California Government Flunks Chemistry

When natural gas burns, it produces two invisible gases (carbon dioxide and water) which form the basis of all life on earth.

California government believes these two invisible gases cause smog.

“California air quality regulators on Thursday voted to require all new space and water heaters sold in the state by 2030 have no emissions, a step toward phasing out the use of natural gas for heating homes and businesses.

The provision was adopted by the California Air Resources Board at a public meeting as part of a larger plan to reduce smog and bring the state into compliance with federal air quality standards over the next 15 years.”

California takes step away from natural gas to heat buildings | Reuters

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to California Government Flunks Chemistry

  1. arn says:

    Wait.
    As water has now become a pollutant just as CO2 according to our experts.
    How is it the even possible to pollute rivers and oceans?
    Is it possible to pollute a pollutant?

  2. Eli the Pit Bulldog says:

    Is it any wonder people are fleeing California in droves?
    Meanwhile here in Tennessee we’ve had enough. Tennessee is paving the way and fighting back against stupidity and degeneracy, and will be the first state to ban trans surgery on minors. Sorry Vanderbilt. Last night the Memphis police shut down an “all ages” drag show at the Memphis museum of science due to major push back from the good folks there. They’ve had enough.

  3. Gamecock says:

    First time I flew into LA, I was appalled by the smog. Decades later, the smog was gone.

    THEY FIXED IT.

    ‘The provision was adopted by the California Air Resources Board at a public meeting as part of a larger plan to reduce smog and bring the state into compliance with federal air quality standards over the next 15 years.”’

    The smog has already been fixed. And since when do you get 15 years to comply with the Feds? And I’ll betcha Cali standards are higher than federal standards, anyway.

    This article makes no sense. Penned by a thirteen-year old for a science fair project?

    • conrad ziefle says:

      We could discuss the modern situation endlessly, or should I say endless. I’m fearful; that modern English professors, not having the cognitive firepower to use adverbs, have decided that adverbs should be banned so that they can never have their poor understanding of the language challenged. You can bet that German and Spanish teachers don’t do the same.
      This is just one outcome of graduating too many college students, many of which just were not mentally fit for higher education, and now are angry that businesses recognize them for what they are, and not for what their certificate says they should be.
      Another is that when you have too many graduates in a field, they begin to look for work, which means finding problems to solve where there are no problems. Lawyers make unnecessary and usually harmful laws, environmentalists find pollutants among non-pollutants, and environmental disasters where none exists. Cosmetic surgeons find a new source of income from the genital mutilation of children, and the list goes on.

      • In the past it took a good six months to break a fresh graduate in, before you could think of putting them in front of a customer. Some persisted in believing they knew everything, and had to be shown the door at the end of their probationary period, doubtless to find a post in academia or government. With the destruction of the industrial base, there are few organisations which can provide the necessary training to convert academics into line engineers, who have a reasonable grasp of reality. Nowadays the emphasis is placed exclusively on academic qualifications, with experience considered irrelevant. This is curious because practically everything learned in universities is available in the literature to anybody with the intelligence, discipline and application to seek it out, yet the know how, which makes real world products possible is not captured. That is to be found in the minds of the dwindling number of practitioners, and would never be accepted for publication in any academic journal. What is worth knowing is generally a closely guarded state or commercial secret and not available to the academic world at all. We have too many universities and not enough commercial organisations to absorb them.

        • Gamecock says:

          The problem is management is too stupid to do their job. I.e., they can’t properly evaluate candidates, nor even their existing employees. So they look for training certs and degrees. Often not suitable for the evaluation, but they don’t know anything else.

    • Timo, not that one says:

      “THEY FIXED IT.”
      Yes, the adoption of catalytic converters and computer tuned combustion chambers and computer controlled fuel systems and evaporative systems brought an end to most city smog in the western world. Good job.
      That does not mean cart blanche to ban fuels that do not cause any smog or pollution. What has happened is that the fuels that caused pollution, no longer have the same adverse effects. What has a bad effect now is the environmental damage caused by removing forests and farm land to build, near worthless, industrial wind farms and
      solar farms.
      The world has reached the best place for human quality of life in all history. We should build on that, not tear it down and return us to the short, miserable lives all our ancestors suffered.

