave Hirschman took a cross-country flight using the fuel in fall of 2009 stating "Swift fuel has
made the leap from the purely theoretical to a real product, and it appears to hold great promise for shifting GA to an
unleaded, non-petroleum-based future."
[52]
The company claims the fuel can be manufactured for USD$2 per gallon,
although Swift Enterprises' cost per gallon for laboratory batches was US$60.
[47][53]
The Swift Enterprises website
Avgas
7
claims their product has 15% more volumetric energy for a 15-25% increase in range over 100LL. The FAA found
SwiftFuel 702 to have a motor octane number of 104.4, 96.3% of the energy per unit of mass and 113% of the
energy per unit of volume as 100LL, and meets most of the ASTM D 910 standard for leaded aviation fuel.
Following tests in two Lycoming engines, the FAA concluded it performs better than 100LL in detonation testing
and will provide a fuel savings of 8% per unit of volume, though it weighs 1 pound per gallon (120 g/l) more than
100LL. GCFID testing showed the fuel to be made primarily of two componentsone about 85% by weight and
the other about 14% by weight.
[54]

[55]
Soon afterwards, AVweb reported that Teledyne Continental Motors had
begun the process of certifying several of its engines to use the new fuel.
[56]
Swift fuel has been criticized by aviation analysts on a number of grounds, including that the forecast price is likely
unattainable, that the US$2 per gallon is a refinery price and not a retail price and that biomass yields are critical to
the project and are unproven. As a replacement for 100LL avgas In March 2009 Paul Bertorelli of Aviation
Consumer termed it "one that's still a long shot", but conceded "...if Swift Fuel's real manufacturing cost is $3 a
gallon and that translates to $5 or a little more at retail, they've got a player. GA in the U.S. can and has adapted to
$5 avgas. If Swift can deliver, this project could have legs".
[57]
Swift fuel was approved as a test fuel by ASTM International in December 2009, allowing the company to pursue
certification testing. Mary Rusek, president and co-owner of Swift Enterprises predicted at that time that "100SF will
be comparably priced, environmentally friendlier and more fuel-efficient than other general aviation fuels on the
market".
[58][59]
In February 2010 AVweb reported that Swift fuel's production costs had not proven economical and in May 2010 it
was confirmed that the initial retail cost would be about US$10 per gallon. John Rusek, president of Swift
Enterprises "strongly disputes" the $10 per gallon figure and insists that Swift fuel can be produced for the same
price as 100LL. In July 2010 company representative David Perme indicated that Swift Fuel 100SF could be made
from either biomass or natural gas as a feedstock for its base constituent of acetone. He stated that this flexibility
should produce a fuel that is US$56 per gallon.
[60][61][62][63]
Swift's patents indicate that the product is a binary fuel made from acetone. The acetone is converted into a blend of
isopentane and mesitylene to make the final fuel. 100SF can be made from biomass or from petrochemical bases,
including natural gas.
[63]
In August 2010 the FAA's William J. Hughes Technical Center in Atlantic City, New Jersey issued a report on
endurance testing of Swift Fuel carried out on a new Lycoming IO-540 engine involving 150 hrs of run time. Other
than deterioration of the fuel pump, the tests were satisfactory.
[64]
In October 2010 Purdue University reported on Swift Fuel as part of their program of testing that will run until at
least April 2012. Purdue used six aviation piston engines, including the highest octane requirement engine, a
Lycoming TIO-540-J2BD and a 1933 model Ranger L-440 which requires 65-octane. David Stanley, principal
investigator, stated, "SwiftFuel appears promising as a replacement for 100LL general aviation fuel".
[65]
94UL
Unleaded 94-octane fuel, known as '94UL, is essentially 100LL without the lead. In March 2009 Teledyne
Continental Motors announced they had tested a 94UL fuel, and said it may be the best replacement for 100LL. The
94UL was shown to meet the avgas specification including vapor pressure, but has not been completely tested for
detonation qualities in all Continental engines or under all conditions. Flight testing has been conducted on an
IO-550-B powered Beechcraft Bonanza and also ground testing on Continental O-200, 240, O-470 and O-520
engines. In May 2010 Continental indicated that despite industry skepticism, they are proceeding with 94UL and that
certification is expected in mid-2013.
