Where do sulphur dioxide emissions come from?
[url="http://www.lookchem.com/cas-891/89125-89-3.html"]Sulphur dioxide[/url] (SO2) is generally a byproduct of industrial processes and burning of fossil fuels. Ore smelting, coal-fired power generators and natural gas processing are the main contributors. In 2000, for instance, U.S. SO2 emissions were measured at 14.8 million tonnes - more than six times greater than Canada's 2.4 million tonnes. But the sources of SO2 emissions from the two countries are different. In Canada, 68% of emissions come from industrial sources and 27% comes from electric utilities (2000). In the U.S., 67% of emissions are from electric utilities (2002).

Canada cannot win the fight against acid rain on its own. Only reducing acidic emissions in both Canada and the U.S. will stop acid rain. More than half of the acid deposition in eastern Canada originates from emissions in the United States. Areas such as southeastern Ontario (Longwoods) and Sutton, Quebec receive about three-quarters of their acid deposition from the United States. In 1995, the estimated transboundary flow of sulphur dioxide from the United States to Canada was between 3.5 and 4.2 millions of tonnes per year.
Sulphur dioxide (SO2) is generally a byproduct of industrial processes and burning of fossil fuels. Ore smelting, coal-fired power generators and natural gas processing are the main contributors. In 2000, for instance, U.S. SO2 emissions were measured at 14.8 million tonnes - more than six times greater than Canada's 2.4 million tonnes. But the sources of SO2 emissions from the two countries are different. In Canada, 68% of emissions come from industrial sources and 27% comes from electric utilities (2000). In the U.S., 67% of emissions are from electric utilities (2002).



Canada cannot win the fight against acid rain on its own. Only reducing acidic emissions in both Canada and the U.S. will stop acid rain. More than half of the acid deposition in eastern Canada originates from emissions in the United States. Areas such as southeastern Ontario (Longwoods) and Sutton, Quebec receive about three-quarters of their acid deposition from the United States. In 1995, the estimated transboundary flow of sulphur dioxide from the United States to Canada was between 3.5 and 4.2 millions of tonnes per year.

#1
Posted 07/29/2008 03:09 AM   
[quote name='janelee' date='Jul 28 2008, 10:09 PM'][url="http://www.lookchem.com/cas-891/89125-89-3.html"]Sulphur dioxide[/url] (SO2) is generally a byproduct of industrial processes and burning of fossil fuels. Ore smelting, coal-fired power generators and natural gas processing are the main contributors. In 2000, for instance, U.S. SO2 emissions were measured at 14.8 million tonnes - more than six times greater than Canada's 2.4 million tonnes. But the sources of SO2 emissions from the two countries are different. In Canada, 68% of emissions come from industrial sources and 27% comes from electric utilities (2000). In the U.S., 67% of emissions are from electric utilities (2002).

Canada cannot win the fight against acid rain on its own. Only reducing acidic emissions in both Canada and the U.S. will stop acid rain. More than half of the acid deposition in eastern Canada originates from emissions in the United States. Areas such as southeastern Ontario (Longwoods) and Sutton, Quebec receive about three-quarters of their acid deposition from the United States. In 1995, the estimated transboundary flow of sulphur dioxide from the United States to Canada was between 3.5 and 4.2 millions of tonnes per year.
[right][snapback]417435[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Hmm, old statistics are really mediocre, especially in environmental statements. Also, I'm really not sure if you have an opinion on this or not, or maybe its referring to an old thread I never saw. I would like to hear your opinion if you have one though :)
[quote name='janelee' date='Jul 28 2008, 10:09 PM']Sulphur dioxide (SO2) is generally a byproduct of industrial processes and burning of fossil fuels. Ore smelting, coal-fired power generators and natural gas processing are the main contributors. In 2000, for instance, U.S. SO2 emissions were measured at 14.8 million tonnes - more than six times greater than Canada's 2.4 million tonnes. But the sources of SO2 emissions from the two countries are different. In Canada, 68% of emissions come from industrial sources and 27% comes from electric utilities (2000). In the U.S., 67% of emissions are from electric utilities (2002).



