2 ms·
I mean, yes, this is what I explained, but in no way is the hydrocarbon necessary, it's just one of many alternative feedstocks for hydrogen.
by colechristensen 4y ago
I mean, yes, this is what I explained, but in no way is the hydrocarbon necessary, it's just one of many alternative feedstocks for hydrogen.
- dekhn 4y agoI don't think this is logical. You said "oil is not turned into fertilizer" but then you agree, oil can be used to do it. And, in reality, nearly all nitrogen fertilizer uses oil as the feedstock, so probably, in the future, don't say "you don't know what you're talking about" unless you are 100% technically correct, which in this case, I don't think you were.
- pfdietz 4y agoHe's saying oil (or any fossil fuel) doesn't have to be the feedstock from which ammonia is produced. That natural gas (not oil) is currently the leading feedstock is entirely beside the point. Agriculture can switch away from it at any time. And, in particular, this statement is figurative and literal bullshit: > Without that oil to turn into fertilizer, the only other chance is to have ruminants actively managed on a regenerative farm growing both meat and produce.