Has the manufacturer even calculated how much energy is needed for production and how long it will take for the corresponding CO2 emissions to be amortized?
We are living in strange times...
A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.
Rules
This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.
Has the manufacturer even calculated how much energy is needed for production and how long it will take for the corresponding CO2 emissions to be amortized?
We are living in strange times...
And trees that are planted in cities are not seeded. They are grown in a forestry until they reach a certain height. And then dug up with machines transported with machines and then planted with machines. The CO2 produced to plant a single tree also takes quite a while to be absorbed by that tree.
You see, trees get in the way when we want to put down more asphalt to make more room for cars. We need more lanes for cars to park in and more parking lots for cars to park in. The goal is to turn the city into a place devoid of anything but asphalt. Then with no access to dirt to grow food or water to keep them alive, the people will be 100% dependent on their capitalist overlords. Everyone wins.
Insert random copypasta about biotech breakthrough that turns water and CO2 and nutrients into sustainable building materials which sounds like space age technology but it's just trees
Back when I was a kid, trees still lived under water.
You can’t charge a subscription fee for trees.
What you can do is take all the trees and put them in a tree museum and charge the people a dollar and a half to see them.
These algae also produce biogas that can be used for heating or producing electricity.
Damn if only trees created something gaseous that was useful
They emit carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, and oxygen, which causes rust in metals and aging in humans. So it's a negative really...
All these braindead silicon valley tech bros trynna reinvent existing solutions to problems in very expensive and unnecessary ways, marketing it as "revolutionary" and "groundbreaking"
This just makes me think it’s an aquarium that needs to be cleaned.
People really like vandalizing trees, diseases exist, and they are less efficient carbon sinks
Like how we found it’s better to feed cattle seaweed than grass but nobody wants to because it’s different
Carbon sinks? Dude, people are planting trees in cities for the shade.
I would support legislation that mandated these be used around the highest carbon emitting facilities. Maybe a few very well designed structures (algae tanks) in very densely populated cities.
These would be in no way a replacement for trees in a community but, I could see forcing the corporations to use them. Such as those that must pollute because, they can not manufacture these products without polluting.
Less infrastructure erosion from roots? Integration into places like above ground parking spaces? Hell could you imagine integrating them into bridge underpasses or walk ways? Heck make a semi destructible version and use that for crash bollards. Only a level 5 vegan is going to complain if some allege is spilt.
trees are not as profitable