🗑️ 🧵 Problem: too much CO2. Solution: Use spotlights to force plants to do photosynthesis at night
Anonymous at Sun, 3 Nov 2024 12:58:24 UTC No. 16460854
If there is too much CO2 in the air, the most optimal solution is to use plants to turn that CO2 into oxygen via photosynthesis.
You don't need to plant more trees (though doing that is always a good idea), all you need to do is to get the trees you've already planted to work overtime.
Thanks to humanity's complete dependence on plants not just for food, but also for drinks (beer, coffee, tea, etc.), medicines, and even clothes (cotton), we have trillions upon trillions of plants in farms turning CO2 into oxygen. Unfortunately, they only do this during the day.
Photosynthesis needs light, but it doesn't have to be sunlight per se. Any light will work so long as it's strong enough. So you can place spotlights on farms to help the plants do photosynthesis at night. You can even connect the spotlights to wind turbines so they are self-sufficient and don't need to be connected to the power grid.
This could potentially double the amount of CO2 turned into oxygen in the farm, while also increasing food production, and it should pay for itself thanks to that increase in food production.
This is the most efficient, most effective, cheapest way to deal with any extra CO2 in the air because it would turn that CO2 into food at virtually no cost, and could be deployed and be fully functional worldwide in a matter of months.
The current approach of trying to reduce CO2 emissions (which has proven to be a complete failure for 50 years) has 2 inherent flaws:
First off, reducing CO2 emissions does NOT reduce the amount of CO2 that is already in the air. You're going to need plants to deal with that no matter what.
And second, unless you can convince 8 billion people and trillions of animals to stop breathing, the total amount of CO2 released into the air every day isn't going to go down by much anyway, even if you convince everyone to stop using fossil fuels. Increasing Earth's capacity to turn CO2 into oxygen is the only sensible way to go, and only plants can do that.
Anonymous at Sun, 3 Nov 2024 13:54:31 UTC No. 16460884
>Just don't sleep bro, it's healthy for you bro!
>Just burn electricity and trillions of light bulbs to stop pollution, you know like we use to make that electricity and the light bulbs. No that's not a positive feedback loop of pollution bro.
My response:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hf
t. horticulturist
Anonymous at Sun, 3 Nov 2024 13:57:59 UTC No. 16460887
>>16460854
>You can even connect the spotlights to wind turbines so they are self-sufficient and don't need to be connected to the power grid.
how about we connect ourselfes to wind turbines? problem solved.
besides that, I hope you realize that its not working without blowing out literally endless addidional CO2 for those lights and the wind turbines.
you have no idea how much more this would need to work. it would be like 10 or 100 times more power demand. maybe even more. sun does 1000 W/m2. make an estimation with the surface of land yourself.
you would also have to consider the heat generated by the lamps, the material consumption for the cables and so on.
then there would be an incredible light pollution, it would kill the most animals and you would probably have to contend with waves of pests as a result.
the plants would not double their growth either, their biology has certainly adapted and optimized itself for nocturnal regeneration.
and even if all of this had worked, the increased biomass would still decompose every year, namely when the plants die.
if you really want to store more co2, you would also have to increase the area for plant growth.
Anonymous at Sun, 3 Nov 2024 14:03:13 UTC No. 16460895
>>16460854
Picrel is false, plants love magenta light, not yellow light
Anonymous at Sun, 3 Nov 2024 14:06:34 UTC No. 16460904
>>16460854
Retard take.
Anonymous at Sun, 3 Nov 2024 14:07:31 UTC No. 16460906
>>16460904
Yup, it should be a basic fact that plants love this color, not yellow
Anonymous at Sun, 3 Nov 2024 14:10:34 UTC No. 16460909
>>16460904
maybe this was posted by an underage.
I wouldnt call that retarded, he will grow up and learn.
you always have to be allowed to fail when you try. thats the only way we learn.
Anonymous at Sun, 3 Nov 2024 14:12:11 UTC No. 16460913
>>16460909
It's almost certainly the spammer
Anonymous at Sun, 3 Nov 2024 14:14:08 UTC No. 16460916
>>16460913
ye probably.
Anonymous at Sun, 3 Nov 2024 14:57:52 UTC No. 16460966
>>16460854
>blah, blah, blah
We'd just end up burning the plants to generate electricty to run the lights.
Anonymous at Sun, 3 Nov 2024 15:11:25 UTC No. 16460983
>>16460909
No, it's very retarded and demonstrates a complete lack of understanding about how the world works from a biological, chemical, physical, and economical standpoint. It's as retarded as being a flat earther.
Anonymous at Sun, 3 Nov 2024 15:18:20 UTC No. 16460988
>>16460913
>>16460916
Here's a neat idea: if you don't want to be called a retard then stop shitting up the math and science board.
Anonymous at Sun, 3 Nov 2024 17:11:34 UTC No. 16461115
>>16460988
pls tell that also to the climate denier posters and those who constantly post /pol/ threads.