[66][67]
In June 2010 Lycoming Engines indicated their opposition to 94UL. Company General Manager Michael Kraft
stated that aircraft owners do not realize how much performance would be lost with 94UL and characterized the
decision to pursue 94UL as a mistake that could cost the aviation industry billions in lost business. Lycoming
Avgas
8
believes the industry should be pursuing 100UL instead. The Lycoming position is supported by aircraft type clubs
representing owners of aircraft that would be unable to run on lower octane fuel; in June 2010 such clubs as the
American Bonanza Society, the Malibu Mirage Owners and Pilots Association, and the Cirrus Owners and Pilots
Association collectively formed the Clean 100 Octane Coalition to represent them on this issue and push for
unleaded 100 octane avgas.
[68][69][70][71]
G100UL
In February 2010 General Aviation Modifications announced that they were in the process of developing a 100LL
replacement to be called G100UL, indicating "unleaded". The new fuel is made by blending existing refinery
products and produces detonation margins comparable to 100LL. The new fuel is slightly more dense than 100LL,
but has a 3.5% higher thermodynamic output. G100UL is compatible with 100LL and can be mixed with it in aircraft
tanks for use. The production economics of this new fuel have not been confirmed but it is anticipated that it will
cost at least as much as 100LL.
[60][72]
In demonstrations held in July 2010, G100UL performed better than 100LL that just meets the minimum
specification and equal to average production 100LL.
[73]
Other uses
In some remote communities in Australia where petrol sniffing has been endemic, automobile gasoline has been
replaced by aviation gasoline for use in all automobiles. The lower vapor pressure and slightly different composition
of aviation gasoline make it less 'usable' as an inhalant.
[74]
However, this has recently been replaced (with similar
success) by a new, unleaded, low-aromatic mogas by the name of Opal fuel, produced by BP Australia.
[75]
References
[1] MacDonald, Sandy A. F.; Isabel L. Peppler (2004) [1941]. "Chapter 10. Airmanship". From The Ground Up (Millennium ed.). Ottawa,
Ontario, Canada: Aviation Publishers Co. Limited. pp.265, 261. ISBN0-9680390-5-7.
[2] US Energy Information Administration (2007). "Voluntary Reporting of Greenhouse Gases Program - Fuel and Energy Source Codes and
Emission Coefficients" (http:/ / web.archive.org/ web/ 20080303154810/ http:/ / www. eia. doe. gov/ oiaf/ 1605/ factors. html). US Energy
Information Administration website. Washington, DC. Archived from the original (http:/ / www. eia. doe. gov/ oiaf/ 1605/ factors. html) on
2008-03-03. . Retrieved 2007-12-03.
[3] US Energy Information Administration (2005). "Appendix F. Fuel and Energy Source Codes and Emission Coefficients" (ftp:/ / ftp. eia. doe.
gov/ pub/ oiaf/ 1605/ cdrom/ pdf/ FormEIA-1605EZ_2005. pdf). . Washington, DC. p.22. . Retrieved 2007-12-03
[4] US Energy Information Administration. "U.S. Prime Supplier Sales Volumes of Petroleum Products" (http:/ / tonto. eia. doe. gov/ dnav/ pet/
pet_cons_prim_dcu_nus_a.htm). .
[5] AV Web (April 2002). "Lead in the Hogwash" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ news/ pelican/ 182149-1. html). . Retrieved 2011-11-18.
[6] Aviation Publishers Co. Limited, From the Ground Up, (20th revised edition), page 20, ISBN 0-9690054-2-3
[7] Shell Aviation (July 2008). "AVGAS Grades and Specification" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20080714154427/ http:/ / www. shell. com/
home/ content/ aviation-en/ productservice/ aviationfuels/ detail/ avgasgradesspecs_10081006. html). Archived from the original (http:/ /
www.shell. com/ home/ content/ aviation-en/ productservice/ aviationfuels/ detail/ avgasgradesspecs_10081006. html) on 2008-07-14. .
Retrieved 2009-11-30.
[8] Experimental Aircraft Association (2009). "Avgas Specifications" (http:/ / www. eaa. org/ autofuel/ avgas/ avgas_specs. asp). . Retrieved
2009-11-30.
