Pittsburgh Airport installs an algae air purifier

Post by dontlaugh » Wed, Oct 12, 2022, 2:11 PM UTC

snapcaster wrote: post #66

dontlaugh wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sort of thing needs to be democratically decided. Currently it isn’t, most countries have a few rich people dominating media and politics. Most poverty isn’t energy poverty at all, it’s a lack of control over the means of production in general. Energy is merely one aspect. Some energy usage is clearly frivolous, like several ton cars with single occupants or vastly oversized armies. Alternatives that achieve the…

What you're describing is a dramatic reduction in human freedom. Right now I have the freedom to use as much energy as I can afford and people like you don't get any say in how I use it. Why not focus on generating more energy efficiently than imposing controls on other people? This seems like more about having control over other people than an actual concern for the environment or energy usage. Would you vote to ban…

Post by dylan604 » Wed, Oct 12, 2022, 2:34 PM UTC

scns wrote: post #43

kolinko wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good math. Another way to ballpark this - the airport tank holds 500 liters of spirulina. Algae extract around 0.5kg co2 per 1000 liters ( https://mdpi-res.com/d_attachment/sustainability/sustainabil... ). So this tank removes around 0.25kg of co2 per day. By comparison, an average human exhales 1kg co2 per day. So you need four of those tanks to offset a single passenger passing by. This does virtually nothing for t…

> By comparison, an average human exhales 1kg co2 per day. So you need four of those tanks to offset a single passenger passing by. Passing by takes less then 24 hours.

Post by dontlaugh » Wed, Oct 12, 2022, 3:59 PM UTC

ajmurmann wrote: post #70

dontlaugh wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven’t been to the US, but it can’t be all that special. Plenty of countries have high speed trains instead of most domestic air travel, even similarly sized ones like China. Especially if you count the time to get to the airport and through security, high speed trains are highly competitive or even better than planes in total travel time.

The problem, as always, isn't size but density. Outside the east coast there is very little density. It's almost unfathomable having grown up in Europe how big and empty even large areas at the west coast are. This gets especially obvious when you get away from the central freeway that goes up the coast. Where I've visited our lived in Europe or Asia these areas would still be largely inhabited and have smaller towns…

Post by thesh4d0w » Wed, Oct 12, 2022, 5:26 PM UTC

bmitc wrote: post #76

ryanmerket wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use it in my office. Don't really notice a difference. I should get a CO2 reader and test it out.

I really like the idea, but it does seem like a hard thing to be sure of. I suppose a secondary question is: does it look nice? :)

Post by ipqk » Wed, Oct 12, 2022, 5:41 PM UTC

garte wrote: post #12

ajmurmann wrote: post #4

This is super interesting! Sounds from the article like the main point is to remove CO2 from the air to improve air for humans. That's already really exciting. In essence it's a CO2 scrubber right? So how does this compare to devices built with the goal to remove CO2 with the goal to reduce climate change? Edit: To answer my own question, this probably does little. They have a home use version that supposedly removes…

The irony is strong in this one: Not building airports would definitely improve the situation as a whole.