You won't believe how an obscure regulator may make gas prices explode in 2020 with this one trick!

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by litesong

Been enjoying this thread (over & over), as Natalya dis-members all the re-pubic-lick-un money changers, who want the pollution-laden poor & colored people to die, so an obsessed fossil-fuel industry can collect all its planned trillions of dollars.

I've never seen someone spend so much effort to say nothing. It's as if you're attempting to make your exceedingly few substantive posts much more valuable by showing how rare they are. I'm on pins and needles waiting for your next one.

[litesong]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

I'm on pins and needles waiting for your next one.

While sitting on the floor on those pins & needles, remember NOT to wiggle your butt like an over-excited dog, as is your custom.

[MetroMPG]

Insulting forum members isn't acceptable. Cut it out, please.

(Edit: to clarify, this is directed at litesong.)

[RustyLugNut]

Originally Posted by MetroMPG

Insulting forum members isn't acceptable. Cut it out, please.

(Edit: to clarify, this is directed at litesong.)

Back to the topic at hand.

Last year, while cruising to and from Bermuda, I had the opportunity to converse with the Environmental Officer of the ship. It was informative and uplifting. Such that he held a daily "coffee shop" discussion with anyone interested in the subject. It was well attended by a broad range of age groups and educational/professional backgrounds.

Of great interest to me was the technology the cruise line had decided upon to meet the coming low sulfur fuel edict. Some countries were enacting laws that required low sulfur fuel only while within a specified range of their lands. These were reasonable laws since sulfur dioxide is quickly dissolved into the sea water. Most ships have several fuel bunkers and a simple retro-fit of a bunker to carry and dispense low sulfur diesel adds little to operational costs. The requirement to run low sulfur fuel the entire trip would be cost prohibitive. Thus, a version of coal scrubbers was ready to be installed on their liners. It is a simple baffled mixer with a spray of water coursing down dissolving the sulfur into the water shower. Thus, the smoke stack emissions carry low single digit percentages of sulfur than before treatment. The sulfuric acid in the cleansing shower is neutralized by crushed limestone to form calcium sulfate.

Depending on the length of a cruise cycle, the last portion - the acid neutralization - could entail a considerable bulk of crushed limestone. However, it was not seen as overly problematical. For every 1000 tons of bunker fuel burned only a few tons of crushed limestone would be consumed in the neutralization step.

The calcium sulfate has value as an ingredient for plaster. Though the volumes produced would not be great.

Additionally, there was talk of simply dispensing the used limestone overboard as calcium sulfate is already found on the ocean floor. However, there was a vociferous group in attendance who felt nothing should go overboard. I'm quite sure tradesmen in Bermuda would have liked a few tons of free plaster.

https://www.shipownersclub.com/metho...sulphur-limit/

[litesong]

Originally Posted by MetroMPG

Insulting forum members isn't acceptable. Cut it out, please. (Edit: to clarify, this is directed at litesong.)

redpoint said, "I've never seen someone spend so much effort to say nothing. It's as if you're attempting to make your exceedingly few substantive posts much more..... ", about litesong.

The bias hangs heavy on this website, as it does on all AGW denier websites. Natalya has the members here targeted well.... & that includes the moderators, that moderate improperly.

[Xist]

Rational people do not insult the people that run the places they frequent. The logical conclusion is being made to leave. Do you go to Walmart, ask to talk to the general manager, and call them ugly?

[redpoint5]

I've seen some informative and constructive posts from litesong, so I know more are possible. Interesting that they have been a member as long as me, but only recently "participating".

I'd never ask someone to leave because it isn't incumbent on me to read things that are unlikely to be substantive, but I understand moderators desire for dialogue to be civil.

[RustyLugNut]

Originally Posted by litesong

redpoint said, "I've never seen someone spend so much effort to say nothing. It's as if you're attempting to make your exceedingly few substantive posts much more..... ", about litesong.

The bias hangs heavy on this website, as it does on all AGW denier websites. Natalya has the members here targeted well.... & that includes the moderators, that moderate improperly.

I remember you from the Dodge Caliber Forums a decade ago. Your approach is still the same. This forum is accepting of all forms of fringe ideas even if they have to reside in the Unicorn Corral. The moderators are very accepting and forgiving. I have been on both sides of numerous derelict discussions and the Mods handled it well.

Redpoint is only stating what the rest of us see . . . that your derogatory posts exceed your useful posts by a painfully large margin. Your attempt to drag Natalya into your derision of the entire forum and its Mods seems manipulative to me. Though many on this site support AGW, most will not support your behavior.

[litesong]

Originally Posted by RustyLugNut

Your attempt to drag Natalya into your derision......

Nah! Natalya tells the truth about you AGW deniers, which all your thickness of heart will not accept. I doubt if you read all her posts & you don't take her words as truth. I tell the truth about yourself, but my words got more shoe scuff on them, sending you into a hissy-fit.

You read the exxon (-mobil) CEO AGW denier propaganda poop sheet, & expel it on the internet. Of course, real scientists, you can't understand or you would know you're packing BS to the masses.

[oil pan 4]

I support man made global warming.
I am looking forward to snowy winters soon becoming a thing of the past.