Quote:
Originally Posted by ssiguy
Many places {like British Columbia} are developing natural gas on a huge scale trying to justify it as being a clean energey source to make themselves feel better which is complete bunk.
Berkely knows that there is absolutely, positively NOTHING clean about natural gas. It is a dirty fossil fuel. Full stop. Calling NG clean is like those that espouse "clean coal", there is no such thing. NG truly scares me because it allows governments and companies to proclaim that they are reducing emissions by using it creating a totally false narrative. Natural gas is very bad for the environment but governments {like BC} try to convinve their populations that it is an ideal "bridge" technology and hoping people will fall for it for they can get their hands on all that juicy revenue. This is a very dangerous road as it prolongs our economy's essential requirement of getting off all fossil fuels energy.
The good people of Berkely know that we have no time to waste in getting off ALL fossil fuels if we are to avert catastophy.
|
A cleaner energy more accurately. From a short term pollution point of view, it emits no SOX, NOX, or other smog forming emissions and no particulate matter during the burning of natural gas.
I think we often (in the developed world) view air pollution in terms of climate change when a lot of the world and geographies still battle smog and particulate matter.