Slightly clayey sand
The device that is used to remove some pollutants before they are released by smokestacks is called a scrubber. A scrubber is also used to control gaseous emissions, especially acid gases.
Rain and snow remove dust, pollen, smoke and other pollutants from the air by weighing them down. The pollutants are then pressed into trees and other things until rain once again washes them away.
This process is usually called bio-remediation. This term can also be used to cover processes like using cattails to clean up water pollution, grasses to remove heavy metals from soils, or Zebra Mussels to remove organic pollutants.
All cost/benefit is driven by the specifics of the situation. In this case terms like "all pollution" and "regardless of cost" would make the question unanswerable. Like the control of toxins in workplace environments there is a "no impact level" for pollutants. Below this limit the natural assimilative capacity of the system can remove the material. Risk analysis is based on the fact that zero is risk is never attainable. With regard to the cost factors - pollution control systems themselves have a calculable cost - the added worth of supporting a population through wages, infrastructure through taxes and health care through employee benefits which offset the acceptance of a level of pollution are more difficult to peg. These would come into play in calculating "regardless of cost". In the example of the use of fertilizers and pesticides in the agribusiness, the total elimination of these potential pollutants could cause massive food shortages and starvation - not a cost that people would be willing to pay.
Naturally, condensation refers to the change of state - water vapor into water liquid. In a technologically enhanced Future, under future Technological Conditions, condensation may be employed in the same manner to CO2.
Natural processes will eventually remove air pollutants, if we stop inputting them at such massive levels. The prospect of removing air pollutants is interesting and seems favorable, but is ultimately myopic. What happens even if we can suddenly remove pollutants from the air? Where can we put them? In the ground? This would undoubtedly engender new issues. No, the question is not how to remove air pollutants, but how to live without producing them.
precipitation
2 general ways are to avoid emitting things that will be pollutants and promoting things, like trees, that will help remove pollutants. To avoid emitting pollutants you can optimize processes to have lower emissions of everything including pollutants, remove the pollutants before releasing (like filters and scrubbing towers), process the emissions to change them (like catalytic converters), change to processes that do not emit pollutants.
Not put pollutants in in the first place.... On a more serious note: bacteria that will feed off the pollutants is usually your best bet. It is infinitely harder to remove pollutants than it is to put them in.
it is a device to remove pollutants and dust from factory smoke
Remove harmful pollutants from the exhaust gases.
The device that is used to remove some pollutants before they are released by smokestacks is called a scrubber. A scrubber is also used to control gaseous emissions, especially acid gases.
A purification device where smoke is passed through water to remove pollutants.
it is scrubber
No. Lightning actually produces small amounts of pollutants such as ozone and nitrogen oxides. The rain the usually accompanies lightning can remove some pollutants.
They remove irritants and pollutants.
Rain and snow remove dust, pollen, smoke and other pollutants from the air by weighing them down. The pollutants are then pressed into trees and other things until rain once again washes them away.