Jeff Fink wrote:
Repeat after me 100 times: CO2 is not a pollutant. CO2 is not a pollutant. CO2 is not a pollutant.
Of course it is a pollutant! That is an absurd assertion. Excessive CO2 causes harm, and it is injected into the atmosphere by people, therefore it is a pollutant.
Any substance is a pollutant in some circumstances and in some amounts, but not in other circumstances or concentrations. Take salt, for example. Two-thirds of the earth is covered by salt water, and we cannot survive without eating salt, so it is obviously not a pollutant in the ocean or in your body. However, if you plow salt into a productive field in a farm, the way the Romans supposedly did in Carthage, it permanently destroys the land. If you spread salt over roads in the U.S. to melt snow, it causes terrific damage to the surroundings. Therefore it is a pollutant.
Please do not replace scientific analysis with empty slogans. Repeating simplistic, mindless nonsense 100 times does not make it true. This is a science discussion forum, so let us have rigor.
If we have to capture the carbon in CO2, then we really can't burn it in the first place.
We can burn it. It is possible to burn it and capture the CO2. But it will probably not be cost-effective. Also, this reduces atmospheric oxygen which is a growing problem.
- Jed
