Originally Posted by Ustwo

Ok now that I have some time I need to expound on this.

DC, your statement is almost everything thats wrong with the 'environmental' movement right now.

Yes, ozone pollution is a problem, its a bad thing. Combustion engines create pollutants which are bad for the environment, such as SO2, NO2, CO, and particulate matter, ALL of which are bad and should be reduced.

But you state 'CO2 emissions' not 'pollution' or what REALLY creates ozone pollution, NO2, but CO2 emissions as if CO2 is the major problem. You are trying to work in that fear, that buggaboo of global warming into the equation to scare people into doing SOMETHING now. Its interfering with really dealing with the real pollution. The cleanest, pollution free internal combustion engine would produce CO2 and water. If there was a new engine which did just that, even if it was quite expensive, I'd be in full support of making such engines mandatory is they would be eliminating huge amounts of measurable and verifiable environmental damage and potential harmful effects to humans.

Instead, we have made CO2 the main enemy, and therefore internal combustion the enemy no matter how 'clean' the burning. This is of course what many of the radical environmentalists want, they see the good of removing the other pollutants worth perpetuating the fear of global warming, even if not true. They think people are too stupid to do whats right, so they can say things like 'CO2 emissions causing ozone pollution' even though CO2 has nothing to do with ozone pollution.

One of the major issues with O3 (thats ozone) is damage to crops/plants, and interestingly increased CO2 helps to negate the negative effects of O3. Basically we are releasing a poison, O3, and releasing the antidote CO2 at least as far as plants are concerned. Animals on the other hand, not so much.