I believe in the science of basic math... just kidding!

Can't even apply the 'figure don't lie but liars figure' rule because the math is so darn wrong.

I know that the chemical reaction involves using air which would add to the weight. Gas has a mixture of about 14.3 air to 1 vaporized gas. Assuming all that the gas is carbon atoms (solid carbon) and it tripled its weight with 2 oxygen atoms, that’s 7x3 or 21 lbs of co2.

All true, if as you say the assumption is that diesel is all carbon. As with many substances the exact chemical composition varies, but diesel is generally accepted as C 12 H 23. Hydrogen is of course the lightest atom in the known elements. There is considerable debate about tonnage calculations when phase change from liquid to gas is involved.
I wrote a paper where I calculated from all oil produced since 1859 (the beginning of the oil industry) from excellent worldwide production records kept since that time, that the max amount of CO2 created is around 7 parts per million. At the time I presented this, that was for 157 years of oil and gas consumption.
This of course is a far cry from the DISASTEROUS 67 ppm that has been added to the atmosphere by evil mankind (current NASA data says CO2 is now at 417 ppm). In my presentation I suggested that there was no reason nature couldn't readily utilize this "additional" CO2, which spawned the reactionary response that plants could indeed detect the difference between natural and man made CO2 because of various non-extant isotopes and what I affectionately call the Acky Acky Poo Poo response in plant life to fossil fuel CO2. I try not to laugh, but this was the refutation I got from the people who also pointed as proof to ancient, primordial forests which had been encased in glaciers being exposed by man made climate change in recent years. Never mind that it was somewhat warmer when these forests grew, logic cannot get in the way of SCIENCE!!!
Also consider that not all oil is burned, depending on the consumption trends in any given year more than 45% of oil produced is used as a chemical feedstock, most of which releases no CO2 to the atmosphere.

And that's the other thing. They say 'Carbon' but don't say which type and when they do it's the wrong one. Carbon Dioxide is necessary for the breathing cycle between animals and plants. If they had said Carbon Monoxide was the problem instead of Carbon Dioxide then maybe their lies would've been more believable. It's frickin' Science 101 and one of the first things kids used to be taught in school.

A typical college grad can't tell the difference between CO and CO2, it just isn't covered in Gender Studies and Social Justice degree programs. Come to think of it, neither is meaningful employment after graduation. And I have asked college grads who have graduated with honors this very question.
Over the last 10 years I've worked with a number of brilliant young people--- who can't write a sentence on a piece of paper and be able to read it back to you. They can't spell and can't make sense of what they wrote themselves if they have some semblance of penmanship. Basic math, addition, subtraction, multiplication and division completely eludes them. Keep in mind what I said at first, these are intelligent, talented and brilliant people who were robbed of an education- an entire generation almost. That pisses me off more than anything else I've ever had to deal with.

Well said!

Where did you study power mechanics?

power mechanics?

The study of internal combustion engines

Well that was obvious, but this meme deals more with chemistry and physics. Are you looking for a good mechanics school?

14.3 isn't stochiometric

Stoichiometric combustion is theoretical.

I understand that

So you also understand that modern furnace combustion has recycled unburned gases for decades, that since 1975 cars have been using catalytic converters and other methods to eliminate unburned gases? Diesel vehicles have been transitioned to the same standards and Tier 4 eliminates the same problem. Stoichiometric combustion has been a non-issue for decades.

8 channel three fuel burners with secondary dual fuel burners, seven gas stack analyzers with five gas analyzers in between the burners and three different scrubbers before the stack.
I have forgotten more about combustion than most people know.

Somebody put their fingers on the scale... hmmmm.. I wonder why?