Like I always think that people don’t get one thing about trees in a city. There purpose is is not about co2. The co2 reduction of city trees is neglectable. The reason you need them in a city is temperature regulation, shade, air quality, mood, and maybe solidifying unsealed ground. Putting these tanks in a city is laughably inefficient w.r.t. co2 conversion if you compare this to any effort to do this in instustrial capacity ( which is is also still laughably inefficient)
Liquid Trees
Submitted 4 days ago by sundray@lemmus.org to science_memes@mander.xyz
https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/635eaf11-bb4e-46be-915d-86b1a946d8cb.jpeg
Comments
bratorange@feddit.org 4 days ago
kwomp2@sh.itjust.works 4 days ago
So… are you saying the air inside a city park isn’t better at all?
BananaTrifleViolin@lemmy.world 4 days ago
They were talking about CO2 which is what the algae tank is about.
Trees have other benefits around filtering pollutants that affect air quality such as sulphur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide. Also the shading effect reduces ozone accumulation as well as generally helping reduce the urban heat island effect (which in turn reduces the amount of air conditioning needed, even a small amount saves a lit of energy and reduces pollution from power stations).
City parks have clean air partly because of tree but also because youre away from roads and buildings so further from car exhausts and chimney stacks. The concentration of pollutants in wide open spaces is lower because the wind can move it around more easily, and there isn’t a pollution source directly near by. Tree and grass do help too.
bratorange@feddit.org 4 days ago
I think there is a difference between air quality (pollution) and co2 levels.
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 days ago
To be fair, I think it’s important to make a distinction between a city park, and a handful of trees lining a busy street.
Micromot@feddit.org 4 days ago
It is, because of the humidity, temperature and also they remove air pollution
Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 4 days ago
CO² isn’t want you should be concerned about with air in a city anyway, its the other emissions like particulates. Just being further away from busy roads reduces that significantly so the park air would be better.
entwine413@lemm.ee 4 days ago
Probably not a statistically significant difference since wind is a thing.
pdqcp@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 days ago
From the top of my head, they also help manage storm water by filtering rainwater into the aquifer, while also lowering flood risks, provides habitats for plants, insects, birds, and small animals while also being a natural sound barriers, which reduces noise pollution. All of these together greatly increase mental health for everyone too
CaptPretentious@lemmy.world 4 days ago
ITT: People who looked at some random headline, didn’t bother looking further and assumed they knew everything.
It’s a stupid headline. These tanks, are to directly affect air polution/quality in urban areas. Trees are terrible at that. The microalgae is 10-50x more effective in cleaning the air.
They aren’t going to rip out trees for these. It would have taken you 10 seconds to find the source of the image and the article from 3 years ago to find out, the social media post was misleading. You spent more time making incorrect and wild accusations.
Oni_eyes@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
Even with the misleading headline, has nobody commenting about how bad it is ever seen how many trees die when set up in low light conditions? These can be used in places trees wouldn’t be effective, and that’s before the whole “they’re better at cleaning the air” bit.
Phegan@lemmy.world 4 days ago
This is missing out on likely the most important part of trees in urban areas. Shade. They give you a cooler place to stand or walk through.
Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 4 days ago
No standing or sitting allowed. Resume consumerism!
But_my_mom_says_im_cool@lemmy.world 4 days ago
My condo complex is easily 5 degrees cooler than the rest of my city cause we’re covered in trees. It’s always noticeable when you leave the complex and go across the road
desktop_user@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 days ago
taller buildings and smog do a more consistent job of providing shade than a new tree will in a decade.
MrsDoyle@sh.itjust.works 4 days ago
I discovered when I joined a volunteer litter-picking group in my town that some people really hate trees. And I must emphasise HATE. They hate the shade they cast in summer, the way the leaves block the all-important View. They hate the fallen leaves in autumn. They hate the bare branches in winter. They hate the risk of branches falling in storms. They hate the racket the birds make. I was astonished - it never occurred to me that people would feel so strongly.
Turns out I’m a bloody tree-hugging extremist.
bane_killgrind@slrpnk.net 3 days ago
That’s just unhinged. The trees are the view.
Draegur@lemm.ee 3 days ago
Those “people” would better serve as fertilizer (specifically for trees)
jerkface@lemmy.ca 3 days ago
LordWiggle@lemmy.world 3 days ago
Yeah trees are assholes. They always ring my doorbell trying to sell me the book of Gaia. Constantly telling me “you can’t smoke here, sir”. There’s a tree behind my house who constantly wears the same glasses as me. Whenever I buy new ones, a day later this tree has the same. He’s constantly mocking me for no reason.
