Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by jandrese 3078 days ago
They're more carbon neutral than dino diesel. Of course energy is still needed to convert the soybeans into something you can burn in an engine, plus all of the cultivation and transportation costs.

The intent is that this is grown on lands that would otherwise lay fallow, so there shouldn't be a large deforestation concern.
1 comments
cantrip 3078 days ago
You either are or you aren't, you can't be "more" carbon neutral. And anyway, I'm not asking if it's better for the environment than fossil fuels, I'm asking if the claim that it is carbon neutral is true or not.
link
stcredzero 3078 days ago
You either are or you aren't, you can't be "more" carbon neutral.

Well, if you're going to be that pedantic about it, then nothing we know of is technically carbon neutral. We might be off by an atom or two!

link
cantrip 3078 days ago
I was clarifying in case the author of the comment was unsure what "carbon neutral" means. It's not a comparative term, so it confuses the discussion to use it as such, just as unfunny comments derail discussion.
link
stcredzero 3078 days ago
It's not a comparative term, so it confuses the discussion to use it as such, just as unfunny comments derail discussion.

"Either it is or it isn't," implies that it's a binary. That's incorrect and muddies the waters. It's quantitative in a practical sense, as in geography or geology, not in an absolute sense as in mathematics. So "more carbon neutral" can be sensibly interpreted in this quantitative sense. Your use of language implying that it's a binary, "confuses the discussion to use it as such."

You probably think it's "unfunny" because you missed the logical distinction. Now that it has been explained to you how you were the one who derailed the discussion in the first place with bad logic, you probably still think it's "unfunny."

link
cantrip 3078 days ago
I honestly can't for the life of me understand what you're trying to say here.

The poster said "They're more carbon neutral than dino diesel."

I was simply stating that not only was I not arguing otherwise (if we're assuming "more carbon neutral" means better for the environment), but also clarifying what the term means (the binary state of being carbon neutral).

I think your statement was unfunny because I did not personally find it funny, nor do I expect others to. Not for any other nefarious reason.

link
stcredzero 3078 days ago
I honestly can't for the life of me understand what you're trying to say here.

Thanks for confirming one of my theories.

link