Here's one for all you Luddites who think the sky is falling: According to a new study, steady advances in technology are decoupling fossil-fuel energy and air pollution. The researchers also found that air pollution continues to reach new record lows even as Americans burn increasing amounts of coal, oil, and natural gas to power their homes, vehicles, businesses, and factories.
Stories like this kinda make you want to build more coal-fired power plants and drill for more oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, don't they?
http://www.texaspolicy.com/pdf/2008-01-PP01-airpollution-schwartz.pdf
Originally posted by shavixmirThe key point is that technology is lowering emissions from burning fossil fuels, including coal, to such an extent, that they fall well below EPA requirements. This is good news since it means that we can now build more coal-fired power plants that will be needed to provide electricity to the fast-growing population of the state of Texas.
So, basically what this guy is suggesting is that coal plants don't lead to more air pollution?
Other findings:
•Steady advances in technology are decoupling fossil-fuel energy and air pollution.
•Air pollution continues to reach new record lows even as Americans burn increasing amounts of coal, oil, and natural gas to power their homes, vehicles, businesses, and factories.
•Texas already meets federal health standards for most air pollutants. The key remaining challenge for DFW and other Texas cities is ozone.
•DFW will attain the ozone standard regardless of whether new coal plants are built. Coal is already a small fraction of ozone-forming emissions, and EPA requires total power plant pollution to continue to decline, even if new coal plants are built.
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterAnd of course we want to get at those 2 Trillion barrels of oil contained in oil shale buried under Utah, Wyoming, Colorado.
Here's one for all you Luddites who think the sky is falling: According to a new study, steady advances in technology are decoupling fossil-fuel energy and air pollution. The researchers also found that air pollution continues to reach new record lows even as Americans burn increasing amounts of coal, oil, and natural gas to power their homes, ve ...[text shortened]... e Refuge, don't they?
http://www.texaspolicy.com/pdf/2008-01-PP01-airpollution-schwartz.pdf
- Joined
- 23 Jul 05
- Moves
- 8869
It's nice to know to that these coal power stations are giving off less air pollution, it supposedly causes many problems for many people. However, one problem remains (well, clearly not in your eyes), by building more power plants, more carbon dioxide is given off; this does not cause health problems like the sulphur dioxide, etc, would; but has been linked to global warming, which is a largely very different problem in itself, which would cause many problems in the near future.
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterWhy should anyone be surprised about this? Do you think that environmentalists are opposed to putting better mufflers on cars and making power plants more efficient? They're concerned, not stupid.
[b]The key point is that technology is lowering emissions from burning fossil fuels, including coal, to such an extent, that they fall well below EPA requirements. This is good news since it means that we can now build more coal-fired power plants that will be needed to provide electricity to the fast-growing population of the state of Texas.
...[text shortened]...
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterHow well things can be spun. Semantics raised to an artform. Objectivity is obviously not the aim.
Here's one for all you Luddites who think the sky is falling: According to a new study, steady advances in technology are decoupling fossil-fuel energy and air pollution. The researchers also found that air pollution continues to reach new record lows even as Americans burn increasing amounts of coal, oil, and natural gas to power their homes, ve ...[text shortened]... e Refuge, don't they?
http://www.texaspolicy.com/pdf/2008-01-PP01-airpollution-schwartz.pdf
The most polluted city in the US is Houston.
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterIntensity reductions are not the same
Here's one for all you Luddites who think the sky is falling: According to a new study, steady advances in technology are decoupling fossil-fuel energy and air pollution. The researchers also found that air pollution continues to reach new record lows even as Americans burn increasing amounts of coal, oil, and natural gas to power their homes, ve ...[text shortened]... e Refuge, don't they?
http://www.texaspolicy.com/pdf/2008-01-PP01-airpollution-schwartz.pdf
1 edit
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterLets just gloss over CO2!
Here's one for all you Luddites who think the sky is falling: According to a new study, steady advances in technology are decoupling fossil-fuel energy and air pollution. The researchers also found that air pollution continues to reach new record lows even as Americans burn increasing amounts of coal, oil, and natural gas to power their homes, ve ...[text shortened]... e Refuge, don't they?
http://www.texaspolicy.com/pdf/2008-01-PP01-airpollution-schwartz.pdf
The article seems to include many air pollutants ... with the exception of CO2 ....
I guess CO2 is not an air pollutant ... that is the main finding of this study ... they are going way back in time before CO2 was found to be a serious pollutant.
Do fossil fuels produce any CO2 ? YES!
You are funny 😀
- Joined
- 30 Dec 07
- Moves
- 9905
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterSomething seems wrong with this statement... like it contradicts years of study and research...
Here's one for all you Luddites who think the sky is falling: According to a new study, steady advances in technology are decoupling fossil-fuel energy and air pollution. The researchers also found that air pollution continues to reach new record lows even as Americans burn increasing amounts of coal, oil, and natural gas to power their homes, ve ...[text shortened]... e Refuge, don't they?
http://www.texaspolicy.com/pdf/2008-01-PP01-airpollution-schwartz.pdf
- Joined
- 30 Dec 07
- Moves
- 9905
Originally posted by flexmoreYou forgot one of these Global Warming Anti-Alarmist's (GWAA) points from another thread... since CO2 does not contribute much in heat compared to other things, it does not matter! Ignore the fact that disrupting balance will still cause a big effect!
Lets just gloss over CO2!
The article seems to include many air pollutants ... with the exception of CO2 ....
I guess CO2 is not an air pollutant ... that is the main finding of this study ... they are going way back in time before CO2 was found to be a serious pollutant.
Do fossil fuels produce any CO2 ? YES!
You are funny 😀
4 edits
Originally posted by UzumakiAiThank you for your advice,
You forgot one of these Global Warming Anti-Alarmist's (GWAA) points from another thread... since CO2 does not contribute much in heat compared to other things, it does not matter! Ignore the fact that disrupting balance will still cause a big effect!
You are correct: CO2 is only small in effect for a size - but it's size is huge- and so it's effect is huge. We can do much that we do not do ... hazelwwod is very bad and should stop.
Of course I would like you to please dicscuss:
Japanese data: Unpublished desk research of Japan's most polluting power stations, July 2005
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_least_carbon_efficient_power_stations
Thank you for your respect!