[PASSED] Ban on Leaded Fuel

[Bears Armed Mission]

Second, leaded fuel is extremely reliable. It may be horrid for the environment, but when one is driving across one of our highways on our nation's grand steppes, with no cities nearby for at least 50 kilometres in every direction, you do not want your engine to break down due to bad quality fuel.

I gather that reliable alternatives are possible.

If this ban were to come into effect, we suggest it be altered to either limit the binding nature of this resolution to allow for even more breathing room.

Thus running the risk that [a] some governments would postpone change indefinitely and [b] the Secretariat would declare the proposal illegal for optionality.

Also we suggest that it requires nations to aid eachother in phasing out the unleaded fuel and developing/proliferating an equally reliable replacement.

But then how would we reconcile the interests of those member nations where any such research & development would be a matter for private enterprise by the automotive and fuel industries with those where it would be a government project?

OOC: While you mentioned the knocking (lack of octane), you failed to mention proper lubrication on soft valve faces/seats.

IC: "Leaded fuel vehicles can be modified to run on unleaded gasoline, and while I appreciate the historical significance of some vehicles, it is possible to use additives in the fuel that will allow them to run on unleaded gasoline without modification."

Thank you for that information. I will see whether there's actually enough room available for explaining about those points in the proposal's text.

IC: Life doesn't always manifest itself in carbon-based form. But that's really a small issue, I think. It could (somewhat) undermine the whole resolution, but I don't believe anyone in this assembly belongs in that category.

And if they do then I strongly suspect that their culture's paths of development wouldn't feature engines & fuels of the relevant types anyhows...

We in the Free State of New Market have a concern over this resolution, as written.

One of the larger civic groups within our borders are classic car collectors. These ladies and gentlemen have spent long hours restoring old cars from the previous century into near mint to mint condition. These cars, unfortunately, require lead for their engines to function correctly in the long term. These owners, when confronted with the prospect of unleaded-only fuel, have to use a lead fuel additive in order to have their cars function properly.

Now, our interpretation of this resolution is these fuel additives would still be legal to use, as it is an additive and not the fuel itself. If this is the case, we would be more apt to support the resolution. However, if these additives are banned, then we cannot support this proposal.

Would those desiring passage of this resolution explain how this would work in the scenario we have presented?

if those additives don't actually include "either Lead or another metal of comparable or worse toxicity" then they'd be fully legal in terms of this proposed resolution. if they do contain such a metal, then...
Hr'rmm... in the absence of any clear statement within the resolution itself about whether mixing those additives with lead-free fuel would count as "producing" leaded fuel, as is currently the case, I think that that decison would be a matter for member nations' own legislatures and law-courts to determine for themselves.

We would have to vote no on this proposal. We do not believe that four years would be a sufficient amount of time to retool the entire automotive industry is some nations.

So, how long would you suggest allowing instead?

*<various comments about phrasing>*

I will consider those points.

"Overall though, you have the full support of Sciongrad. Good luck!"

Thank you.

[The Dark Star Republic]

Consider the possibility of imports for conversion to run on other types of fuel, imports simply for scrapping, and antique or 'classic' vehicles being imported for [unmodified] inclusion in museums and private collections. Those probably wouldn't affect the "in use" figures during the transition period much anyway, not unless there were a LOT of private collectors willing to pay for vehicles that they knew would have no more fuel available within just a few years time, and once there's no more fuel for them to run on what harm in allowing continued importation for any of those reasons?

I hadn't considered that - you're right. No objection, therefore.

[Wrapper]

OOC: I am serious. Three of my grandparents were in the medical field. They smoked, drank, ate all the meat they wanted. None of them died of cancer, liver failure, or heart attack. I'd rather ask the advice of the people living in their nineties and hundreds then someone in the medical profession. My great grandfather and great grandmother lived until their late nineties. And they did everything that medical professionals say not to do now. The list of things that are and not healthy change daily. What gives or doesn't give cancer changes too. I'm not one to follow the latest medical trend.

Ah, of course, I forgot that anecdotal trivia trumps hard scientific evidence every time. How silly of me.