[9] Rotax (April 2009). "Selection of Suitable Operating Fluids For 912 and 914 (Series) Engines - Rev 2" (http:/ / legacy. rotax-owner. com/
SI_TB_INFO/ returndoc2. asp?PATH=http:/ / legacy.rotax-owner. com/ si_tb_info/ serviceinfo/ si-912-016. pdf& DOCID=SI-912-016&
S_TYPE=SS). . Retrieved 31 October 2010.
[10] Federal Aviation Administration (2000-04-05). "Revised Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin (SAIB) Number CE-00-19R1" (http:/ /
web. archive. org/ web/ 20061012225919/ http:/ / www.faa. gov/ aircraft/ safety/ alerts/ saib/ media/ CE-00-19R1. htm). Archived from the
original (http:/ / www. faa.gov/ aircraft/ safety/ alerts/ saib/ media/ CE-00-19R1. htm) on 2006-10-12. . Retrieved 2006-10-28. "The FAA
highly recommends installing placards stating the use of 82UL is or is not approved on those airplanes that specify unleaded autogas as an
approved fuel."
[11] Pew, Glenn (November 2007). "Avgas: Group Asks EPA To Get The Lead Out" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ avwebflash/ news/
GroupAsksEPAToGetTheLeadOutOfAvgas_196596-1. html). . Retrieved 2008-02-18.
[12] VP Fuels (September 2010). "Airplane Racing Fuels = 2010-09-30" (http:/ / www. vpracingfuels. com/ page469679. html). .
Avgas
9
[13] Berry, Mike (undated). "Avgas vs Autogas" (http:/ / www. eaa. org/ autofuel/ autogas/ articles/ 1Autogas vs Avgas. pdf). . Retrieved
2008-12-31.
[14] Berry, Mike (undated). "Autogas Part 2" (http:/ / www. eaa. org/ autofuel/ autogas/ articles/ 1Autogas vs Avgas Part 2. pdf). . Retrieved
2008-12-31.
[15] Pew, Glenn (October 2008). "EPA Sets New Standard For Lead In Air" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ avwebflash/ news/
epa_100ll_lead_standard_aviation_fuel_199020-1.html). . Retrieved 2008-10-20.
[16] Balbus, John (October 2008). "New EPA Lead Standard Significantly Improved to Protect Kids' Health" (http:/ / www. marketwatch. com/
news/ story/ new-epa-lead-standard-significantly/ story.aspx?guid={EC3D72C5-9037-4ECB-BC93-4B2EFF038E37}& dist=hppr). .
Retrieved 2008-10-20.
[17] Environmental Protection Agency (November 2007). "Federal Register: 16 November 2007 (Volume 72, Number 221)" (http:/ / a257. g.
akamaitech. net/ 7/ 257/ 2422/ 01jan20071800/ edocket.access. gpo. gov/ 2007/ E7-22456. htm). . Retrieved 2008-02-24.
[18] Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (October 2008). "U.S. tightens health standard for airborne lead" (http:/ / www. cbc. ca/ health/ story/
2008/ 10/ 16/ lead-air.html). CBC News. . Retrieved 2008-10-17.
[19] Hirschman, Dave (October 2008). "EPA sets new air quality standard" (http:/ / www. aopa. org/ advocacy/ articles/ 2008/ 081017epa. html).
. Retrieved 2008-10-20.
[20] Pew, Glenn (December 2008). "Leaded Fuel, Emissions, The EPA And AOPA" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ avwebflash/ news/
lead_fuel_emissions_air_epa_aopa_aviation_199344-1. html). . Retrieved 2008-12-08.
[21] Grady, Mary (April 2010). "Leaded Avgas Issue Moving To Front Burner" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ avwebflash/ news/
LeadedAvgasIssueMovingToFrontBurner_202299-1.html). . Retrieved 8 April 2010.
[22] Grady, Mary (April 2010). "EPA Advances 100LL Rulemaking Process" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ avwebflash/ news/
EPAAdvances100LLRulemakingProcess_202434-1.html). . Retrieved 22 April 2010.
