Re:Wind now competes with fossil fuels, and solar almost does
by cpprototypes on Friday October 09, 2015 @01:23AM
(#10358329)
He is probably referring to other pollutants such as NOx. It is unavoidable to produce some amount of these pollutants in an oil combustion process. But California has shown that it's possible to get this down to a low level. Smog used to be really bad in LA. But a combination of catalytic converters, strict emissions testing, and oil refinery requirements to make cleaner burning gas has dramatically reduced smog. The oil refinery requirements make CA gas very expensive compared to the rest of the nation. But I think it's worth it for the air pollution improvements.
Re:Wind now competes with fossil fuels, and solar almost does
by thewopr on Friday October 09, 2015 @01:19AM
(#10358320)
Oxides of nitrogen, soot and various other pollutants come out of burning diesel, even if it's just carbon we pulled out of the air. It would be carbon neutral, but not pollution neutral.
Re:Wind now competes with fossil fuels, and solar almost does
by danieltillett on Friday October 09, 2015 @01:19AM
(#10358318)
You get other pollutants other than CO2 when you burn fuel in an internal combustion engine - things like NO2, NO as well as carbon particle, etc.
Re:Wind now competes with fossil fuels, and solar almost does
by Al-Khwarizmi on Friday October 09, 2015 @04:12AM
(#10358732)
This is an example of how the pollution debate has became ridiculously carbon-centric...
Yes, CO2 is what causes global warming, but other pollutants can cause acid rain and lung cancer among many other effects.
Doesn't burning it just turn it back into what it was made from? You're not releasing any more carbon than you put into it.