21–30 of 178 posts
Grass is made from recycled carbon dioxide and cows are made from grass. And we already know beef is delicious.
That's an interesting angle. I haven't pictured myself made from chicken before.
Seriously though, by mass, aren't plants by mostly carbon that was separated from CO2?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's an interesting angle. I haven't pictured myself made from chicken before.
Water, air, chicken, dirt, star stuff. Seriously though, by mass, aren't plants by mostly carbon that was separated from CO2?
God, the Captain Planet re-boot got weird...
I recently spoke with a researcher working in this field. She identified three key issues: 1. Doing it with microbes means keeping the microbes alive, which is hard. You need to essentially replicate the functions of an animal, and you’re not necessarily going to be more efficient at them. 2. You can solve this by just doing it in a chemical process with catalysts and stuff. This is pretty easy except we have no way…
Could you use an enzyme to reliably produce chiral molecules? Maybe we will be able to mass-produce nano-machines or something that could facilitate this on an avogadro's scale.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Plants have been doing a pretty good job of sustainably capturing carbon dioxide for something like three billion years. Is there any direct air capture technology that’s remotely as reliable and low maintenance?
Not sure why you're downvoted because the answer to your question is definitely "no". Everything else, at the moment, is not much more than slides on a pitch deck.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Plants have been doing a pretty good job of sustainably capturing carbon dioxide for something like three billion years. Is there any direct air capture technology that’s remotely as reliable and low maintenance?
Not sure why you're downvoted because the answer to your question is definitely "no". Everything else, at the moment, is not much more than slides on a pitch deck.
It is pretty insane when you think about it. We could get all the climate harm reduction benefits the article mentions if people would just choose to eat plants instead. Seems like a very simple solution.
If you have to start with "if people would just choose" then it's not viable.
Instead of elaborate carbon capture infrastructure, it seems more straightforward to just use photosynthetic organisms like algae. Either engineer algae to make the proteins you want, or engineer yeast or some other microbe that can take the products of algae and convert to these proteins. Honestly it sounds like a needless and impractical gimmick.