[23] Bertorelli, Paul (July 2010). "Fuel Fight: It's About Time" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ blogs/ insider/ AVwebInsider_FuelFight_202818-1.
html). . Retrieved 5 July 2010.
[24] Bertorelli, Paul (July 2010). "EPA On Lead In Fuel: No Immediate Deadline" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ news/ airventure/
EAAAirVenture2010_EPA_Says_No_Deadline_On_Lead_In_Fuel_202974-1. html). . Retrieved 28 July 2010.
[25] Bertorelli, Paul (July 2010). "Industry Leaders: Don't Panic On Avgas" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ news/ airventure/
EAAAirVenture2010_100LLReplacement_DontPanic_202973-1. html). . Retrieved 28 July 2010.
[26] Bertorelli, Paul (July 2010). "AirVenture 2010: Avgas Top 'Er Off with 100 Gallons of Muddled Message" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/
blogs/ insider/ AVWebInsider_EPAConflict_203002-1. html). . Retrieved 29 July 2010.
[27] Pew, Glenn (July 2010). "100LL: FAA's Babbitt Contradicts EPA Statement" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ news/ airventure/
babbitt_contradict_epa_lead_gas_tetraethyl_alternative_202992-1. html). . Retrieved 29 July 2010.
[28] Grady, Mary (April 2011). ""Town Meeting" Issues: Avgas, Pilot Decline" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ news/ snf/
SunNFun2011_TownMeetingIssues_AvgasPilotDecline_204404-1. html). AvWeb. . Retrieved 3 April 2011.
[29] Final Results from EPAs Lead Modeling Study at the Santa Monica Airport, by Arnold Den, Senior Science Advisor, February 22, 2010
(http:/ / www. smgov.net/ uploadedFiles/ Departments/ Airport/ CommissionMeetings/ EPA Lead Modeling Study Presentation. pdf)
[30] editorial (2008-08). "Avgas Revolution?" (http:/ / www. aeromarkt. net/ index. php?lng=1& cll=archive& ID=619). Aeromarkt (235). .
Retrieved 2008-08-28.
[31] Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (2006-08-09). "Regulatory Brief: AVGAS (100LL) ALTERNATIVES" (http:/ / www. aopa. org/
whatsnew/ regulatory/ regunlead.html). . Retrieved 2008-08-28.
[32] Taylor Graham (2008-08-28). "Swift developing synthetic fuel to replace 100LL" (http:/ / www. airportbusiness. com/ web/ online/
Top-News-Headlines/ Swift-developing-synthetic-fuel-to-replace-100LL/ 1$20599). Airport Business News (Airport Business). . Retrieved
2008-08-28.
[33] By AOPA ePublishing staff (2006-03-19). "AOPA working on future avgas" (http:/ / www. aopa. org/ aircraft/ articles/ 2008/ 080319avgas.
html). AOPA onlin. Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association. . Retrieved 2008-08-28.
[34] Wheelock, Jim (January 1991). "Teledyne Continental Letter" (http:/ / www. hjelmco. com/ upl/ files/ 2911. pdf). . Retrieved 2010-02-13.
[35] Lycoming (April 2012). "Lycoming Service Instruction 1070R" (http:/ / www. lycoming. com/ support/ publications/ service-instructions/
pdfs/ SI1070R.pdf). . Retrieved 2012-05-17.
[36] Miring, Robert (October 2006). "Service Bulletin 129/S/2006" (http:/ / www. hjelmco. com/ upl/ files/ 37123. pdf). . Retrieved 2010-02-13.
[37] AvWeb Staff (February 2008). "Teledyne Continental Plans Certified Diesel Within Two Years" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ eletter/
archives/ avflash/ 1054-full. html). . Retrieved 2008-02-18.
[38] Bertorelli, Paul (February 2008). "Make Room in the Aerodiesel Market, Thielert TCM Tells Aviation Consumer About Some Big
Engine Plans" (http:/ / www.avweb. com/ podcast/ podcast/ 197170-1. html?kw=RelatedStory). . Retrieved 2008-02-18.
[39] Paul, Bertorelli (May 2010). "Continental Unveils a Diesel Project" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ avwebflash/ news/
Continental_DieselEngineProject_202535-1. html). . Retrieved 12 May 2010.
