leaded gasoline is still needed

Bob Larbey, Jakarta

In 2003, Indonesia's government expressed its intention to ban leaded gasoline in 2005. This would mean the entire gasoline- powered vehicle fleet, ie cars, taxis, motor cycles, mopeds and bajas will next year be running on unleaded fuel. One of the urgent issues that need to be addressed by President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and his cabinet is a review of this policy. They should be asking themselves the question, is the time and economic climate right for gasoline lead phase-out next year? In my opinion the answer will be a firm "no".

At a time when the price of crude oil has dramatically escalated it makes sound economic sense to delay lead phase-out -- which will be exceedingly costly and consume more energy -- until oil supplies and prices stabilize, and ideally fall.

Given that producing only unleaded gasoline would be extremely costly, are there paramount environmental arguments in favor of a rapid lead phase-out, regardless of the expense? In my opinion, no. I contend that there is no medical evidence on the effects of lead on health to oppose the view that the orderly gradual lead phase-out in Indonesia, which is already underway, should continue.

However, there are always some residential and industrial environments where unsafe lead levels can be found. But focusing solely on gasoline lead removal to achieve perceived improvements runs the risk of deflecting attention away from other sources of lead which might warrant urgent investigation and remedial action.

Extra energy consumption in the refinery to produce unleaded fuel is in the form of crude oil. It results from the need for more severe refining to produce gasoline components, such as aromatics from catalytic reformers, which are employed to replace the octane numbers lost by lead's elimination. The exact figures involved depend largely upon the octane quality of both the leaded and unleaded gasolines marketed, as well as the current refinery configurations.

Huge investment demands arise from the essential requirement for expensive imports of "hi-tech" refinery equipment. Catalytic reforming, isomerisation and alkylation units are commonly employed to produce high octane gasoline components.

Plants can also be installed to manufacture the so-called "oxygenate" compounds of which MTBE and ethanol are the most widely used. However, extra energy consumption and high investment costs are involved here, too. At the moment Indonesia imports expensive High octane gasoline blending components(HOBC) from Singapore to provide octane numbers lost by lead's elimination from gasoline in Jakarta.

Despite concern in some quarters over the health risks associated with gasoline lead, there is environmental justification to support the retention of leaded fuel for a longer period. The gasoline components necessary to replace lead's octane numbers can themselves contribute to harmful exhaust emissions.

Aromatics, which include benzene, together with oxygenates such as alcohols, are by far the most popular octane enhancers employed worldwide. But these gasoline components increase the cancer inducing, smog-forming, lung irritant potential and the acid rain content of exhaust gas from "non-cat" vehicles.

There is an important technical facet to the gasoline lead removal debate. Lead possesses a lubricating property that prevents exhaust valve seat recession (vsr) in older cars fitted with cast iron engines.

It's a fact that most of the world's leading industrialized nations have already completed the transition to totally unleaded gasoline. Interestingly, the U.S. and Europe took some 20 years or so to phase lead out.

Why was unleaded introduced in the first place? Initially lead-free fuel was needed for catalyst-equipped cars introduced into the U.S. and Japan markets in the mid-1970s. In the U.S., catalysts were fitted so that the car manufacturers could meet the U.S. government's exhaust emissions limits mandated at that time to improve air quality, as required by the 1970 Clean Air Act.

At a worrying time of high and still rising crude oil prices it would be prudent for Indonesia to delay the high capital investment and imports of even more HOBC involved in making all gasoline unleaded. This policy would not in any way compromise the country's commitment to complete gasoline lead phase-out as soon as the economic climate improves.

Historically, because they are very costly measures, the wealthiest countries such as the U.S., Canada, Germany and Switzerland were among the first to reduce lead contents of gasoline and then phase out lead altogether. Other nations followed suit as and when they could accept the high cost implications.

During my visits to Indonesia in the 1990s, it became abundantly clear that urban air quality urgently needed improving. But I believe that the pollutants of greatest concern and which were and still are causing the greatest human health problems are particulates, mainly originating from 2-stroke and diesel-powered vehicles, carbon monoxide, unburned hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen.

Because they are poorly maintained and serviced, the majority of vehicles are fuel inefficient and gross emitters. Significant improvements in air quality would accrue from attention to this aspect of vehicle ownership. An inspection and maintenance program would help greatly. To make matters worse, car engines are designed or tuned to run on a lower octane grade of gasoline, which makes them fuel inefficient.

Superficially, the lead phase-out issue appears to be a relatively simple one of comparing the lead and health risk with the cost of refinery conversion and extra energy consumption. But the issue has further facets of some importance. As already mentioned, consideration needs to be given to the health and environmental risks associated with increased usage of certain octane enhancing components.

Doubtless, Indonesia's new government will be reminded that the "Blue Sky" initiative of 1996 targeted 2000 as the lead phase-out date. Also it will be told that a regeneration of "Blue Sky" in July 1999 aimed at January 2003 for leaded gasoline removal. However, to be fair to the authorities in control at that time there were good economic reasons for these delays.

The burden of huge extra costs and subsidies just could not be tolerated. Furthermore, there were other more pressing priorities for the country's limited budget. If anything, there is now even greater justification for delaying the completion of the transition to unleaded fuel. Jakarta going totally unleaded in 2003 was a significant, if costly, achievement.

The writer is a UK-based international consultant on fuels, engines and emissions. Until the early 1990s he was first secretary and then chairman of the European Oil Industry's Co- operative Octane Requirement Committee.