  4. oeman 50 says:

    Er, combustion of natural gas also forms a small amount of NOx, produced from the nitrogen in the air used tp support that combustion. NOx is a precursor to ozone, which cases smog.

    However, modern combustion turbines treat their exhaust gas with catalysts and ammonia injection that transform the NOx back to nitrogen and water. The process is not 100% efficient, so some small amounts get emitted. But compared to emissions from cars, it’s a drop in the bucket.

  5. Eli the Pit Bulldog says:

    The clown show with hurricanes begins, with a potential strike in Florida next week. Now Twitter folks are tweeting their cat 5 pics of Michael.
    I have a degree in Engineering Sciences, honing in on both structural and Mechanical engineering, with 40 years plus experience. I drove relief supplies to Michael, Andrew, and Hugo. If Michael was a 5, then Andrew was an 8, and Hugo a high end 6. You get my point. The NHC has been upping the winds of these hurricanes lately to make a point (about climate change)
    While this Floridian is a true patriot, he’s not posting cat 5 damage. Look at the trees. I’ll give them a low end cat 3.
    https://twitter.com/catturd2/status/1573792379152130048?s=21

    If you follow that thread there’s a pic of a cell tower downed, but look at the row of pine trees in the background. I see low end cat 2 at best there.

    While there was some extreme damage, it wasn’t from wind. It was from storm surge. We saw extreme damage from the surge, and a block away slightly uphill away from the surge most of the buildings had much of the roof left.
    With Andrew, the trees were nubs. Much much better with Hugo.
    I’m not criticizing anyone that lived thru it. I nearly died twice from Hurricane Agnes in the 70s, which was a low end cat 2 at best but that was bad enough.
    My point here is whatever soon to be hurricane Ian does in the gulf, also be wary of how it’s rated. There’s plenty of platforms and buoys in the gulf with weather stations, and on shore as well. More on that as it evolves. The great and late Dr William Gray would be displeased at what the NHC is doing

  6. Martin says:

    Just a side remark: in the reaction equation a factor of 2 is missing before O2 and H2O.

    • Peter Carroll says:

      Yes, Two atoms of oxygen, somehow, become three after the reaction.
      Also, where have two atoms of hydrogen gone? They start with 4, in CH4, but have only two in the result, H2O.
      If CO2 is produced in the reaction, then the other byproduct of the reaction must simply be, hydrogen.

  7. Peter Carroll says:

    Only if coefficients are added.

  8. jb says:

    Well, besides what Martin wrote about to balance the eqn,
    the eqn only represents total, complete combustion.

    If burned in air, other products come out too: CO, NO, N2O, NO2, etc.
    But, these are all colorless too, albeit CO is can kill you.

  9. conrad ziefle says:

    I have two recommendations for reader’s review:
    If you are not a fan of “The Dark Horse” Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying, two PhDs in Biology, who examine various modern issues. Yesterday, they did a bang up job analyzing the proposed “citizen written” Chilean “science-based” constitution, which was rejected by two-thirds of the Chilean citizens. Turns out that the proposed constitution was just a laundry list of insane progressive ideas: like gender bla bla, climate change bla bla, animal rights and planet rights (=>) human rights, freedoms guaranteed but controlled at will by the national government, etc. etc.
    It is a grand expose of what the Marxo-Nazis and WEF is trying to force upon the world population. Well worth listening to, found here and other places:
    https://www.audacy.com/podcasts/bret-weinstein-darkhorse-podcast-49987/142-constitutional-myopia-bret-weinstein-heather-heying-darkhorse-livestream-1525771775
    Second: My brother recommended this book to me awhile back and I just got into it in the last two weeks. I’m jealous that I did not write this book. It is so simply written that even a global warming fanatic can read and understand it, yet it is comprehensive in its discussion of fossil fuels and the insanity of trying to replace them with diffuse energy sources. I got my copy on Kindle. The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels by Alex Epstein.
    https://www.amazon.com/s?k=the+moral+case+for+fossil+fuels+by+alex+epstein&crid=L7OUZ6WB0TOD&sprefix=the+moral+case+%2Caps%2C171&ref=nb_sb_ss_ts-doa-p_2_15

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.