Canada cannot win the fight against acid rain on its own. Only reducing acidic emissions in both Canada and the U.S. will stop acid rain. More than half of the acid deposition in eastern Canada originates from emissions in the United States. Areas such as southeastern Ontario (Longwoods) and Sutton, Quebec receive about three-quarters of their acid deposition from the United States. In 1995, the estimated transboundary flow of sulphur dioxide from the United States to Canada was between 3.5 and 4.2 millions of tonnes per year.

[snapback]417435[/snapback]






Hmm, old statistics are really mediocre, especially in environmental statements. Also, I'm really not sure if you have an opinion on this or not, or maybe its referring to an old thread I never saw. I would like to hear your opinion if you have one though :)

#2
Posted 07/29/2008 04:30 PM   
Onions thats why your eyes water while chopping them.

Oh Canada don't have coal fired power plants.

You think sulfur dioxide is bad. Wait until Canada has a heavy water leak!!!! Or it seeps into the ground water. It's not a question of if, but when???
Just my IMHO, nothing more

Maybe your not aware of, heavy water. Google it. Make sure you and your family are a 1,000 miles away
Onions thats why your eyes water while chopping them.



Oh Canada don't have coal fired power plants.



You think sulfur dioxide is bad. Wait until Canada has a heavy water leak!!!! Or it seeps into the ground water. It's not a question of if, but when???

Just my IMHO, nothing more



Maybe your not aware of, heavy water. Google it. Make sure you and your family are a 1,000 miles away

Would you like SLI Support for your game?

nvidia.com_sli_request_form

Nvidia_SLI_Profile_Update#7_2011.03.01

#3
Posted 07/29/2008 04:37 PM   
[quote name='bobmillers123' date='Jul 29 2008, 11:37 AM']Onions thats why your eyes water while chopping them.

Oh Canada don't have coal fired power plants.

You think sulfur dioxide is bad. Wait until Canada has a heavy water leak!!!! Or it seeps into the ground water. It's not a question of if, but when???
Just my IMHO, nothing more

Maybe your not aware of, heavy water. Google it. Make sure you and your family are a 1,000 miles away
[right][snapback]417712[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Actually, heavy water really isn't that dangerous compared to many things....You would have to have a very significant amount of your daily water be heavy water. The figure I saw was that around 25% of your daily drinking water would have to be pure 'heavy water' in order for it to really start to harm your body. This is one of the last things I think I would worry about.
[quote name='bobmillers123' date='Jul 29 2008, 11:37 AM']Onions thats why your eyes water while chopping them.



Oh Canada don't have coal fired power plants.



You think sulfur dioxide is bad. Wait until Canada has a heavy water leak!!!! Or it seeps into the ground water. It's not a question of if, but when???

Just my IMHO, nothing more



Maybe your not aware of, heavy water. Google it. Make sure you and your family are a 1,000 miles away

[snapback]417712[/snapback]






Actually, heavy water really isn't that dangerous compared to many things....You would have to have a very significant amount of your daily water be heavy water. The figure I saw was that around 25% of your daily drinking water would have to be pure 'heavy water' in order for it to really start to harm your body. This is one of the last things I think I would worry about.

#4
Posted 07/29/2008 05:45 PM   
Janelee, We don't have sulfur dioxide emissions in the U.S. Just ask the administration in Washington D.C. Also, global warming is a hoax.

Of course you should check back around say January 20, 2009 and you will see some VERY different answers out of Washington D.C. when the new administration takes office and De Nile becomes MUCH more than just a river in Egypt!
Janelee, We don't have sulfur dioxide emissions in the U.S. Just ask the administration in Washington D.C. Also, global warming is a hoax.



Of course you should check back around say January 20, 2009 and you will see some VERY different answers out of Washington D.C. when the new administration takes office and De Nile becomes MUCH more than just a river in Egypt!

AMD quad core 955 BE @ 3.6GHz
Seagate 250GB SATA, Lite On DVD writer SATA
2x2GB DDR2 800Mhz RAM, Asus M4N82 mobo
Thermaltake 650 watt PSU, eVga GTX 260-216
Samsung 953 monitor, Windows 7
ATH AD700 headphones, Lian Li PC-7 YCF

#5
Posted 08/03/2008 12:29 AM   
[quote name='jonmichaelkelly' date='Aug 2 2008, 07:29 PM']Janelee, We don't have sulfur dioxide emissions in the U.S.  Just ask the administration in Washington D.C.  Also, global warming is a hoax.

