I think about 10 years from now is a reasonable guess.
thanks guys 
Well then, a lot of things can happen in 10 years time…
I don’t think we can tell.
The US process is indeterminate because they have 100LL and it is relatively safe there politically – the usual pressure groups notwithstanding. ISTM that GAMI is pushing for some amazing deal which not many oil companies are signing up to. Maybe they are waiting for his patent to expire, which is, what, 20 years?
100UL may cost more than 100LL but 100LL pricing varies hugely around Europe anyway.
European pilots have developped 100LL avoidance strategies that now can’t be replaced with a unique one size fits all solution.
As Silvaire said, entropy ! 
@Peter 20 years it is. GAMI holds six applications so far on 100UL, but there might be some more newer ones that are not yet visible. They do take this serious 😉
It could be the right moment to go with patents, because maybe there aren’t 20 years to wait…
6 applications is unusual for one product, but they are probably covering various variations which would produce similar fuels. It’s a problem because how to make “100UL” has been known since around WW2 and with any chemical composition a small variation may deliver the same result while evading a patent. Also prior art is a problem; none of this is new.
I tried to look for these patents, without success. They should disclose the fuel composition.
Peter wrote:
I tried to look for these patents, without success
Now should this be the first time that the forum needs a patent attorney?
Ok here we are. First good point to remember is the full name of the company, because it’s the patent holder. It is General Aviation Modifications, Inc.
That bit of information should guide to any platform that provides the patent documents. I like https://patentscope.wipo.int to get a good overview of international applications and where they get nationalized (here only US documents are shown).
Entering the applicant name results in this:
All is clickable and you get directly to the abstract when clicking on the application number. But I can’t paste the direct link, because the session link terminates. Clicking the topmost link leads here:
There is a top bar “Description”, that is the bunch of information you’re looking for.
But knowing you @Peter you will readily be able to access the documents. So wish you a good read!
By the way, on a quick search I only found applications that are valid in the United States. Nothing in the rest of the world. So in principle we could blend it here without infringing the U.S. patents. That’s weird. But this explains why GAMI has zil interest in doing anything in Europe.
More readable PDF of above screenshot
I am not a patent lawyer but have read many patents. In a previous life, I had competitors who spent many £1000s filing bogus patents, so they could put “patent applied for” all over their products, and some of these were even granted although all of those were so obscure nobody would have used those methods. And even I did that once.
And to me this lot smells of “prior art” from start to finish.
Peter wrote:
And to me this lot smells of “prior art” from start to finish.
That won’t matter much. Patent offices have long since stopped checking for prior art (that’s obvious in the software patent field). Instead they rely on people filing objections to the patent applications.
Sure (well not quite true; it’s just that in very specialised fields, and with clever predatory applicants, they cannot have examiners who know it all – one exception) but that changes nothing.
The patent is just as worthless because anybody with two bob to rub together can and will challenge it, and rest assured that absolutely everybody in this particular game has way more than two bob
Poor quality patents have value only against poor people