/pol/ motivated threads right now
>Is evolutiona finally proven to be true, or is it still a theory?
>Why does this happen?
>How good are standardized tests for judging someone's ability
>Can you faggots explain this shit
>History of peer review
>scientifically speaking, what is the root cause of homosexuality?
and probably more
Anonymous at Sun, 3 Nov 2024 17:18:04 UTC No. 16461120
>>16460854
It's a problem that doesn't exist. CO2 levels SHOULD be at least 3x what they currently are. We're in a desert, cold, CO2 sparse climate right now. It's extremely bad for life.
Anonymous !niqjediPCA at Sun, 3 Nov 2024 18:27:04 UTC No. 16461194
>>16460854
I'd like to thank MIT for producing this knowledge that improved the efficiency of my vacuum distillation "Device", and helping me "win the global water wars"
>MIT's addition is in light green
congrats, MIT, you have have just solved the Icing problem.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1P
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vm
as an addendum to your brilliant research into the chloroplast molecule and the thylakoid structure, I would suggest there might be a photon frequency counterpoint which encourages condensation.
Imagine! total photonic vacuum desalination, no heat pump required, except maybe as a booster!
in reference to the water wars, that would be a Inter-Continental-Ballistic-Missile
"Good shit"
>Pssssst... try indigo or violet.
it takes a different amount of energy to FORCIBLY GASSIFY water, than it takes to add moisture to an under-saturated atmosphere?
Anonymous !niqjediPCA at Sun, 3 Nov 2024 18:37:15 UTC No. 16461212
>>16461194
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFk
Anonymous !niqjediPCA at Sun, 3 Nov 2024 18:41:42 UTC No. 16461222
>>16461194
>>Pssssst... try indigo or violet.
>or red.
Anonymous !niqjediPCA at Sun, 3 Nov 2024 18:44:29 UTC No. 16461225
>>16461222
IT'S A FUCKING POLARIZED LC CIRCUIT!!!!!
AHAHAHAHAHAHAYHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!
Anonymous !niqjediPCA at Sun, 3 Nov 2024 18:46:02 UTC No. 16461229
>>16461225
Fractal Antenna.
Anonymous !niqjediPCA at Sun, 3 Nov 2024 19:10:07 UTC No. 16461261
>>16461194
>Also it has no internal moving parts
>Not to mention, no filters that need replacing.
Anonymous at Sun, 3 Nov 2024 21:25:14 UTC No. 16461419
>>16461115
We all need to do our part to call out the retards without engaging with them in a way they find meaningful or entertaining. Call them a retard and leave.
Anonymous at Sun, 3 Nov 2024 23:34:05 UTC No. 16461543
>>16461419
last time I tried it with 'faggot' and got banned. :D
Anonymous at Mon, 4 Nov 2024 01:29:57 UTC No. 16461626
>>16461543
I've been calling retards retards for months without getting banned. Just make sure it's not the only thing you're posting.
Anonymous at Mon, 4 Nov 2024 01:41:18 UTC No. 16461637
>>16460854
>If there is too much CO2 in the air
there isn't
there is not enough CO2 in the air
life is carbon based, not oxygen based
Anonymous at Mon, 4 Nov 2024 02:55:32 UTC No. 16461707
>>16460966
sounds like a job creator, even better than throwing bricks through windows to boost GDP
Anonymous at Mon, 4 Nov 2024 03:11:37 UTC No. 16461719
>>16460906
>muhgenta
Anonymous at Mon, 4 Nov 2024 03:34:20 UTC No. 16461743
>>16461637
Question for you anon. When did stop pollution turn into climate change?
I'm curious because I see a lot less stop pollution campaigning these days and it's all focused on CO2 output.
Anonymous at Mon, 4 Nov 2024 15:38:21 UTC No. 16462231
>>16461637
Retard.
>>16461743
No you don't, retard. Why do you think straws have been being banned, sulfur emissions are being limited, ect., ect.? You only key into climate change because it makes you irrationally angry.
Anonymous at Wed, 6 Nov 2024 20:43:03 UTC No. 16465345
>>16462231
retard.
Anonymous at Wed, 6 Nov 2024 21:02:58 UTC No. 16465359
>>16460854
Where are you going to get that energy from?
Anonymous at Sat, 9 Nov 2024 01:05:43 UTC No. 16467806
bump since this is an intelligent thread
Anonymous at Sat, 9 Nov 2024 01:25:05 UTC No. 16467826
>>16467806
No it isn't, retard.
Anonymous at Sat, 9 Nov 2024 16:34:51 UTC No. 16468390
>>16461194
>it takes a different amount of energy to FORCIBLY GASSIFY water, than it takes to add moisture to an under-saturated atmosphere?
Yes. To go from the under-saturated partial pressure P1 to the other you supply pressure-volume work >=nRT ln(P2/P1), which is not much compared with the amount needed to vaporize so he doesn't go into it in the talk.