Of course you should check back around say January 20, 2009 and you will see some VERY different answers out of Washington D.C. when the new administration takes office and De Nile becomes MUCH more than just a river in Egypt!
[right][snapback]419961[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Well, this is somewhat true. The executive office doesn't fully recognize global warming, but most of congress does, which is a start. Hopefully the new administration will be able to work together with congress to kick start implementing solutions. It seems like both major candidates will do a decent, albeit different, job to address global warming. Lately McCain (sp?) has been wavering a bit more towards the hardcore republican side, probably just to ensure that they vote during the election. My opinion is that if he does get in office he will go back to his Maverick self and work with both parties to more of an extent than most.


That being said, I am not endorsing McCain, nor am I endorsing Obama. Just trying to give an overview of how things are currently playing out.
[quote name='jonmichaelkelly' date='Aug 2 2008, 07:29 PM']Janelee, We don't have sulfur dioxide emissions in the U.S.  Just ask the administration in Washington D.C.  Also, global warming is a hoax.



Of course you should check back around say January 20, 2009 and you will see some VERY different answers out of Washington D.C. when the new administration takes office and De Nile becomes MUCH more than just a river in Egypt!

[snapback]419961[/snapback]






Well, this is somewhat true. The executive office doesn't fully recognize global warming, but most of congress does, which is a start. Hopefully the new administration will be able to work together with congress to kick start implementing solutions. It seems like both major candidates will do a decent, albeit different, job to address global warming. Lately McCain (sp?) has been wavering a bit more towards the hardcore republican side, probably just to ensure that they vote during the election. My opinion is that if he does get in office he will go back to his Maverick self and work with both parties to more of an extent than most.





That being said, I am not endorsing McCain, nor am I endorsing Obama. Just trying to give an overview of how things are currently playing out.

#6
Posted 08/04/2008 03:22 PM   
I also think that whomever is elected will work with the Congress to craft a global warming policy. I agree McCain MIGHT revert to his old self. If he is elected, I hope he does. If he does though, he will probably only be elected once. All I am looking for in a new executive branch is some competence. I think both candidates are competent. It is a little worrisome how cozy McCain is with the American Enterprise Institute.
I also think that whomever is elected will work with the Congress to craft a global warming policy. I agree McCain MIGHT revert to his old self. If he is elected, I hope he does. If he does though, he will probably only be elected once. All I am looking for in a new executive branch is some competence. I think both candidates are competent. It is a little worrisome how cozy McCain is with the American Enterprise Institute.

AMD quad core 955 BE @ 3.6GHz
Seagate 250GB SATA, Lite On DVD writer SATA
2x2GB DDR2 800Mhz RAM, Asus M4N82 mobo
Thermaltake 650 watt PSU, eVga GTX 260-216
Samsung 953 monitor, Windows 7
ATH AD700 headphones, Lian Li PC-7 YCF

#7
Posted 08/06/2008 09:12 AM   
[quote name='jonmichaelkelly' date='Aug 6 2008, 04:12 AM']I also think that whomever is elected will work with the Congress to craft a global warming policy.  I agree McCain MIGHT revert to his old self.  If he is elected, I hope he does.  If he does though, he will probably only be elected once.  All I am looking for in a new executive branch is some competence.  I think both candidates are competent.  It is a little worrisome how cozy McCain is with the American Enterprise Institute.
[right][snapback]421448[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I pretty much agree with all of this.
[quote name='jonmichaelkelly' date='Aug 6 2008, 04:12 AM']I also think that whomever is elected will work with the Congress to craft a global warming policy.  I agree McCain MIGHT revert to his old self.  If he is elected, I hope he does.  If he does though, he will probably only be elected once.  All I am looking for in a new executive branch is some competence.  I think both candidates are competent.  It is a little worrisome how cozy McCain is with the American Enterprise Institute.

[snapback]421448[/snapback]






I pretty much agree with all of this.

#8
Posted 08/06/2008 02:06 PM   
Scroll To Top