[40] Paul, Bertorelli (May 2010). "TCM Buys a Diesel: Does This Make Sense?" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ blogs/ insider/
AVWebInsider_DieselTCM_202542-1. html). . Retrieved 13 May 2010.
[41] Niles, Russ (November 2008). "Aviation Off D.C. Radar" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ news/ aopa/
AOPAExpo2008_USGovernment_AviationOffWashingtonDCRadar_199142-1. html). . Retrieved 2008-11-07.
[42] "Business Profile: Swift Enterprises" (http:/ / www.purdueresearchpark. com/ pdf/ Swift Enterprises. web. pdf). .
Avgas
10
[43] Jennifer Archibald (2006-06-21). "Petroleum Free: New agriculture-based fuel revealed at Delphi Airport" (http:/ / www.
carrollcountycomet. com/ news/ 2006/ 0621/ front_page/ 002. html). Carroll County Comet (Flora, Indiana, USA). . Retrieved 2008-08-28.
[44] The patent lists Mary-Louise Rusek and Jon Ziulkowski as inventors. US application 2008168706 (http:/ / worldwide. espacenet. com/
textdoc?DB=EPODOC& IDX=US2008168706), RUSEK, Mary-Louise, R & ZIULKOWSKI, Jonathon, D., "Renewable Engine Fuel",
published 2008-07-17, assigned to SWIFT ENTERPRISES, LTD. WO application 2008013922A1 (http:/ / worldwide. espacenet. com/
textdoc?DB=EPODOC& IDX=WO2008013922A1), RUSEK, Mary-Louise, R & ZIULKOWSKI, Jonathon, D., "Renewable Engine Fuel",
published 2008-01-31, assigned to SWIFT ENTPR LTD [US]
[45] Lowe, Debbie (2007-11-07). "Permit required for tree activity in Delphi" (http:/ / www. carrollcountycomet. com/ news/ 2007/ 1107/
local_news/ 033. html). Carroll County Comet (Flora, Indiana, USA). . Retrieved 2008-09-18.
[46] Eric Weddle (2008-06-13). "Delphi could be showcase for renewable aviation fuel" (http:/ / www. jconline. com/ apps/ pbcs. dll/
article?AID=/ 20080613/ NEWS0501/ 806130330). Journal&Courrier (Federated Publisher Inc.). . Retrieved 2008-06-18.
[47] [ |Sara Sargent (http:/ / news.medill.northwestern. edu/ authorprofile. aspx?id=76519)] (2008-08-26). "Swift Enterprises hopes to take off
with renewable aviation gas" (http:/ / news.medill. northwestern. edu/ chicago/ news. aspx?id=97989). Medill Reports (Chicago:
Northwestern University Medill School of Journalism). . Retrieved 2008-08-28.
[48] "New Aviation Fuel Developed in Indiana" (http:/ / www. insideindianabusiness. com/ newsitem. asp?ID=29204). Inside Indiana Business.
2008-06-05. . Retrieved 2008-06-18.
[49] Lowe, Debbie (2008-07-30). "Demonstration fuel facility project accelerated" (http:/ / www. carrollcountycomet. com/ news/ 2008/ 0730/
local_news/ 054. html). Carroll County Comet (Flora, Indiana, USA). . Retrieved 2008-08-28.
[50] Lowe, Debbie (2008-07-09). "Annual EDC request approved by Delphi" (http:/ / www. carrollcountycomet. com/ news/ 2008/ 0709/
front_page/ 006. html). Carroll County Comet (Flora, Indiana, USA). . Retrieved 2008-09-18.
[51] Robert X Cringely (2008-06-06). "It's the Platform, Stupid" (http:/ / www. pbs. org/ cringely/ pulpit/ 2008/ pulpit_20080606_005036. html).
PBS. .
[52] Dave Hirschman (2009-09-03). "Grass for gas - Flying a real, renewable fuel" (http:/ / www. aopa. org/ members/ files/ pilot/ 2009/
september/ fuel0909. html). AOPA. .
[53] Bertorelli, Paul (March 2009). "FAA Evaluates 100LL Alternative" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ avwebbiz/ news/
FAAEvaluates100LLAlternative_199892-1.html). . Retrieved 2009-03-05.
