And you continue to know didlly squat... There are multiple scrubbing techniques for differing gases and particulates. MAG CORP was another business on the Great Salt Lake that employed these techs. Between the two Kennecott and MAG CORP they were two of the worst emitters of H2S in the country. Do you know what that is? When you add water, it becomes Sulfuric Acid.
I know that removing particulates does not affect acid rain. And I know that I stated that sulfur dioxide, not H2S, is removed with a spray of limestone slurry. I never mentioned H2S. You have yet to produce a single sentence that actually responds to the comments I made. This is all babbling bullshit; an attempt to distract other readers from the fundamental errors you've made and your ongoing lie about have a PhD in atmospheric physics.
Billy Bob said: "...the use of Oil, Gas and Coal are as clean as nuclear plants in the output of the cooling towers."
I was responding directly and quite obviously to Billy Boy's falsehood.
Do fuck off Todd. Go have a nice Christmas somewhere.
And they are. You have disproved nothing. CO2 is NOT a pollutant and I demonstrated why that is. All plant life on earth needs it and the earth is CO2 deprived as the average CO2ppm is 1,467ppm, by the empirical records. You idiots think CO2 is a problem, but I have shown that it does very little in our atmosphere, so little that it cannot be discerned from noise in our climatic system.
Your original comment would strenuously suggest that post scrub exhaust from a fossil fuel powered plant is chemically similar to the exhaust of the cooling tower on a nuclear power plant. I'm pretty sure that EVERYONE here, no matter their side of ths primary argument, KNOWS that suggestion is false. That cooling tower is putting out nothing but water vapor and air BECAUSE THERE'S NO COMBUSTION TAKING PLACE.
Atmospheric CO2 levels from before the appearance of homo sapiens to the start of the Industrial Revolution, have never exceeded 300 ppm, Now, in the last 170 years they've reached 420 ppm, most of that in the last 50.
The only thing you've shown is that your science knowledge is inadequate and that you have no compunction about presenting long-debunked arguments.
The authorities to which I appeal ARE the experts in the field. You are anything but. Since posting about the cigarette-like PR campaign the fossil fuel industry has been running, I have begun referring to AGW deniers such as yourself useful idiots because you have made yourself useful to the folks at Exxon/Mobil by being stupid enough to buy into their bogus arguments and have rejected mainstream science.
Because it is save for CO2 emission.
Arctic ice free? Check
You need to post the repeatable scientific experiments detailing the relationship between temperature and these tiny levels of CO2Your original comment would strenuously suggest that post scrub exhaust from a fossil fuel powered plant is chemically similar to the exhaust of the cooling tower on a nuclear power plant. I'm pretty sure that EVERYONE here, no matter their side of ths primary argument, KNOWS that suggestion is false. That cooling tower is putting out nothing but water vapor and air BECAUSE THERE'S NO COMBUSTION TAKING PLACE.
Do you remember claiming that 99.991% of the scrubbed exhaust of a coal fired plant was water vapor? I'm wondering how that is managed when 1.5% - 3% of it is carbon dioxide not to mention the other gases that slip through.
Scrubbers are wonderful things and I am glad they're being used and, to be honest, I thank you for working on them, particularly in a place as potentially hazardous as Dugway. But they're not perfect and they don't eliminate the need to move away from GHG emitting power technologies.
Atmospheric CO2 levels from before the appearance of homo sapiens to the start of the Industrial Revolution, have never exceeded 300 ppm, Now, in the last 170 years they've reached 420 ppm, most of that in the last 50.
The only thing you've shown is that your science knowledge is inadequate and that you have no compunction about presenting long-debunked arguments.
Do you REALLY want to say that that spike at the right end can't be discerned from the noise in these data? Really?
Temperature record of the last 2,000 years - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
The authorities to which I appeal ARE the experts in the field. You are anything but. Since posting about the cigarette-like PR campaign the fossil fuel industry has been running, I have begun referring to AGW deniers such as yourself useful idiots because you have made yourself useful to the folks at Exxon/Mobil by being stupid enough to buy into their bogus arguments and have rejected mainstream science.
You say I never address the science? Explain how removing particulates reduces acid rain. Explain how the weak logarithmic nature of temp vs CO2 overcomes the logarithmic growth of CO2, the loss of sinks and its accumulation in the atmosphere. Explain how a scrubbed exhaust with 3% CO2 and small levels of other gases is "just as clean" as exhaust from a water cooling tower. Get as scientific as you like.
The image below is the Down Welling Solar Radiation distribution into our oceans.
Simple. That layer is where evaporation takes place and energy is expended. The amount of energy we are talking is very small. as it takes 4 times as much energy to heat water than it does air, it is insufficient to defeat the thermocline barrier just below the evaporation layer.
