top | item 46445222

(no title)

caturopath | 2 months ago

Plants seem to manage it okay.

discuss

order

hannob|2 months ago

They don't, and they can't cheat physical realities either.

Plants only filter out very small amounts of CO2 from the air over relatively long timeframes. That's why crop-based biofuels require such enormous amounts of space.

8bitsrule|2 months ago

'Very small'?? Depends on your perspective.

"The amount of CO2 removed from the atmosphere via photosynthesis from land plants is known as Terrestrial Gross Primary Production, or GPP. It represents the largest carbon exchange between land and atmosphere on the planet. GPP is typically cited in petagrams of carbon per year. One petagram equals 1 billion metric tons, which is roughly the amount of CO2 emitted each year from 238 million gas-powered passenger vehicles."

The article: https://www.technologynetworks.com/applied-sciences/news/pla...

The paper: doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-08050-3

msandford|2 months ago

They're pretty amazing for the amount of capital cost. $50 in seed and an acre of land can sequester several to over a dozen tons of carbon per year. It might not be space efficient but it requires basically zero infrastructure.

newyankee|2 months ago

Which is something that when I try to explain to some 'environmentalists' do not get the point.

The other benefits of a biodiverse green belt are great, but if tomorrow I have a concrete system that captures CO2 at 10x the level of trees over lifetime in a similar density, guess what I would like my futuristic city to look like.