No, you're missing the point. Everything pollutes, we all know that, zero points .. The question is how much do things pollute, and is it worth doing anything about the quantity, for the cost and inconvenience, compared with other things.
If One gas boiler polluted 1,000,000,000 times as much as the same sort of pollution as cars, you wouldn't bother about the cars, would you? If all the boilers in the country caused deaths of 10 people a year, you'd probably say , well, how else could we heat our homes for fewer deaths.
If converting entirely to electric would cause only 9 deaths but cost £100bn, you'd say , sorry, it's not worth swapping.
I've said it about 3 times now in different ways, I don't see why you won't understand it.
Saying "cars pollute therefore we must stop all cars" - is obviously wrong.
SO you have to do some science and decide WHICH cars, and how, etc etc, Yes???
It's like British rail saying safety is their number one priority. No it isn't. Number 1 is to run a train service. The SAFEST thing to do is run no trains.
"You can't put a value on life", is also rubbish. If it's true, have an ambulance permanently parked in every street.
All of these arguments are the type which children have to learn are wrong in their first few years. Past about 11 you'd be put in the dunce's class.
There's also the STRAW MAN arguments which start "so you're saying...." which are puerile nonsense. Look it up.
