Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (315495)	12/14/2006 10:13:55 AM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1584709

The most conservative approach is to assume CO2. Besides, CO is going to be pretty quickly oxidized. You also don't have perfect combustion. I'm not a chemist or a coal plant engineer, but while I think most of the carbon becomes CO2, the amount that doesn't would be noticeable. Maybe 50 to 90% becomes CO2. As for most conservative approach generally that being more conservative is estimating that the effect is smaller not larger. If someone says "conservatively estimated at", they should err on the side of a lower estimate if they can't be sure of accuracy. "I don't know about the figures for coal production." Shrug. Find others. I wasn't disputing them, just saying I don't know.