Environmentalists target NASCAR
#1
Senior Member
Posts like a Northstar
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Purgatory
Posts: 533
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#2
Senior Member
Posts like a Camaro
That'* pretty silly.
If that happens, those tree-huggers better look out for Bubba and his double-barrel shotgun coming their way. You don't mess with hillbillies and their NASCAR!
Seriously tho, I can't imagine that a few hours of slight lead fuel exposure at a NASCAR race is a serious health risk. If you're sucking on the tailpipe maybe, but not sitting hundreds of feet away from the cars in a massive open air arena.
As the stock car racing season has just kicked off, I'm sure NASCAR won't be too happy if eco-activist protesters start showing up at races wearing gas masks and chanting "Get the lead out!" and "NASCAR pollution lowers kids' IQs!"
Seriously tho, I can't imagine that a few hours of slight lead fuel exposure at a NASCAR race is a serious health risk. If you're sucking on the tailpipe maybe, but not sitting hundreds of feet away from the cars in a massive open air arena.
#3
Senior Member
Posts like a Corvette
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ill be willing to bet them eco-lologistsss never been in a stock car going over 160MPH through a turn....
If they didnt completely turn pro-racing they would pass out from the forces and promptly run over.
:P
Billy Joe would probably busta beer bottle over their head.
If they didnt completely turn pro-racing they would pass out from the forces and promptly run over.
:P
Billy Joe would probably busta beer bottle over their head.
#8
While I agree that the amount of lead from an average NASCAR race wouldn't have any effect on the environment or on fans, much of the columns arguments for continuing to use leaded fuel are specious.
"Leaded race fuel is less likely to explode."- BS. The 110 octane fuel used by NASCAR is just as flammable as what you or I put in our cars.
"It makes the cars run better."-Also BS, the manufacturers could easily make the changes required to run unleaded fuel, without hurting performance at all. They re-design their engines every year anyways, so the change wouldn't hurt the sport.
The only reason that NASCAR still uses leaded gas is that leading is a cheaper way of raising octane tha the chemicl additives that civilian fuel uses. Changing to unleaded might cost them as much as $1000 a race. Whoopy.
As for aviation engines, the government didn't force the change to unleaded aviation fuel because then they would have had to change all the piston engine aircraft over to unleaded, at extraordinary expense. They could have, however, simply required that all new aircraft be compatible with unleaded fuel.
All of this is from the horse'* mouth, my Father. He'* been with the EPA for 27 years.
And, no, I ain't no damn tree-hugger, I'm as big a NASCAR fan as any avowed redneck.
Go #12!!
"Leaded race fuel is less likely to explode."- BS. The 110 octane fuel used by NASCAR is just as flammable as what you or I put in our cars.
"It makes the cars run better."-Also BS, the manufacturers could easily make the changes required to run unleaded fuel, without hurting performance at all. They re-design their engines every year anyways, so the change wouldn't hurt the sport.
The only reason that NASCAR still uses leaded gas is that leading is a cheaper way of raising octane tha the chemicl additives that civilian fuel uses. Changing to unleaded might cost them as much as $1000 a race. Whoopy.
As for aviation engines, the government didn't force the change to unleaded aviation fuel because then they would have had to change all the piston engine aircraft over to unleaded, at extraordinary expense. They could have, however, simply required that all new aircraft be compatible with unleaded fuel.
All of this is from the horse'* mouth, my Father. He'* been with the EPA for 27 years.
And, no, I ain't no damn tree-hugger, I'm as big a NASCAR fan as any avowed redneck.
Go #12!!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post