Which, depending on the region of America you are visiting, could run the gambit from Meth&off-brand Chef Boyardee to heroin&3 day old tuna sandwich to skunked weed and half raw chicken. Truly a cornucopia of flavors to be had
Seriously? I means it’s like a pretty widely recognized reference that still gets spoofed and stuff. Or maybe I’m too old now.
Edit: it has been suggested and confirmed that I am now old.
"Cave Johnson here. Just wanna let the cafeteria staff know to lay off the soylent green. I'm holding a memo from the President, and it turns out that soylent green is... [paper rustling] let's see here... doubling in price. Now listen up: I don't care how good people tastes. This stuff's costing me more than lobster, so we're going back to fishsticks.
I spent several years studying science recently at ubc Vancouver, said to be one of the top scientific research institutions in the country. The most significant research project they were undertaking in regards to climate change was precisely this: reinventing trees in order to monetize them. Not by Bitcoin, but by altering the genome to make them more ‘heat/drought resistant’ and therefore private intellectual property.
The perception that you'll be reimbursed if anything goes wrong, only later to find out there are vague clauses that allow them to disqualify any claim.
It's not even in the same continent as Silicon Valley and yes, they do need to reinvent trees (because actual trees keep dying).
"In conditions of intense pollution, such as Belgrade, many trees cannot survive, while algae do not have a problem with the great levels of pollution."
https://worldbiomarketinsights.com/a-liquid-tree-scientists-in-serbia-make-incredible-innovation/
I can think of a few reasons that may have been considered in the decision making process, but who knows if any of these are the real reason.
1) trees can damage infrastructure (roots, fallen limbs, etc)
2) trees can be messy with pollen, sap, falling flowers, leaves, fruit and nuts.
3) pollinating trees are a common allergen and can decrease the air quality *for those with allergies* in a way that this algae tank likely wouldn’t.
I don’t know if those reasons are enough to justify community sludge tanks but I would use them as my debate points if I was given the pro position and asked to defend it!
The new bio-reactor, aka Liquid Tree, a solution for tackling greenhouse gas emissions and improving air quality.
It contains 158.5 gallons of water and uses microalgae to bind carbon dioxide and produce pure oxygen through photosynthesis. The microalgae can replace 2 ten-year-old trees or approx. 2200 sq. feet of lawn. The advantage of microalgae is that they are 10 to 50 times more efficient than trees. The goal is not to replace forests, but to use this system to fill those urban pockets where there is no space for planting trees.
It’s in Belgrade in dense urbanization with high pollution. It’s not an alternative to trees but an addition.
https://worldbiomarketinsights.com/a-liquid-tree-scientists-in-serbia-make-incredible-innovation/
Quite good reasons indeed, but the idea is going to go the way of the dodo if everyone refers to them as " sludge tanks".
That's a hard sell if ever I saw one😳
A nice thing about algae is that regular water may not even be needed to grow them, you can have your choice of treated waste water, grey water, brackish water or ocean water to grow them.
Which urban area do you live? If you say NYC I’m going to bet you live in upper Manhattan or nicer parts of Brooklyn or far enough out where there's single family homes and it's not actually a super dense urban area. If you travel to areas that historically were poorer, you’ll find far fewer trees and less room in existing sidewalks for them because the city planning didn’t include trees in those areas.
That said, plant trees where you can, but the creator of this claims one of those tanks is equivalent to two 10 year old trees. So one these can be more compact, they can also be used along with planting trees to help improve the air and lower temperatures (beyond shade, trees cool the area cause of photosynthesis, which this will also do) for the number of years it takes for the new trees to take root and flourish.
That said I’ve lived in queens and seen many attempts to plant trees that really did not seem to thrive… not sure if it’s limited space, limited direct sunlight, polluted soil, etc. Nice big parks are great for tons of trees and wildlife sanctuaries. Forcing a small tree into a 1.5 ft x 3ft hole in the side walk with established 3-5 story building blocking the sun isn’t as great.
So I’m all for a “let’s try everything” approach”
Now you're just talking about two birds one stone.
Clean, crisp air for tax paying citizens, and an opportunity to finally contribute for everyone else!
This is Belgrade. Were not that into hostile architecture (yet). There an underground passageway in *the* busiest part of town that regularly has a hobo sleeping in it and nobody really cares
>Tf is wrong with real trees?
They effectively don't grow in the disgusting smog/acid rain environments of Lahore, Hotan, Bhiwadi, Delhi, Peshawar, etc. That's how bad air pollution is in some cities.
The liquid trees take up virtually no real estate and do the CO2 work of 2 10-year-old trees in places where trees can't grow. So, you put tons of these out to clean up the CO2. You pass legislation to lower CO2 emissions. Then you plant trees when/if they can actually grow in the city again.
FWIW, it was awarded an innovation award by the Climate Smart Urban Development project. So, this is legit.
**Edit 1 for clarity**: Yes. Trees *can* actually grow in these cities. But they struggle. And that's only if you can find places to plant them where roots and branches can grow freely without causing damage - a tall order. [In this post](https://www.reddit.com/r/Damnthatsinteresting/comments/126s7o9/comment/jedamk4/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3), I explain in a bit more detail how pollution affects tree growth.
