William Kovarik
Radford University
and
Matthew E. Hermes
Kennesaw State University

 

Fuels and Society C: 2. GM's Decision for the Catalytic Converter

3. Catalytic Converter Chemistry

Back to: Start

In chemistry we relate macroscopic, observable change to transformations at the molecular level that go unseen through the shorthand of symbolic representation. For the most part, we are comforted by the fact that we can at least observe the macroscopic.

The catalytic converter represents a device from which we can measure successful outcomes. Without the converter, CO and NO levels from exhaust gases are much higher than with the converter in place. Throughout the country jurisdictions require measurement of tailpipe emissions to make certain that pollutants are controlled.

The operators of the gas chromatograph devices that measure our tailpipe emissions cannot see the gases the engine emits, nor of course can they see the molecules as they stream out. But we have developed methods to make measurements on these unseen yet very real gases and represent the compositions of the gases on charts or graphs or displays.

Thus in the very real world, employees are doing chemistry. They are measuring the output of macroscopic chemical reactions and representing the using the charted representations of the reaction products to place a sticker on our cars that lets us drive away for another year!

  People have been concerned about air pollution for a long time. Even non-industrial cities like ancient Rome had pollution from wood smoke, and coal smoke has been a well known part of the famous London fogs. The switch away from coal to relatively cleaner oil and gas in the 1940s and 50s helped with stationary sources like big power plants in the U.S. and Europe.

But mobile source – automobiles – were also creating smog problems that were noticeable after WWII. The concerns led to the Clean Air Act of 1970 which required 90 percent reductions in auto exhaust. The mandatory reduction was controversial, and had not yet been approved by Congress, when on January 14, 1970, GM president Ed Cole told a Society of Automotive Engineers conference that the “pollution free” car was possible if two conditions were met:

  • Cars used a new devices called a catalytic converter; and
  • Lead was taken out of gasoline.

Catalytic converters would greatly reduce carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides and hydrocarbons (unburned fuel).  The converters would do nothing to lower lead emissions, but their use made leaded gasoline impossible since lead would deactivate the main catalytic element, platinum. Unleaded gasoline would be necessary.

There was an irony in Cole’s speech that was widely acknowledged at the time. After all, the company that had created leaded gasoline was now announcing its demise. Aware that this moment might come, GM had pulled out of the leaded gasoline business only a few years before, in 1962, when it sold its interests in Ethyl Corp. to a small paper company in Richmond, Va.

GM’s proactive position on lead and catalytic converters should be seen in the context of the many pressures on the auto industry in the 1960s and 70s. Biting critiques by consumer advocates like Ralph Nader, anti-trust lawsuits by the federal government, Congressional investigations and a growing environmental movement all combined to convince GM that the time had come for change.

Catalytic converters were not introduced to reduce lead, as is sometimes suggested. It was the drive to reduce nitrogen oxides and CO that forced the converter – and ended TEL in U.S. gasoline. Even if there had been no public health issue with lead, the converters would still have needed unleaded gasoline. But new public health research did indicate serious problems and this was used as an added justification for eliminating leaded gasoline.

In 1973, Ethyl Corp. sued the EPA and won a temporary victory when a federal court set aside the leaded gasoline phase-out regulations, saying EPA hadn’t demonstrated that lead was a public health hazard. This ruling was overturned in favor of the EPA in 1976 when a federal appeals court said while lead was not a certain danger, “awaiting certainty will often allow for only reactive not preventive regulation.”

Catalytic converters are now a standard part of a car’s exhaust system. They reduce three main types of emissions: hydrocarbons HC (unburned fuel); carbon monoxide CO; and nitrogen oxides NOx. The converter reduces the nitrogen oxides back to nitrogen and oxygen and oxidizes carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon emissions.

You review catalytic converter chemistry next, or go on to the lead phase-out, that accompanied and was triggered by the introduction of the catalytic converter.

An EPA report from 1985 still exist on the web and relates that the catalytic converter was introduced to reduce lead. But that is not the case - it was the drive to reduce nitrogen oxides and CO that forced the converter - and ended TEL in US gasoline.

College of Science and Mathematics
Kennesaw State University
1000 Chastain Rd.
Kennesaw, GA 30114
770-423-6160
 
t_logo.gif (12525 bytes) ChemCases.com is a National Science Foundation supported curriculum development project.