[Free State of New Market]

Removal of lead from fuel is not a cheap process. One can claim it is cheap, but that is due to the development over many years of the process. We in New Market do not believe the rich countries will be so generous in handing out the technology for the process to those who are poor. This puts an undo burden on those poorer nations that results in what the delegate from Jarish Inyo states.

As for the causes of lead poisoning in children, the fact leaded paint was used on older homes, and young children have eaten paint chips from those houses, is by the far the largest cause of lead poisoning. In New Market, due to the fact we were forced to completely rebuild our land due to natural disaster, we have eliminated that threat. The small amount of collector cars we have within our borders does not justify a large, overreaching ban on leaded fuels.

At this time, we cannot support the ban.

[Defwa]

Removal of lead from fuel is not a cheap process. One can claim it is cheap, but that is due to the development over many years of the process. We in New Market do not believe the rich countries will be so generous in handing out the technology for the process to those who are poor. This puts an undo burden on those poorer nations that results in what the delegate from Jarish Inyo states.

As for the causes of lead poisoning in children, the fact leaded paint was used on older homes, and young children have eaten paint chips from those houses, is by the far the largest cause of lead poisoning. In New Market, due to the fact we were forced to completely rebuild our land due to natural disaster, we have eliminated that threat. The small amount of collector cars we have within our borders does not justify a large, overreaching ban on leaded fuels.

At this time, we cannot support the ban.

You don't need to remove lead, you need to stop putting it in.
If you refuse to update your cars, then you can postpone the larger expense with low cost fuel additives for less than [Convert ten cents USD to your currency] a gallon.
There is no point to using lead in this day and age. Non lead substitutes are readily available and just about all motor vehicles can be affordably refit to use unleaded fuel without sacrificing any significant engine parts- its a valve replacement, not a historical enema.

I'm not even going to bother arguing the effects of lead poisoning and other ill effects of lead fuel usage because they're so incredibly well documented that I could simply not do it justice.

[Jarish Inyo]

Wrapper, it is silly of you. It's not anecdotal trivia. Every time someone that lives past a hundred is asked how they lived that long, they say they have lived their life as they have always done. That trumps your so called hard scientific evidence every time. As I said, what is and is not healthy for you changes all the time. Causes of diseases change or medical professionals just don't know the causes. These days, according to the medical professionals, nothing is healthy for you.


Bear Armed Mission, I would suggest a 10 year time frame for retooling.

[Defwa]

Wrapper, it is silly of you. It's not anecdotal trivia. Every time someone that lives past a hundred is asked how they lived that long, they say they have lived their life as they have always done. That trumps your so called hard scientific evidence every time. As I said, what is and is not healthy for you changes all the time. Causes of diseases change or medical professionals just don't know the causes. These days, according to the medical professionals, nothing is healthy for you.


Bear Armed Mission, I would suggest a 10 year time frame for retooling.

That's the kind of shit spewed by people who don't actually do any research. They hear more anecdotal, usually exaggerated, stories than they do actual scientific studies and never look into anything they hear. But the fact is for every smoking, drinking, meat binging grandparent out there (whom are usually exaggerating or being exaggerated about) there are a hundred people killed by easily preventable circumstances because of their poor diet, smoking habits, etc.
You're just like those people who believe all vaccines cause autism.

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Its true for medical professionals who go public with half baked studies and its true for representatives of nations (and even civilians in nations) who derive their opinions and policies from ill conceived conjecture and unscientific methods.

[Wrapper]

It's not anecdotal trivia. Every time someone that lives past a hundred is asked how they lived that long, they say they have lived their life as they have always done.

Okay, I can't tell if you're purposely being obtuse just to get a rise out of me (won't work), or if you genuinely don't understand the concept of anecdotal evidence (go back to school, young padawan).

[Imperializt Russia]

Wrapper, it is silly of you. It's not anecdotal trivia. Every time someone that lives past a hundred is asked how they lived that long, they say they have lived their life as they have always done. That trumps your so called hard scientific evidence every time. As I said, what is and is not healthy for you changes all the time. Causes of diseases change or medical professionals just don't know the causes. These days, according to the medical professionals, nothing is healthy for you.


