Another reference which is often touted for understanding the lead issue is The Secret History of Lead by Jamie Lincoln Kitman (published in The Nation, March 20, 2000). You can find a 42-page reprint online if you search for it. It has a lot of facts in it, but also has a bias that I think almost - but not totally - taints the work. So overall it’s worth a read, but with caution (IMO, and it was a while since I read it, the bias is in the assumptions on the motivations of the players involved, and I think it does downplay a bit the initial technological challenges of competitors to lead…recall, this is early 20th century here).
[QUOTE=Saint Cad]
To answer yes, there has to be a value in unleaded fuel not found in leaded fuels that would produce a change in demand.
Suppose some activist get out a campaign about how spending a little bit more for unleaded fuel saves our health, the environment, etc. If effective, people demand more unleaded fuel and supply changes from leaded to unleaded to meet demand. I don’t think however that this would eliminate regular gas completely.
[/QUOTE]
That would only work if there were some way to identify, and introduce some social cost to, the people who continued to use leaded gasoline.