A single cruise ship does more damage in one day than 50 people who drive a car every day of their life until they die of old age. The idea that any one average Joe has had a hand in this is a massive and intentional corporate driven fallacy to keep the public unaware of just exactly what magnitude of damage a very small percentage of people are doing to the environment.
You’re conflating greenhouse gas emissions with particulate pollution. Particulates damage lungs and drop temperatures, but fall out of the atmosphere within a few weeks of emission into the troposphere.
I get what you’re saying, that heavy fuel oil is much worse for pollution, but I don’t think that the difference between the carbon emission rate between heavy fuel oil and gasoline is enough for an accusation of conflation when my initial point was that a single cruise liner burns 150 metric tons of fuel in a day.
Can you visualize 150 metric tons of fuel? Cars measure their intake by gallons.
That 0.05 difference is the discrepancy between saying that’s only 49 lifetimes worth of car driving vs 50.
I mean in defense of the other person. It sounds more like the argument is trying to encourage a bigger action. Like don’t just do your part, vote/participate for what actually changes things in a larger scale.
The very first sentence of the article reads “calculating CO2 emissions” and doesn’t mention or convert to sulfate emissions at all. What are you even talking about?
What I’m doing is pointing out that change has to start with the most damaging factors in our society. I’m not discouraging action, I’m only revealing the scale of the contributors.
A single cruise ship does more damage in one day than 50 people who drive a car every day of their life until they die of old age. The idea that any one average Joe has had a hand in this is a massive and intentional corporate driven fallacy to keep the public unaware of just exactly what magnitude of damage a very small percentage of people are doing to the environment.
You’re good dude. It’s not your fault.
https://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/as-it-happens-wednesday-edition-1.4277147/a-cruise-ship-s-emissions-are-the-same-as-1-million-cars-report-1.4277180
You’re conflating greenhouse gas emissions with particulate pollution. Particulates damage lungs and drop temperatures, but fall out of the atmosphere within a few weeks of emission into the troposphere.
CO2 accumulates, and raises temperatures.
You don’t think heavy fuel oil releases CO2? Heavy fuel oil releases a ratio of 0.85 carbon specific content by weight vs gasoline’s 0.90.
https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/co2-emission-fuels-d_1085.html
I get what you’re saying, that heavy fuel oil is much worse for pollution, but I don’t think that the difference between the carbon emission rate between heavy fuel oil and gasoline is enough for an accusation of conflation when my initial point was that a single cruise liner burns 150 metric tons of fuel in a day.
Can you visualize 150 metric tons of fuel? Cars measure their intake by gallons.
That 0.05 difference is the discrepancy between saying that’s only 49 lifetimes worth of car driving vs 50.
The stats linked above are for the sulfate emissions.
What you’re doing is trying to discourage action, and that’s not ok here.
I mean in defense of the other person. It sounds more like the argument is trying to encourage a bigger action. Like don’t just do your part, vote/participate for what actually changes things in a larger scale.
The very first sentence of the article reads “calculating CO2 emissions” and doesn’t mention or convert to sulfate emissions at all. What are you even talking about?
What I’m doing is pointing out that change has to start with the most damaging factors in our society. I’m not discouraging action, I’m only revealing the scale of the contributors.