Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Red Badger

If you are going to burn the plastic anyway as jet fuel, you might as well burn it in furnaces, use anti pollution smokestack technology and save the cost of liquefying the plastic. The amount of carbon dioxide released will be about the same and maybe even less with modern capturing techniques.


13 posted on 05/17/2021 1:36:47 PM PDT by allendale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: allendale

Depends on what the heat of the furnace is being utilized for. Also, burning polyethylene produces a lot of black carbon soot.


15 posted on 05/17/2021 1:43:51 PM PDT by Olog-hai ("No Republican, no matter how liberal, is going to woo a Democratic vote." -- Ronald Reagan, 1960)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: allendale

Very good point. Very basic. But, does not fit Rube Goldberg ideology.


25 posted on 05/17/2021 2:17:17 PM PDT by Cold Heart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: allendale

But then you won’t have made the jet fuel. I think the main thing they are excited about is making a liquid fuel.


50 posted on 05/18/2021 7:11:08 AM PDT by ecomcon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson