‘Poison pill’ language may keep leaded fuel at airports

I’m a pilot. The airport is a community resource that needs to remain open and be modernized. Whereas leaded aviation fuel needs to be replaced ASAP. The good news is in September 2022, the FAA approved G100UL, an unleaded aviation fuel, for use in all piston-engine aircraft.

The bad news is the recently passed House of Representatives FAA reauthorization bill, H.R. 3935, contains an anti-unleaded aviation fuel “poison pill” amendment. It requires airports to continue to sell leaded aviation fuel until an unleaded aviation fuel earns FAA approval and meets an “industry consensus standard”. G100UL has FAA approval but doesn’t meet the “industry consensus standard” because no “industry consensus standard” exists for unleaded aviation fuel. It may take years for one to be developed. Major oil industry players have repeatedly failed to develop an unleaded aviation fuel that passes FAA tests. Whereas GAMI, a small Oklahoma company, developed G100UL. With the “industry consensus standard” poison pill language, the companies that have failed are in the position to block GAMI from easily offering their unleaded aviation fuel. Conflict of interest? The result is airports must continue to sell leaded aviation fuel for years. This protects the significant profit margin refiners enjoy for leaded aviation fuel but comes at the cost of higher maintenance costs for aircraft owners plus continued environmental and health damage.

Anyone who wishes to replace leaded aviation fuel with unleaded aviation fuel soon must contact Senators Bennet and Hickenlooper to ensure the Senate’s FAA reauthorization bill, S.1939, does not include the anti-unleaded aviation fuel “poison pill” language “meets an industry consensus standard.” It’s vitally important the only approval an airport needs to offer unleaded aviation is from the FAA. Additionally, contact Representative Neguse to not allow the “poison pill” language to be included in the eventual conference committee bill.

— Scott Snider, Boulder

City needs airport land for affordable housing

Regarding a letter to the editor from Aug. 23 stating that the Boulder airport is a huge benefit to the city, I wonder just how many residents agree. Do we actually think that continuing to dedicate that land to supporting a handful of pilots, recreational flyers, and sky divers is in the city’s interest? The author (who is from Westminster) writes about the Boulder airport as if it were the United Nations: Community bonding? Educational opportunities? Come on! Why is this even a debate? The city needs that space for something more essential to the well-being of our town — housing its citizens.

— Alma Becker, Boulder

Hypocrisy shouldn’t be used in discussing issues

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Mr. Keegan’s hyperbolic rhetoric in the August 23, 2023, edition of the Daily Camera regarding Councilman Wallach’s hotline message and council comments is replete with the very same hypocrisy, revisionism and distortion of which he complains. He does get one thing correct and that’s the Bedrooms initiative, basing increased occupancy on the number of bedrooms in a housing unit, failed by a vote of 52.3% to 47.7%.

The remainder of his diatribe consists of bitter invective complaining that Wallach had the temerity to argue that the proposed ordinance increasing occupancy limits was not the best way to address the occupancy issue. He accuses Wallach of saying that the voters rejected an increase in occupancy because of the vote on Bedrooms, then he concludes that the voters were in favor of an increase in occupancy because three members of the council were elected who, among the many other issues upon which they ran, were in favor of increasing occupancy. Is Mr. Keegan speaking for all voters who voted for these council members? Wallach recognized that there is no mandate either way. That’s why he argued for the matter to be put to the voters.

If you’re going to accuse somebody of hypocrisy and distortion you should not engage in hypocrisy and distortion.

— Mike Schreiner, Boulder