Getting the Lead Out

The rise of the subcompacts is not the only remarkable change overtaking Detroit. In the early 1970s, the automakers probably will have to hold down the power of their high-performance cars as one result of new federal pollution requirements. If so, the "muscle" cars like the Mustang Mach 1 and the Buick Grand Sport 455 will no longer have the kick that enables youngsters to roar away from the stop lights, tires smoking and exhaust pipes blasting. Big engines on luxury cars probably will be somewhat less powerful. The current high-powered cars are likely to have lower-compression engines designed to burn the unleaded gasoline of the future.

Taking the lead out of gasoline appears to be a necessary step in cutting down air pollution caused by automobile exhaust fumes. Though not one of the major air pollutants itself, lead befouls most present-day antipollution devices. President Nixon, in his message to Congress last week (see ENVIRONMENT), proposed strict new Government standards to eliminate virtually all auto-caused pollution by 1975. Detroit could accomplish this by replacing the internal-combustion engine with hybrid cars that combine a small gas engine and an electric motor, or engines that run entirely on electricity, steam or even natural gas. G.M. has an XP-883 test model that can use gasoline, electric or hybrid systems. While some of these cars may hold long-term promise, each is said to be too costly or impractical for the here and now.

Instead of switching engines, Detroit intends to make extensive changes in existing ones by building in antipollution devices. These could raise the price of the average new car by 10% or more --but that is not the most immediate problem. The key antipollution device is the "catalytic converter" that burns up hydrocarbons in the exhaust. The trouble is that the converter is eventually gummed up and rendered useless by the tetraethyl lead in present-day gasolines.

Lead has been an increasingly significant additive to gasoline ever since Detroit began its horsepower race in the 1950s. The more and more powerful engines required gasolines with higher octane ratings, which is a measure of antiknock properties. The cheapest way of raising octane is to add lead in the refining process. If lead is removed, 100-octane premium gasoline will decline to an octane rating of about 94, the level of regular gasoline. Only one gasoline, Amoco, is marketed in unleaded premium octanes, and that is sold only in the eastern U.S.

Dual-Purpose Engines. For Detroit's automakers, the ideal solution would be for oil companies to produce unleaded gasoline at present high-octane ratings. That would require the oilmen to build many new refineries, which would cost their industry about $4 billion, according to the American Petroleum Institute. That cost would be passed on to the consumer in higher gas prices--perhaps 20 per gal.--atop the extra cost of pollution-control devices on the car. By contrast, unleaded gasoline at lower octane ratings can be produced with relatively little changeover or cost by the oil companies, and with no price penalty. With all this taken into consideration many experts feel that the most economic and safest solution is to lower the compression and horsepower of the cars.

Ford and General Motors have already publicly agreed to do so. Last week G.M. announced that it will lower the compression ratio on most of next year's cars, enabling them to operate on unleaded gasoline of a relatively low octane rating. In a letter to 19 oil companies, Henry Ford II declared last month: "Just as soon as we are assured that an adequate supply will be available, we will build our new cars with modified power systems so that they can operate effectively with regular-grade fuel." So far, most of the largest oil companies have replied, largely to the effect that they will provide the gasoline as soon as they are assured that there are engines on the road to use it.

If and when the muscle-car market withers away, Ford and G.M. will have to do little retooling beyond adding the antipollution devices. Most of the two companies' engines are "dual-purpose" --that is, their high-performance cars are powered by souped-up versions of the family car engine that uses regular gasoline. With a few changes, the high-performance engine can be modified to run on lead-free gas. But Chrysler, alone of the big three, maintains that "an engine tailored for low-octane, lead-free fuel would result in both performance and economy losses below what can be expected from today's vehicles."

Chrysler's concern is understandable. Some of its most powerful engines have compression ratios so high that they cannot be adapted to lower-octane gasoline, and all but its three smaller engines could no longer be used. If the switch to lead-free gasoline is made, Chrysler will not be the biggest loser. Times might well be tougher for the Ethyl Corp., the largest producer of lead additives. Last week its stock sank to a low of 15, down from its 1968 high of 361.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.