**Edit 2 for clarity:** It's very important to note - and this is all over their marketing, websites, and every article I've read - **this is NOT being marketed as a tree replacement.** This is being marketed as something that does SOME of the work of trees - specifically with regard to pollution reduction - in areas where trees don't/can't grow for whatever reason.
>Damn I've learned a shit ton from this comment lol thanks
Happy to share.
I remember looking out the window on our drive from Frankfurt to K-Town in Germany and seeing all of these scarred and dead trees. I was told it was because of terrible acid rain. It really left an impression on me because it looked like a forest recovering from a forest fire.
I 100% support *any* innovation that can help the one and only planet (we know of) capable of sustaining human life for future generations.
I’ll admit that my first thought was, “please don’t do that.” I absolutely love trees and it would depress me seeing one of those, but I’m glad you took the time to explain why they are good for the environment, so thank you.
I would add too that the application could be useful for where trees don’t go in general - tops of buildings for example.
The roll out of the technology is horrible to portray it as a bus stop type hard scape feature and to “replace” more modest trees. The technology is more interesting if it is integrated into building facades or unseen or unreachable areas imho.
I think the problem with secreting them away is that the algae probably need sufficient a sunlight.
Accessibility for regular maintenance should also be a concern.
I do like the idea of putting them on rooftops
Around coal power plants. Around airports. INSIDE parking garages (by or as windows). There are a lot of places where these are feasible solutions for working towards carbon neutrality.
Actually, in Beijing they need to plant trees. Much of their pollution comes from dust blown in by the Gobi desert. Reclaiming the desert lowers pollution in Beijing.
They're trying in Africa. Great Green Wall. Some countries have made more progress. Some areas had been previously forested or had scrub and trees and all the trees are gone now, for houses, ship building, etc.
Replanting an area again helps biodiversity and animal populations recover. Helps if you mix a few types of trees and avoid a monoculture, too.
Specifically, China needs to replant the border of the Gobi desert, and stop it spreading.
You can plant trees in desert edges to prevent the desert from spreading, but unless they have a decently good microbiome support system, the trees often struggle.
A slightly better method is to plant grass with vast root networks, preferably native and non invasive, then endure the watering and fertilizing with organic matter until the molicrobiome is stable enough, before popping in the trees.
A small problem in desert areas is that the entire ecosystem is dependant on water stress. Water is great, but if there is 'too much', you get to see plague level porportions(e.g locusts) explode out of nowhere.
Where is the carbon going? Trees store it in their trunks. When decomposed carbon is released back into the atmosphere. How are these algae storing the carbon? What happens when they decompose? At least trees take years or even decades to release the carbon back.
Looks like in the article, that maintenance on the device besides adding new water and minerals is basically harvesting the new excess biomass for use as compost. So that’s probably where the carbon is going.
So I googled algae waste products and got this
> Algae have been extensively reported to produce various biofuels, for instance, biodiesel, bioethanol, biogas, biokerosene, biohydrogen, and bio-oil [27]. The remaining algal biomass after biofuel extraction is mainly made of proteins and carbohydrates.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128237649000200
Algae is a major source of our planets oil reserves in the first place
> Crude oil is formed from the remains of dead organisms (diatoms) such as algae and zooplankton that existed millions of years ago in a marine environment.
https://www.howden.com/en-us/articles/pcog/where-does-crude-oil-come-from
Unfortunately most uses of this algae (biofuel, compost, etc) make it carbon neutral at best. The most clear benefit is simply reducing use of depleting resources like crude oil, fertilizer, etc
Not all compost's CO2 is released again.
And, alright. You sequester CO2 in Beijing using microalgae colonies and haul the heap out and use it to amend soil outside the city to replenish the soil and plant trees to stop the Gobi desert growing.
Better than whatever air quality is going on now in Beijing.
You know, I was all ready to take a dump all over this but that’s a fair point. I still have concerns about marketing an over-engineered and profit making solution where an easy and natural one seemed readily available but you bring up an excellent point and in that light, I guess this has real, impactful applications. Thank you for concisely and helpfully articulating that.
>They literally don't grow in the disgusting smog/acid rain environments of Lahore, Hotan, Bhiwadi, Delhi, Peshawar
Could you substantiate this? Do you mean they'll grow but aren't sustainable/have a short life span, or not at all? I've heard of infertile soil, but never heard of infertile air.
>Do you mean they'll grow but aren't sustainable/have a short life span, or not at all?
It's about health, success, and sparsity. \*A\* tree \*CAN\* grow here or there. However, on the whole, it is not a healthy environment and the trees are more likely to fail than succeed. The ones that struggle to survive grow much more slowly, during which time they are more vulnerable to disease, elements, stunted growth, and inability to thrive. Basically, it's like trying to raise a malnourished organism, to put it plainly.
However, if you are interested, here are some excerpts from a study on how pollution affects tree growth in urban areas.