I think all trees should be cut down and burned. Algae never complain, are always kind and always say “good day sir” when you walk by.
moakley@lemmy.world 3 days ago
A tree stole my wallet and had sex with my wife!
captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
I guess I’m too…born and raised in a forest?..to be the same species as those people.
desktop_user@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 days ago
Leaves are annoying in urban areas with full concrete/asphalt/metal/glass environments. Different people like different things and some aesthetics are incompatible.
jerkface@lemmy.ca 3 days ago
annoying how?
jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 4 days ago
They get in the way of parking spots. The steel cages must run supreme.
illi@lemm.ee 4 days ago
These gave to take up more space than a tree…
jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 4 days ago
When this was proposed the idea was that one of tank can replace two trees and it can be put in corners that are too small for trees (and cars). When you consider the space for roots you can get at least one parking space per tank at the cost of making car-centric cities even more of an hell hole.
Sylvartas@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 days ago
I think the idea behind this is that algae are more space-efficient than trees at producing oxygen and/or capturing CO2. Of course this is also ignoring that the bulk of a tree’s volume is high above the ground, and they also provide other things like shade and shelter for insects etc.
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 days ago
The steel cages must rule supreme.
Just ask The Undertaker and Mankind…
bennypr0fane@discuss.tchncs.de 4 days ago
I guess the “problem” with trees is obvious: it takes decades for them to produce the desired cooling effect in urban areas. You plant a dozen young trees today, you can begin to reap the cooldown 10 years later at best. Also, they need a lot if water, and many of them just don’t make it - urban surroundings are just much hotter and more stressful (smog, salt…) then standing with other trees in a forest. I fail to see though how these artificial “trees” pesticide any kind of benefit at all.
LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 4 days ago
The amount of water required is trivial compared to most other water uses. Especially if correct species are selected.
MrsDoyle@sh.itjust.works 4 days ago
The London plane tree is particularly suitable for urban areas, it’s resistant to air pollution.
skisnow@lemmy.ca 4 days ago
I think the problem is putting them in those dumb tanks where a tree would be, as if to say “do this instead”. The principle would be fine if they got a bit more creative with it and played to its strengths, e.g. if you make a train platform out of it, or the railings of an overpass, or the external wall panels of buildings etc.
Ofc OOP didn’t actually provide a source so we’ve no idea what the creators were actually thinking…
nickiwest@lemmy.world 3 days ago
A cursory search for “liquid trees micro algae” led me here: liquidtrees.org/urban-solutions
InFerNo@lemmy.ml 4 days ago
The roots destroy sewer systems etc too. There’s a bike path I take to work where the pavement is all distorted by the roots, making it very unsafe, but I still prefer that the trees are there.
pdqcp@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 days ago
That’s why you have to properly select the species that will be planted, there are many different species which have roots that won’t cause this type of damage and you can most likely get by with native plants for better adaptability
matlag@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
The issue with trees is you need to adapt the city to them, you can’t adapt them to the city. And people have proven once and again that they would invent anything to not move by an inch when our way of life is put in question.
So we push forward with absurd solutions one after the other: carbon capture, atmospheric geo-engineering, a damned nuke in antarctica, and now “liquid trees”.
Because the alternative is to change our ways, and we can’t face that.
ThatGuy46475@lemmy.world 3 days ago
I would be fine with changing my ways if changing my anything didn’t require endless paperwork. How is it fair that some guy invents agriculture and now I have to have a credit score
desktop_user@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 days ago
trees take don’t come with actual requirement lists. An algae pool can and will come with explicit instructions that are able to be met and won’t destroy the sidewalk for no reason.
echodot@feddit.uk 3 days ago
That’s an incredibly negative spin.
All these technologies are improvements on the natural version, not a replacement for the natural version, but an upgrade. If you want nice trees go take a walk in a city park, these aren’t for looking at they have a different objective. We can have both things, one isn’t trying to replace the other.
matlag@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
Trees provide shades that cool down the cities. These algae don’t. The main benefit of these “liquid trees” is to reduce pollution. You know what reduces even more pollution? Electrification and public transportation. Combine both. You’ll need much less space for motor vehicles lane inside the city and no need for “depolluting” inventions. Add some bike lanes and you’ll still have plenty of space for trees. They’re better looking and will do the cooling job.
So, as I was saying: praising a less efficient solution that may bring new unexpected issues down the road because the efficient solution requires people to change.