Bear Armed Mission, I would suggest a 10 year time frame for retooling.

If a picture says a thousand words, this says "no" one thousand times.

It may intersperse the words "probability", "numbers game", "risk" and "likelihood", periodically.

[Normlpeople]

"I shall await the next draft, I do however, wish to address this:

Removal of lead from fuel is not a cheap process. One can claim it is cheap, but that is due to the development over many years of the process. We in New Market do not believe the rich countries will be so generous in handing out the technology for the process to those who are poor. This puts an undo burden on those poorer nations that results in what the delegate from Jarish Inyo states.

Fuel does not naturally contain lead. It was put in as an octane booster, and had a side effect of lubricating valve seats. Its not so much that cars require the lead, its that cars require higher octane and proper valve lubrication. There are other additives one could use to accomplish this goal that are less harmful to people breathing in the fumes."

OOC: Finally, a resolution I actually am versed in. We need more automotive ones. Well, ones beyond 'cars are bad for the environment man.'

[The Dark Star Republic]

Removal of lead from fuel is not a cheap process.

This is a nonsensical claim, and makes it extremely difficult to take the rest of your arguments seriously.

[Wrapper]

Removal of lead from fuel is not a cheap process.

This is a nonsensical claim, and makes it extremely difficult to take the rest of your arguments seriously.

OOC: To be fair (even though surely this was not the original contention), if governments or oil companies have stockpiles of fuel that won't run out before the requirement kicks in, they would have to remove the lead from the fuel or dispose of it. Thus a phase-in makes sense for a resolution like this, it gives everyone an opportunity to burn down stockpiles (figuratively, of course) without having to make expensive changes.

And now to put my FT hat on for an IC comment that will likely (and probably should be) ignored:

Wait, four years? Do you know how long a year is for our colony in the Pegasus galaxy?

[Bears Armed]

Wait, four years? Do you know how long a year is for our colony in the Pegasus galaxy?

But it doesn't say that you must take that long for the changeover...
... and at least the pollution there is unlikely to affect any other nation.

[The Dark Star Republic]

But lead is still an additive to begin with. To argue that lead can't be "removed" on an indefinite basis is silly. Just stop using the additive!

And now to put my FT hat on for an IC comment that will likely (and probably should be) ignored:

Wait, four years? Do you know how long a year is for our colony in the Pegasus galaxy? :ugeek:

Four years are still four years. If that converts to 0.5 years in your colony, so be it, but it doesn't affect your obligations, any more than would the fact that nations that do not speak English still have to comply with resolutions written in the English language.

[Jarish Inyo]

Wrapper, it is silly of you. It's not anecdotal trivia. Every time someone that lives past a hundred is asked how they lived that long, they say they have lived their life as they have always done. That trumps your so called hard scientific evidence every time. As I said, what is and is not healthy for you changes all the time. Causes of diseases change or medical professionals just don't know the causes. These days, according to the medical professionals, nothing is healthy for you.


Bear Armed Mission, I would suggest a 10 year time frame for retooling.

That's the kind of shit spewed by people who don't actually do any research. They hear more anecdotal, usually exaggerated, stories than they do actual scientific studies and never look into anything they hear. But the fact is for every smoking, drinking, meat binging grandparent out there (whom are usually exaggerating or being exaggerated about) there are a hundred people killed by easily preventable circumstances because of their poor diet, smoking habits, etc.
You're just like those people who believe all vaccines cause autism.

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Its true for medical professionals who go public with half baked studies and its true for representatives of nations (and even civilians in nations) who derive their opinions and policies from ill conceived conjecture and unscientific methods.

I'm not basing anything on just anecdotal evidence. I base off the knowledge of 3 medical professionals in my family. People who do everything I stated in my previous comments and are in good health.

Simple fact is that anything in excess is hazardous to one's health.

I do not believe that fuel fumes are an international issue.

[Wrapper]

I'm not basing anything on just anecdotal evidence. I base off the knowledge of 3 medical professionals in my family. People who do everything I stated in my previous comments and are in good health.

That EXACTLY fits the definition of anecdotal evidence. Now go learn some more science before you embarrass yourself further.

[Mundiferrum]

Simple fact is that anything in excess is hazardous to one's health.

