Talk:Flue-gas emissions from fossil-fuel combustion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Chemical and Bio Engineering  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemical and Bio Engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Chemical and Bio Engineering articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Energy  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

Pollutant category[edit]

I had removed the Category:Pollutants since I placed the article in the more specific category of Category:Air pollution. Alan Liefting 22:24, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment. Alan, the Category:Pollutants only has about a dozen articles. Seven of them (namely Nitrogen Oxide, Nitrogen Oxide, Nitrogen Dioxide, Peroxyacyl Nitrates (PANs), Ozone, Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) and SO2) are air pollutants. If we transferred all of them to the "more specific" Category:Air pollution, the Category:Pollutants would be sadly depleted.
But that isn't my main point. My main point is that readers coming to Wikipedia to search for information about a pollutant will probably look for the specific pollutant's name (like Nitrogen dioxide) ... or they might look for "pollutants" ... or they might look for "air pollutants" ... or they might look for "smog" or "haze" or "greenhouse gas" ... or for many other keywords. I don't think we should limit them to the point that if they don't happen to search for the "more specific" keywords of "air pollutants", they will leave empty-handed. Quite the contrary, we should try to think of all the possible category keywords they might use and make sure that we list in those categories. In other words, make it easier for them to find what they are looking for ... not harder.mbeychok 23:27, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

BTU available to heat water divided by lbs. of carbon dioxide emitted[edit]

comparing coal, natural gas, wood, diesel, etc. It sure would be nice to have these numbers posted. There is a lot of anti-coal discussion, generally in the favor of natural gas. I've seen numbers stating that natural gas per available BTU emits over 2/3 of the carbon dioxide that is emitted by coal. Can we clarify this?

Another thing: Dry Ice (100% carbon dioxide) is typically made from natural gas---because the carbon dioxide available for extraction from natural gas is dramatically higher that it is in the coal flue gas

Lots of emotion on this topic....and not enough factual data

Thanks for helping and providing quotable sources.207.178.98.67 01:15, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

For the natural gas and coal compositions and for the amounts of excess combustion air used for each fuel in this article's table:
CO2 produced from the natural gas = 11,600 × 0.088 = 1021 SCF per million Btu of fuel burned
CO2 produced from the coal= 12,714 × 0.137 = 1742 SCF per million Btu of coal burned
Thus, that means that the CO2 produced by burning natural gas is only 59% as much as the amount of CO2 produced from burning coal. - mbeychok 04:58, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

First sentence needs work[edit]

Good day, the meaning of the first sentence is not clear to me. It seems like it was poorly edited. It currently reads: "Flue gas emissions from fossil fuel combustion refers to the combustion product gas resulting from the much as 10 to 25 volume percent or more of the flue gas." Can someone edit? I do not know the subject well enough to do so. Thanks, Hu Gadarn (talk) 17:43, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Almost complete vandalism by User:24.154.119.71 on 15:22 of Nov.7, 2010.[edit]

In response to Hu Gadarn just above, the reason that the introduction made no sense to you is that User:24.154.119.71 committed vandalism by removing almost all of the lead-in paragraphs and their references on November 7, 2010.

I created this article years ago and have since left Wikipedia ... and no one seems to have corrected that vandalism which was done over a year ago. It was purely by happenstance that I saw the above remark by Hu Gadarn and have now corrected the vandalism. mbeychok (talk) 22:55, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

  • Much apperciated! Hu Gadarn (talk) 14:36, 17 February 2012 (UTC)