You are assuming complete combustion to CO2, no CO, and no multiple-carbon products.
Cheers!
Cheers!
Strictly speaking, you're right, of course. I believe that I used the term "rough calculation" in my original post.
For estimating the difference between the claimed 40 tons and the (roughly) calculated 2.2 tons, though, I really don't think those assumptions are especially harmful to the accuracy.