I do not believe that fuel fumes are an international issue.

What the hell? That's a pretty big contradiction.

And a good counter-claim to your "unhealthy-living-not-being-healthy" argument would be most medical publications passed in the last fifty or so years, or perhaps your or any relatives' lives following suit (unless your family's luck is, well, genetic in nature).

Anyway, lead is dangerous, lead is unnecessary in fuel, lead needs to be removed. We already switched to unleaded, like, never (since we never used lead in the first place, as we're kinda new to the whole cars thing), so this resolution won't really do anything to us. That said, we'd love to see other nations follow this healthy practice, mostly because we don't like seeing people die of lead poisoning and such. And if this passed, we'd probably try helping other nations follow suit too, which could help with the very minor economic setback this will produce. So yeah, once this is submitted (and in queue), we're voting for.

[Bears Armed Mission]

Removal of lead from fuel is not a cheap process. One can claim it is cheap, but that is due to the development over many years of the process.

OOC: Even if some oil hypothetically did come out of the ground with Lead compounds already present, are you under the mistaken impression that the oil deposits occur already neatly sorted into petrol/gasoline, paraffin/kerosene, and so on? That -- at least in RL, and thus arguably (unless mineral oil within the NS multiverse actually has a different origin than the RL stocks) in NS as well -- is not the case: The 'crude oil' pumped to the surface is actually a mixture of materials, that already have to be separated form each other, and so separating-out any Lead compounds at the refinery as well would be a fairly trivial addition to the process.

[Frustrated Franciscans]

OOC: Perhaps some BASIC SCIENCE might help enlighten the uninformed.

Now to make a long story short, the really easy to refine crude oil is by turning it into steam and then condensing what you want at various temperatures. This process is so far below the boiling point of lead that any lead in the oil never goes gets into the fractional distillation column in the first place. End of story.

[Empire of Africa]

The Empire of Africa strongly opposes this as it seeks to improve its Automotive industry as of currently and it doesn't need laws coming into effect as of now to hurt its growing industry.

[Bears Armed]

The Empire of Africa strongly opposes this as it seeks to improve its Automotive industry as of currently and it doesn't need laws coming into effect as of now to hurt its growing industry.

Lead-poisoning potentially hurts your entire population. You'd be better off in the long-term "growing" your industry in the safer direction to start with...

[Mundiferrum]

The Empire of Africa strongly opposes this as it seeks to improve its Automotive industry as of currently and it doesn't need laws coming into effect as of now to hurt its growing industry.

Lead-poisoning potentially hurts your entire population. You'd be better off in the long-term "growing" your industry in the safer direction to start with...

No, I think it's alright that they oppose this. If this fails, and they don't act on the issue, then we, the unleaded nations, we'll be the ones selling them medical relief xD.

[The Greater Luthorian Empire]

ooc:
does this mean I can't get snookered on moonshine and shoot up gas tanks anymore?

/redneck

ooc: wouldn't 'unleaded' fuel explode just as well?

>The joke
>The moon
>The sky
>Your roof
>Your head

Leaded fuel, bullets are made of lead and he wants to shoot up gas tanks. Get it if he shoots lead bullets at a gas tank he is making leaded fuel.

[Defwa]

The Empire of Africa strongly opposes this as it seeks to improve its Automotive industry as of currently and it doesn't need laws coming into effect as of now to hurt its growing industry.

As Urrsish delegate advised, develop healthily. Defwa was a late comer to the world community but we use that to our advantage. Many nations have poisoned their skies and waters with trial and error industrial revolutions. We skipped that- moved directly into the manufacture of hybrid and electric vehicles. We never had to use leaded fuel- it is not a requirement or even an aid in growth.

You should use this same principal- learning from the mistakes of more 'advanced' nations to skip other pitfalls like failure to plan cities, mining with outdated poisonous chemicals, social inequality, and so on.

[The Dark Star Republic]

Of course, if this passed, demand for vehicles capable of running on or being converted to run on unleaded fuels would greatly increases in WA nations, creating significant for emerging manufacturers. If anything, it is the entrenched, established manufacturers more likely to suffer.