Quote:
Originally Posted by Undertoad
but that is neither a graph nor a chart.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Undertoad
Knee jerk assumptions department: after 50 years of cleaning up vehicle engine emissions,
what's worse for the environment: a 6210cc engine Ford F150 truck, or a 30cc engine leaf blower?
Not even close.
...
In fact the car and truck actually cleaned the air:
http://www.edmunds.com/car-reviews/f...af-blower.html |
UT, when I read your posts such as these, I assume you are allusively addressing climate change.
And they give me the impression you believe that either it does not exist, it is not man-made,
it is not worth worrying about, and/or nothing can/should be done about it.
For example, in the earlier post cited above, your comment seems to be that
those autos' exhaust are less polluting than the exhaust from leaf blowers.
But the table in that post does not extend the quantities of pollutants to totals
based on number of units (cars vs blowers) and the number of hours each would be in (worldwide) operation.
Likewise, does the "CO" in your table refer to carbon monoxide only, or both carbon mono- and di-oxides ?
My understanding is that concerns over climate change are primarily an issue of carbon dioxide,
and so your table and comment do not seem to focus on climate change, per se.
Have you formed specific opinions for yourself about arthropogenic climate change,
and what, if anything, should or could done about it ?
.