[54] Bertorelli, Paul (2009-03-04). "FAA Evaluates 100LL Alternative" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ eletter/ archives/ bizav/ 1325-full.
html#199892). AvWeb 7 (9). .
[55] David Atwood (2009-01). "DOT/FAA/AR-08/53 Full-Scale Engine Detonation and Power Performance Evaluation of Swift Enterprises 702
Fuel" (http:/ / www.tc.faa. gov/ its/ worldpac/ techrpt/ ar0853. pdf) (PDF). FAA Office of Aviation Research and Development. .
[56] Russ Niles (23 April 2009). "Continental-Powered Bonanza On Swift Fuel" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ news/ snf/
ContinentalBonanzaFliesOnSwiftFuel_200216-1. html). AVweb. . reporting on Press Release "Continental Motors Completes First Flight on
Unleaded AvGas" (http:/ / tcmlink.com/ pressReleases/ UnleadedFuelFlight_Final. pdf) (Press release). Teledyne Continental Motors, Inc. 31
March 2009. . "With the first flights complete, TCM will begin the certification process of several engine models to meet the needs for
existing and future aircraft"
[57] Bertorelli, Paul (March 2009). "Swift Fuel: Is It for Real?" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ blogs/ insider/
AvWebInsider_SwifFuelRealities_199927-1.html). . Retrieved 2009-03-05.
[58] Grady, Mary (December 2009). "Efforts Move Forward To Produce Alternative Aviation Fuels" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ avwebflash/
news/ EffortsMoveForwardToProduceAlternativeAviationFuels_201691-1. html). . Retrieved 2009-03-05.
[59] Purdue Research Park (December 2009). "Indiana Airline Fuel Developer Moves Ahead With Testing" (http:/ / www. insideindianabusiness.
com/ newsitem. asp?ID=39195#middle). . Retrieved 2009-12-17.
[60] Bertorelli, Paul (February 2010). "Exclusive Video: AVweb's G100UL Flight Test" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ avwebflash/ exclusivevids/
ExclusiveVideo_G100UL_FuelFlightTest_201983-1.html). . Retrieved 2010-02-08.
[61] Bertorelli, Paul (May 2010). "Oil Slicks and Avgas" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ blogs/ insider/ AvWebInsider_GulfDisaster_202481-1.
html). . Retrieved 3 May 2010.
[62] The American Bonanza Society (June 2010). "ABS Developing Fuels Strategy" (http:/ / www. bonanza. org/ News/ ?id=583). . Retrieved 19
June 2010.
[63] Bertorelli, Paul (July 2010). "Swift Fuel: A Tilt Toward Natural Gas" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ avwebflash/ news/
SwiftFuelTiltsTowardNaturalGas_202814-1.html). . Retrieved 5 July 2010.
[64] Niles, Russ (August 2010). "Swift Fuel Engine Test Results Generally Positive" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ avwebflash/ news/
Swift_Fuel_Engine_Test_Positive_203168-1.html). Avweb. Aviation Publishing Group. . Retrieved 23 August 2010.
[65] Grady, Mary (October 2010). "SwiftFuel Expands Testing" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ avwebflash/ news/
SwiftFuelExpandsTesting_203523-1.html). Avweb (Aviation Publishing Group). . Retrieved 28 October 2010.
[66] Bertorelli, Paul (March 2009). "Continental: Maybe 94 Unleaded Fuel Will Fly" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ avwebbiz/ news/
Continental_94_UL_Replacement_100LL_200048-1.html). . Retrieved 2009-04-13.
[67] Bertorelli, Paul (May 2010). "Can 94UL Replace 100LL? TCM Thinks So" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ avwebflash/ news/
TCM_94UL_Replacing_100LL_AlternativeFuels_202536-1. html). . Retrieved 12 May 2010.
[68] Bertorelli, Paul (June 2010). "Lycoming: 94UL Would Be A Huge Mistake" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ avwebflash/ news/
LycomingSays94UL_Would_Be_Mistake_202673-1.html). . Retrieved 14 June 2010.
