City subsidies aren’t moving the needle on unleaded fuel use at Long Beach Airport
As a result, residents who live beneath the flight path argue they’ve been left vulnerable to lead-related illnesses.
In August 2023, city and airport officials gathered around a small airplane parked on the tarmac outside Signature Aviation at Long Beach Airport to celebrate the introduction of unleaded fuel at the airfield, which included photo ops of the mayor pumping fuel and speeches boasting about the health benefits of the cleaner burning gas.
But one year later, barely any of the fuel has been used despite city officials’ implementation of reimbursement and subsidy programs funded through airport operating revenue from airline fees, parking, concessions and ground leases.
“Unleaded aviation fuel is available and proven safe and reliable but the [general aviation] industry does not want to switch over, mainly due to financial reasons,” said John Mosquera, a founding member of the Small Aircraft NoisE Reduction group, or SANeR, a community organization fighting back against noise and air pollution in Long Beach.
“This leaves those under the flight path and all of Long Beach vulnerable to any number of lead-related illnesses,” Mosquera said. “Their profits are at the expense of our health.”
The initial delivery of unleaded fuel at Long Beach in August 2023 was 992 gallons. Since then, through June of this year, no more unleaded fuel has been purchased by Signature, the leading fixed-base operator at Long Beach and the only organization that stocks the gas at the airfield, city data shows. In that same time, 460,180 gallons of leaded fuel have been delivered, for a monthly average of 41,835 gallons.
Beginning late last year, city officials set out to address concerns from the aviation industry about the cost of transitioning to unleaded fuel. The first hurdle for plane operators is that each plane must be certified to use unleaded fuel, which typically costs between $100 and $600 for smaller aircraft.
The city introduced a reimbursement program that went into effect on Jan. 1 of this year to cover up to $300 of that expense. So far, only 14 of the estimated 200 qualifying planes have been certified, according to airport spokesperson Kate Kuykendall, who said the city has reimbursed $4,200 out of the $60,000 allocated to the program.
The price difference between leaded and unleaded fuel is the biggest hindrance to the transition, aviation experts say, with the latter costing upward of 40% more than its dirtier counterpart. To remove that burden from operators, city officials approved $200,000 in subsidies to allow Signature to sell unleaded fuel for the same price as leaded. The program went into effect in May, Kuykendall said.
Signature declined to comment on exactly how much unleaded fuel it has sold over the past year, but the company filed its first reimbursement claim this week, which states it sold 51 gallons of unleaded fuel in July. While some smaller aircraft have a fuel capacity of around 26 gallons, the Cessna 175 Skylark, a plane commonly seen flying around the airfield as part of flight school training, has a fuel capacity of 52 gallons.
The reimbursement amount was not immediately available. In response to questions about the lack of unleaded fuel sales or what they are doing to educate operators about these programs, airport spokesperson Lindsey Phillips said in a statement that the airport "remains in close communication with its tenants to ensure they're aware of these incentives, so that when pilots are prepared, they can take full advantage of the support available to them."
Multiple flight schools in Long Beach declined to comment for this story, but Gary Schank, vice president of the Southern California Pilots Association and a pilot with 40 years of experience, said the hesitance for plane operators to make the shift is simple: the unleaded fuel is “an unknown.”
“Humans in general resist change,” Schank said, adding that there is no benefit for pilots to make the switch but that there could be a costly downside.
Airplane engines can only fly a certain number of hours before they must be completely overhauled, which costs tens of thousands of dollars, Schank explained. This is known as “time before overhaul.”
As it stands, TBO is set based on industry standards, which include the use of leaded fuels. Unleaded fuels are relatively new and not enough data exists on its long-term impacts on engines, Schank argues. If unleaded fuel reduces an aircraft’s TBO, it will cost operators untold sums in the long run, he said.
“Why should I take a chance when there is nothing wrong with the existing fuel?” Schank said. “Based on limited research they say it won’t hurt my engine, but maybe it will.”
If, after several years of availability with a small number of pilots taking the chance on unleaded fuel, it proves to be safe for engines, Schank said more pilots will be willing to make the shift. He added that at some point, California pilots may not have a choice if the state bans leaded fuel outright.
But the state may not have to take action on the matter itself. Eliminate Aviation Gasoline Lead Emissions, a partnership between the Federal Aviation Administration and the aviation community, is working toward eliminating leaded aviation fuels nationwide by 2030.
Of the health implications of lead emissions, Schank said there is “nothing wrong with leaded fuel,” pointing to his decades of flying and the fact that his health has not been affected. “There’s no harm to this fuel at all,” he added.
The Environmental Protection Agency disagrees. On Oct. 18, the government agency released a long-awaited determination that calls lead emissions from aircraft engines a public health hazard.
“The science is clear: exposure to lead can cause irreversible and life-long health effects in children,” EPA Administrator Michael Regan said in the announcement. “Aircraft that use leaded fuel are the dominant source of lead emissions in our air.”
But the determination was purely academic, ending with a note that the findings do not “ban or impose restrictions on the use, sale, distribution, dispensing, and general availability of leaded fuel.”
Locally, as community members continue to rally against lead emissions, officials are not satisfied with the 2030 timeline. In a Nov. 14 agenda item, Councilmembers Cindy Allen, Megan Kerr and Roberto Uranga said “with the health and safety of our citizens on the line, this is simply not soon enough.”
Mosquera noted that leaded fuel was federally banned for automotive vehicles in 1996.
“Yet here we are in 2024 and we still have general aviation … using leaded fuels,” Mosquera said, adding that the planes continuously fly over nearby elementary schools. “The impact of GA leaded fuel to those vulnerable are documented and proven.”
Editor's note: This story has been updated to include an additional statement from Long Beach Airport and to clarify how the programs are funded.
We need your support.
Subcribe to the Watchdog today.
The Long Beach Watchdog is owned by journalists, and paid for by readers like you. If independent, local reporting like the story you just read is important to you, support our work by becoming a subscriber.