AlolanYoda@mander.xyz 3 days ago
Yeah, can plant a tree? Plant a tree. If you can’t, the alternative right now is nothing. This introduces another option.
termaxima@programming.dev 4 days ago
We can have both trees and this ! Let’s replace the stupid ad spots on bus stops with these 😮
notthebees@reddthat.com 4 days ago
A few reasons: Trees need a lot of space and the space underneath a sidewalk isn’t enough for long term life. They can die after like 30 years? This is tree dependent and location dependent.
Tree roots can destroy sidewalks making it harder for people to go over them. (Think people in wheel chairs)
Liability in terms of damage (have you seen trees after a storm?)
MightBeFluffy@pawb.social 4 days ago
Sounds like we need to remove the need for sidewalks. Rip up all the roads in the city and replace them with green space. Problem solved
stray@pawb.social 4 days ago
I disagree. Pavement is valuable to pedestrians, cyclists, emergency and service vehicles, and the disabled. While it’s important to preserve nature as much as possible, some urbanisation is also a good thing. That said, I’m not sure algae tanks would be necessary in areas where huge tracts of land aren’t dedicated to parking. I can’t really think of where my city would benefit from them.
spooky2092@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 days ago
Yes to ripping up roads for greenspace, not to removing sidewalks too.
Make the citu green and walkable, and you solve so many problems in one go
Bloobish@hexbear.net 4 days ago
Still and this is the big thing, these are all possible considerations, plenty of urban areas, once they reduce street traffic to what is seen in European and other areas could also vastly greenify areas via mini parks allowing root space (and tbh if it messes with a sidewalk well then fix it like what functional societies with infrastructure budgets doi). All in all this just gives off techbro “genius solution” grifting and likely isn’t even possible on a large scale given I swear I’ve seen this same tumblr reblog before and yet areas that are hard on trees (Like LA) still has a crap ton of palms and other trees not even remotely habitable to the climate.
notthebees@reddthat.com 4 days ago
I should have mentioned this but usually stuff like this is planted in front of people’s houses etc. I wouldn’t expect a pine tree planted in one of those. Same with a palm tree.
I’m from Pittsburgh and there’s a lot of greenery projects and ecological restoration currently going on. Outside of the city, it’s very heavily wooded. But it’s slow progress.
Those giant algae tanks miss the large point of trees and their physical benefits and do feel like a tech bro solution looking for a problem.
WizardOfLoneliness@hexbear.net 4 days ago
fuck sidewalks, tree roots can fuck up entire buildings
keepcarrot@hexbear.net 4 days ago
My first thought, having lived in an area with trees but inadequate funding for clearing leaves, is that every sidewall just gets buried and slick with wet leaves.
Idk what the labour costs are for these things.
sqgl@beehaw.org 3 days ago
Not all tree species destroy sidewalks.
LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 4 days ago
Trees don’t attract VC funding the way some dumb new invention does.
I guess this could be useful in places trees don’t fit but I think there are other simpler solutions.
glitch1985@lemmy.world 4 days ago
useful in places trees don’t fit
I have a tree sitting in a pot on my desk.
LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 4 days ago
Your potted tree isn’t a tree in the sense that I’m talking about. The environmental services trees provide are all based on size and are predominantly provided by larger trees.
BussyCat@lemmy.world 3 days ago
How much CO2 does the tree on your desk take in? Do you think it approaches 1/1000 of the amount that a bunch of algae can take in? So maybe it’s not the same and comparing it as being the same is done in bad faith. Trees are great and in many cases are superior as they also provide shade, but you can’t ignore the negatives of them(mostly related to their roots) and that they don’t work in every situation
RedditRefugee69@lemmynsfw.com 4 days ago
Does its root structure break the pavement above it?
agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 4 days ago
Real answer is probably that they’d be used in addition to trees, designed to fit in places unsuitable for a tree.
ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org 4 days ago
Like walls of high-rises.
DasFaultier@sh.itjust.works 4 days ago
This. Trees (especially large ones) are a pain to irrigate properly, might not be drought-resistant, grow very slowly until they reach their full potential at removing CO2, interfere with infrastructure that we humans are used to (piping, electricity, telco), roots break up pavements, branches can be a hazard after storms, fruit might attract rats, …
I’m very much pro trees (despite what I’ve listed in the first paragraph), but I’m sure there are places in cities where you can’t plant trees but could put up algae tanks.
