Quote:
Originally Posted by edslunch
There’s something called engineering where they design to meet specific outcomes. True it’s not proven until built but it’s not a case of building a random plant and hoping it works.
|
It is just theoretical and has no empirical evidence to support the claim. That is kind of important, don't you think. Especially considering the claim? Consider this is the claim.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure
Overall, Canadian LNG releases 25% less emissions compared to Chinese/India sourced LNG.
|
This is suggesting that Canadian LNG, essentially super-cooled methane gas, releases less carbon dioxide than LNG from China or India when burned. How is this possible? LNG is super-cooled methane, regardless of location it came from. Unless someone is suggesting that the process used to cool methane is superior in Canada than anywhere else that claim doesn't make sense. To make that claim there needs to be some empirical evidence to support that theory that Canadian LNG has 25% less carbon. If you buy this, then don't you have to consider the cost and impact of shipping the LNG to other countries, which certainly has to have a significant impact, no? I get that we have pride in the things we produce, but there has to be something behind the claims? I'm just asking, how the hell this claim makes sense in any way? Seems like it is something that just doesn't add up?