Sadly I am a bit hopeless about climate change. Even if every person on earth dropped everything and started making biochar to be buried it would not sequester enough carbon to make a difference.
So you want to use plants to reduce CO₂
11–20 of 117 posts
Re: So you want to use plants to reduce CO₂
#12The BBC did this in their 2012 documentary mini-series "How to Grow a Planet" with Iain Stewart. It was a lovely series; I highly recommend it.
Re: So you want to use plants to reduce CO₂
#13What if the plants were algae?
Re: So you want to use plants to reduce CO₂
#14What if the plants were algae?
Here's a real world* example:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAbyUaLN2QA
*youtuber
Re: So you want to use plants to reduce CO₂
#15Sadly I am a bit hopeless about climate change. Even if every person on earth dropped everything and started making biochar to be buried it would not sequester enough carbon to make a difference.
It's going to be ok.
Re: So you want to use plants to reduce CO₂
#16Sadly I am a bit hopeless about climate change. Even if every person on earth dropped everything and started making biochar to be buried it would not sequester enough carbon to make a difference.
This article isn't about climate change. It's about using houseplants to absorb the CO2 you exhale in your house.
Re: So you want to use plants to reduce CO₂
#17How is it that 132.5 watts is 3 light bulbs but 918 watts is 765 light bulbs? Is there a typo?
It might not be clearly worded, but 132.5 watts is the power used by 2 incandescent light bulbs, whereas 918 watts is the power present in the light produced by 765 light bulbs. The factor of 50 comes from the fact that incandescent lightbulbs are only ~2% efficient at turning power into light.
Re: So you want to use plants to reduce CO₂
#18> Real plants do photosynthesis through a physical process (nit) it is more accurate to call this a biological process, or chemical process Saying "physical process" makes me think of inclined planes, free-body diagrams, and EM fields.
It's all physics at the bottom. Nature doesn't have APIs.
Yes, except parent is correct. Physcial and chemical mean very different and specific things in this context.
Calling photosynthesis a physical reaction is flatly incorrect no matter how you want to look at it. It is a physics reaction, sure, but "physical reaction" specifically means a Newtonian mechanical, reversible process at the macro scale.
A "chemical reaction" specifically means a (trivially) irreversible quantum/atomic reaction involving chemical bonds at the atomic/molecular scale.
Re: So you want to use plants to reduce CO₂
#19This seems trivial: if you could add enough plants to your room to reduce CO2, we could easily do the same thing at planet-scale and global warming wouldn't be an issue.
Re: So you want to use plants to reduce CO₂
#20[dead]