Avgas
11
[69] Pew, Glenn (June 2010). "Groups Act On Potential Leaded-Fuel Rulemaking" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ avwebflash/ news/
lead_fuel_epa_coalition_rulemaking_regulations_aircraft_engine_202711-1. html). . Retrieved 14 June 2010.
[70] Niles, Russ (June 2010). "Big-Engine Type Groups Unite On Fuel Issue" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ avwebflash/ news/
BigEngineTypeGroupsUniteOnFuelIssue_202734-1.html). . Retrieved 14 June 2010.
[71] Lee, B. (2010). "100 Octane Unleaded Aviation Fuel - Demand No Less!" (http:/ / www. 100octaneformyplane. com/ ). . Retrieved 11
September 2010.
[72] Bertorelli, Paul (February 2010). "AVweb Flies New G100UL Fuel" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ avwebflash/ news/
AVwebFliesNewG100ULFuel_201982-1.html). . Retrieved 2010-02-08.
[73] Bertorelli, Paul (July 2010). "Pelton, Fuller Take A Look At GAMI's G100UL" (http:/ / www. avweb. com/ avwebflash/ news/
Pelton_Fuller_Look_At_G100UL_202845-1.html). . Retrieved 8 July 2010.
[74] Burns (1995). "Evaluation of strategies used by a remote aboriginal community to eliminate petrol sniffing." (http:/ / www. ncbi. nlm. nih.
gov/ pubmed/ 7616903). . Retrieved 2010-01-04.
[75] "Opal fuel leads to 70pc drop in petrol sniffing" (http:/ / www. abc. net. au/ news/ stories/ 2010/ 06/ 24/ 2936053. htm). ABC News Online
(Australian Broadcasting Corporation). 24 June 2010. . Retrieved 24 June 2010.
Article Sources and Contributors
12
Article Sources and Contributors
Avgas Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=493070712 Contributors: APWebber, Ahunt, Airplaneman, Alansohn, Alejomdp, Ali@gwc.org.uk, Anthony Appleyard, Auguste3972,
Azrin619, Binksternet, Bobblewik, Bodybagger, Bombcar, Borbrav, Bovineone, Brianhe, BritishWatcher, C.Fred, Caitifty, Capitainamerika, Chestergunn, Chris the speller, Cleared as filed,
Cujet, DHN, David.Monniaux, Dictouray, Dodger67, Dricherby, Eequor, Ericg, Erzahler, Falcon Kirtaran, FlugKerl, GPoss, Gbleem, Gene Nygaard, Giggy, Goldom, Gromlakh, Gurkha,
Hugo999, Hydrargyrum, Inglixthemad, Jan olieslagers, Jchyde, Jcwarren, Jdlh, Jer v, John, John Nevard, John of Reading, Juneau10, Karen Johnson, Ke4djt, Kjkolb, Lars Hjelmberg, Liberatus,
Lightmouse, Lisiate, LorenzoB, Maikel, Marc Salvisberg, MarsInSVG, MartinDK, Maury Markowitz, Morven, Nimbus227, Orpheus, Parable1991, Philryan, Phirst, Prari, Psb777, Pwjb, Quota,
Registreernu, Rjwilmsi, Rleebue, Rmhermen, SV Resolution, Santamoly, Scheinwerfermann, Secret-HQ, Severinus, Shaddack, Shimada22, Shreditor, Snarayan007, Soarhead77, Sonett72, Spike
Wilbury, Stan Daniel, StephenDennis, Storkk, TGC55, The Founders Intent, The PIPE, Whosasking, Wik, Woohookitty, Yaki-gaijin, 130 anonymous edits
Image Sources, Licenses and Contributors
Image:AmericanAviationAA-1YankeeC-FBVQrefueling01.jpg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:AmericanAviationAA-1YankeeC-FBVQrefueling01.jpg License:
Public Domain Contributors: Original uploader was Ahunt at en.wikipedia
Image:GATS jar 03.JPG Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:GATS_jar_03.JPG License: Public Domain Contributors: Ahunt
Image:EAA150.jpg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:EAA150.jpg License: Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Contributors: FlugKerl2
Image:Cessna152-SwiftFuel.jpg Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Cessna152-SwiftFuel.jpg License: Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Contributors:
User:FlugKerl2
License
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported
//creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/