Buring hydrocarbons releases CO2 and H2O. The EPA or some court or whatever in the US has decreed that CO2 is a pollutant (please stop breathing now).

C + O2 = CO2; in atomic masses that's
12 + 16 x 2 = 44, i.e. 1 kg of CO2,
so 1 kg of high carbon fuel yields 3.7 kg CO2.

For methane,
CH4 + 2xO2 = CO2 + 2xH2O which is
16 + 2 x 16 x 2 = 44 + 2 x 18,
so 1 kg of CH4 yields 44/16 yields 2.75 CO2. 

Of course, H2O is a greenhouse gas, so it's only a matter of time before that is declared a pollutant.




These type of energy boxes seem to appear over and over again. The previous I saw was at a French supermarket: Wooden 600W energy box to heat your apartment.
I gathered that 6 light bulbs might do the same for cheaper...
It looked nice though. 

The people at Kibbutz Tzora are also very inventive - www.freepatentsonline.com/6739669.html

"More than three kilograms of pollutants are generated for each kilogram of fossil fuel burned."

Sounds suspiciously overstated to me...

How could this system reduce pollutants emitted by 90%? I went to Phoebus' website; it is extremely sparse on teh information. However, the understanding I've cobbled together from there and The Inq's article says that this unit is both electric and gas/oil/distillate/somekindapetrol. So it switches between these... let's say you live in an area where electricity is rather cheap so the unit's really clever algorithm tells the heating unit to just keep usin' that juice. 90% reduction in pollution with that electric, right?

Not really- I'm inferring that they came up with 90 by assuming the power plant at which the electricity was generated is either very green or has -excellent- enviro standards & controls. Let's face it, folks: cheap energy is usually dirty. Cleaning it up costs. Solar's expensive. So is wind... hydro is a bit better but it's a limited resource and totally screws over the local (& often other) ecosystems.

In conclusion, this newfangled energy box, wise thought it may be, is probably not as great as the inventors claim. Sadly, most things aren't. They -could- actually program the thing to constantly find the most environmentally-sound source of energy: it'd be difficult, but it could be done. Phoebus (or someone else) could even rate energy sources and give them a composite "value" score which takes "green" into account and even weights it according to user preference. 
It would be a huge strength if this box could be modified to the individual user's taste: eviro-conscious home users and even large corporations seeking out carbon credits or good press could benefit, as well as those penny-pinchers needing to save every bit for more important things. These Israelis are onto something, but they shouldn't go around making borderline-boastful claims of things like "90% pollution reduction" the chances of which seem remote, even in the most advantageous, not to mention unlikely, of conditions. So if you're reading, fellas:
1. Make more realistic claims, or at least add in -some- kind of reference point so we know what you're talking about.
2. We know you've spent a lot of time programming your clever little hybrid-box-child, but it could probably benefit from a lot more versatility. Make it user-programmable, or make an add-on module with said functionality. It's not easy, but that would be something REALLY new and inspiring, perhaps even revolutionary.