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.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : Green Oasis Environmental, Inc. (GRNO) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Chylek who wrote (9452)	5/30/1998 10:35:00 AM
From: Charles A. King	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 13091

Maybe if everybody who was pricing a new car or truck would also figure the money saved over the years because of the difference in fuel efficiency between gasoline and diesel, more diesel engines would be sold. In the coming years it is possible that fuel economy will not be the only consideration in comparing gasoline and diesel. It depends on possible new regulations yet to be dreamed up in the D of C. Congress has not yet decided whether it will do anything to try to reduce global warming. I assume in that regard, diesel fuel efficiency is better for global warming because it puts less carbon compounds in the air. Am I right? Zeev, anybody? Anyway, carbon compounds are not the only gaseous chemicals that contribute to global warming. There is a compound called laughing gas, nitrous oxide, that is produced by the catalytic converter that is 300 times more effective in producing heat trapping effects than carbon dioxide. What I am saying is that if in coming years it is decided to effect policy to reduce global warming, laws and regulations may make the diesel engine far more popular than it is now. Unfortunately I don't know how the diesel engine compares with the gasoline engine plus catalytic converter in producing NO. Car Part May Add to Global Warming Friday, May 29, 1998; 5:49 a.m. EDT NEW YORK (AP) -- Catalytic converters have gone a long way toward cutting smog from automobiles in the last two decades, but federal regulators say the devices are a growing cause of global warming, The New York Times reported today. The Environmental Protection Agency says that converters, which break down smog-causing nitrogen and oxygen from car exhaust, are rearranging the compounds to form nitrous oxide -- a potent greenhouse gas. Nitrous oxide, known as laughing gas, is more than 300 times more potent than carbon dioxide, the most common of the greenhouse gases that trap heat in the Earth's atmosphere. Nitrous oxide makes up about 7.2 percent of the gases cited in global warming, the EPA said in a study published this spring. Vehicles fitted with catalytic converters produced nearly half of that nitrous oxide. ''You've got people trying to solve one problem, and as is not uncommon, they've created another,'' Wylie Barbour, an EPA official who worked on the study, told the Times. Automakers say they could fix the catalytic converters, but some environmentalists say the problem will exist as long as cars run on gasoline. Nitrous oxide also comes from nitrogen-based fertilizer and manure from farm animals. It is not regulated because the Clean Air Act was written in 1970 to control smog, not global warming. No regulations exist to control gases that are believed to cause global warming. Last winter, the United States joined other industrialized nations at a meeting in Kyoto, Japan, in agreeing to lower emissions of greenhouse gases to 5 percent below 1990 levels, over the next 10 to 15 years. The U.S. Senate has yet to approve the agreement and no federal rules have been written. The EPA will seek public comment on its study. c Copyright 1998 The Associated Press search.washingtonpost.com Charles