Quote:
Originally Posted by trebuchet03
Why is your first assumption always to scrub it out?
It's incredibly disingenuous to completely ignore long term effects  |
I didn't. LD50 measurements are taken over the lifetime of an animal. So to get the LD50 of Benzene they introduced varying grams to mice. The amount that it took to kill the mouse before its natural lifetime is the LD50.
1800 grams In a single dose will not kill you right away. 1800 grams is just the point at which the lifespan is shortened.
the .5 figure is the marked up number that refineries generate per gallon(which comparedto avg mpg of diesel cars/small trucks does not meet the new emissions policies) was an estimate. Nevertheless thats minutiae, because even if it produces 10 grams per gallon there is still vastly more CO2 damage than NOx. original requirements were less than 1 gram per mile?(average was 23 mpg for diesels) so 23 grams per gallon average. Still more CO2 using diesel from the 80s. Diesel today is refined further to ensure that less pollutants are emitted if you just burn it in open air. Nevertheless since I am apparently not capable to calculate that number maybe you should tell me and we'll go from there.
It is disingenuous to make false assumptions that just because MPG didn't go down means regulation didn't hurt it.
It is also deceptive to say that emissions regulations would save money when really efficiency R&D saved money.
And where you quoted me. . . my first asnwer was not scrub CO2. It was to reclaim it. Reclaim means to rescue from an undesireable state. C02 emissions are undesireable states and changing them to something else could easily be construed as reclaiming them. So any emissions policies taken towards CO2 would be reclaiming them. I also addressed the idea of using bacteria or algae to convert it to something either not harmful or something useful.