If you understand German (specifically Austrian dialect) you might like this podcast episode about challenges and methods to overcome them in the context of greenery in the city of Graz:
Simple Smart Buildings: Bäume in der Stadt
Webseite der Episode: podcasted3e6b.podigee.io/153-baume-in-der-stadt
Mediendatei: …podigee-cdn.net/1742586-m-9ecab280e580cd07f75c83…
TL;DL of this episode: it’s not as simple as “just plant more trees”.
psx_crab@lemmy.zip 4 days ago
Yes. Algae is better in absorbing co2 than tree, but tree is important as a shade and creating a cooling effect for the surrounding. Both is important for different thing and combine it you get the best of both world, especially in a lot of urban area where planting big tree isn’t possible
shrugs@lemmy.world 3 days ago
let me introduce you to this: scientificamerican.com/…/robo-bees-could-aid-inse…
humans are crazy. You want to know whats wrong with trees and bees? It’s pretty hard to make a profit of them
Whats_your_reasoning@lemmy.world 4 days ago
I recently learned that there’s a group dedicated to planting 1000 trees in the city of Trenton, NJ, USA. I’m really glad to see a city working to bring back a little nature!
iamkindasomeone@feddit.org 3 days ago
Wake me up as soon as some goofy ass startup found out how to arrange the algae to display ads.
Prunebutt@slrpnk.net 4 days ago
While I don’t want to spoil the joke (but I will) and I hate techno-optimist solutions that displace actual solutions for our biosphere: supposedly, Belgrade is such a dense concrete hell that trees aren’t viable solution (at least in the short term).
There is some rumbling that liquid trees are not the solution to the real problems caused by large-scale deforestation, nor does it reduce erosion or enrich the soil. However, much of this wrath is misplaced as Liquid tree designers say that it was not made as a replacement for trees but was designed to work in areas where growing trees would be non-viable. Initiatives like Trillion Trees are laudable, but there is something to be said for the true utility of this tiny bioreactor. The fact that they can capture useful amounts of carbon dioxide from day one is another benefit for them. Such bioreactors are expected to become widespread in urban areas around the world as the planet battles rising carbon levels in the atmosphere.
Formfiller@lemmy.world 4 days ago
Trees don’t create shareholder profits
DandomRude@lemmy.world 4 days ago
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…
Xatolos@reddthat.com 4 days ago
The problem with trees in an urban setting is trees have roots, and these cause issues. The can damage pipes and other underground objects. And many trees that are designed to not have these issues, end up with stunted/damaged roots which severely effects the trees growth. Planting trees in urban settings take quite a lot of pre-planning, and aren’t drop in solutions, and if the areas weren’t originally designed with trees in mind, you are likely to cause more problems than solutions.
greenblue.com/…/avoid-root-heave-pavement-damage-… tiptoptreeandgroundcare.co.uk/…/tree-roots-in-urb…
Madrigal@lemmy.world 4 days ago
You can’t charge a subscription fee for trees.
Sunflier@lemmy.world 3 days ago
Few things about trees in cities: (1) tree roots ruin sidewalks because they upend that stuff; (2) tree roots get into and ruin infrastructure, (3) not every cut can sustain a tree; and (4) they damage stuff when thet fall over in storms.
VampirePenguin@midwest.social 3 days ago
Welp, all the trees are gone but at least there are these cloudy stinking tanks of goo everywhere. Does anything not dystopian happen anymore? Like these things are a set piece from Blade Runner FFS.
TxzK@lemmy.zip 4 days ago
trees are not as profitable
umbraroze@slrpnk.net 4 days ago
Insert random copypasta about biotech breakthrough that turns water and CO2 and nutrients into building materials which sounds like space age technology but it’s just trees
CaptainHowdy@lemm.ee 3 days ago
Dumb take. If someone crashes their car into one of these, it can be replaced in a few days. Trees take decades to grow in ideal conditions. Between tall buildings in a city is far from ideal conditions.
Also algae is way more efficient at converting CO2 into O2; I think it’s maybe multiple times more efficient using the same amount of light.
stebo02@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 days ago
trees take a loooooong time to grow
epicstove@lemmy.ca 3 days ago
When I was visiting Europe, seeing all the trees so well integrated into urban areas was so nice.
Then we git our flight back to Toronto. Concrete jungle.
RedFrank24@lemmy.world 3 days ago
Trees take ages to grow, and their root systems damage buildings and pavements.
Trimatrix@lemmy.world 4 days ago
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.
MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 4 days ago
Upkeep. Oh, wait.
rivvvver@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 days ago
im guessing “where will the animals go” is also a stupid question?
RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works 4 days ago
Also, where do I find the shade?
ExtantHuman@lemm.ee 3 days ago
Under the actual tree next to it. This is effectively just a large bench. Which also helps the air.
wiccan2@lemmy.world 4 days ago
I would guess into the tree soup.
Iheartcheese@lemmy.world 4 days ago
But you can for oxygen. Total Recall taught us this.
nightwatch_admin@feddit.nl 4 days ago
You mean Space Balls?