this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2024
63 points (90.9% liked)

United States | News & Politics

7227 readers
155 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

By Brett Wilkins

September 12, 2024

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] InvertedParallax@lemm.ee 10 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

Sigh.

OK, this is basically bad metrics.

Yes, by tonnage NG produces a lot of co2, but they're measuring gas emissions from both, while coal has non-gas emissions they don't count.

They're basically comparing the worst case NG emissions with the beyond best case coal emissions assuming we forced them to use maximum particulate reclamation and carbon capture and sequestration.

Which is great, but we have no large-scale working examples of that in this country, and this is the kind of BS they spout to get people to let them build more plants with minimum protections then act shocked when we say anything.

NG produces co2, but that's about it, it's the cleanest fossil fuel we have, if they have a problem with that they should push for renewable or nuclear.

BTW, for future lessons, this is modern lobbying now: claim numbers from a solution you have 0 intention of implementing just so they'll let you get started, then do whatever you want once their back is turned.

The moment it's off the ground they parade kids crying about not understanding why their daddies are losing their jobs, making everybody else the monster.

[โ€“] Teepo@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago

It seems to also factor in leaks of NG, which is much more potent as a greenhouse gas than CO2.

load more comments (2 replies)