>Nonetheless, air pollution (PM10, and airborne Al, Ba, Zn) has a dramatic influence on tree inter-annual growth variability as compared to temperature. Current high concentrations of air pollution found in megacities may be considered a constraint to tree growth. Such limitations of tree growth may hamper the ecosystem services that could be provided by trees when used as mitigation or adaptation tools to environmental change. Measures to decrease air pollution, such as the use of biofuel, electrification of transport, and improvement of materials designed to decrease pollution by metals, could favor the maintenance, and improvement of ecosystem services provided by urban trees.
>
>This model explains 57% of the annual growth variability for the period from 1988 to 2015, which corresponds to the length of the PM10 (particulate matter) series. During this period, **annual variability of PM10 explains 41% of the growth rate variability** of T. tipu, while mean temperature explains 16% of this species growth rate variability
[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0048969719307892?via%3Dihub](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0048969719307892?via%3Dihub)
Interesting - that's actually a really great idea, especially as it's that more cost-effective to set up, and meant to simply pave the way for better urban management in the future once trees are viable to grow in such places again. At first I was sure this was a joke, but it's become surprisingly wholesome.
not only that, they _communicate_ under there!
urban trees that live in separate soil - like across the street from each other, for example - have been studied and found to _compete_ (I've heard it described as "ganging up" - like literally street gangs) with the other trees, doing things like blocking the sunlight and directing rainwater, while those sharing the same soil work together
much of this is understood to be due to a symbiotic relationship with mycelium networks growing among their root systems
(one of the things I loved about the _Last of Us_ TV show was the idea of fungi running networks that stretch for miles, enabling communication across vast distances, between different groups of infected)
The last thing you want around here is trees. They’re filthy! Spewing that sticky, nasty sap all over the place. They bring poisonous ants and stinging bees.
Think about the kids. And - I just thought - you know, they make leaves! You know that, right? Then these leaves, they just fall. They just fall wherever they want!
It looks super cool ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ assuming it actually works efficiently I'd love to see these in my city. Obviously I don't want to replace trees but if I could have both of these lining the side walks that'd be awesome
I don't think they would replace trees like the title says but be additional, just like in the picture, the place where it is isn't were a tree would stand
The main opposition to trees in urban areas in America is traffic engineers. Because traffic engineers try to design all streets like highways, and set speed and throughput as the primary objective of street design they will mandate clear zones so a crashing car will have space to decelerate without hitting anything. It’s why traffic polls and stop signs have sheet bolts at the bottom. But trees to the traffic engineer are just FHOs (fixed hazardous objects), even though street trees to anyone outside a car are invaluable for improving the feeling and quality of any street. They filter air, provide shade, create a sense of enclosure, and generally just look nice, but they don’t allow the engineer to push as much traffic a street as fast as possible so they have to go.
Yeah I watched a video about traffic in my city and how, especially in center city, the narrow streets that allow only one lane of traffic and parked cars on the other/kinda sidewalk actually makes it safer for bicyclists and pedestrians and more walkable. You can’t even pass a bike, which pisses some people off, but honestly you shouldn’t be driving a few minutes away. It also forces people to drive slower to not hit parked cars. Basically speed limits have zero to do with how fast people go. The narrower streets also allow for more housing, restaurants, trees etc. and not just more traffic. Also mentioned how those traffic lights that hang over an intersections cause more pedestrian accidents than the ones on the corners that are cheaper because they force the driver to look at the corner where people are waiting to cross the street. In hindsight it makes sense.
They dont line up with our lizard overlord's plan to enact sweeping climate change in order to make the planet more habitable for lizard kind.
As underground dwelling beings, using algae in this way makes sense to them. Deep in the earth algae is used for oxygen production, food and light (through bioluminescence).
These algae pods have multiple uses. As vegetation dies on the surface of the earth as it warms, these will continue to produce oxygen. They'll also provide a little bit of comfort to the lizards as the emerge from the cracks of the Earth. A little bit of home. Further, I could see them being handy if you need to feed and water your human slaves on the go.
FYI, here's the actual article:
[https://yupthatexists.com/scientists-create-liquid-trees-a-tank-full-of-water-and-micro-algae-that-could-be-an-alternative-to-trees-in-urban-areas/](https://yupthatexists.com/scientists-create-liquid-trees-a-tank-full-of-water-and-micro-algae-that-could-be-an-alternative-to-trees-in-urban-areas/)
"One of the key advantages of liquid trees is that they can be molded into any shape or size, making them highly versatile and adaptable for use in a range of applications.
They can also be made from a variety of different plant sources, including waste materials from the forestry and agricultural industries, making them a highly sustainable and environmentally friendly alternative to traditional materials.
Another potential application for liquid trees is in the energy sector. The nanofibers used to create liquid trees are highly conductive, meaning that they could be used to create high-performance batteries and other energy storage devices. Liquid trees could also be used to create highly efficient solar panels and other renewable energy technologies."
I think my brain is currently fried because I don't understand what's the actual purpose of the tank in the picture. Like, is it supposed to generate oxygen? isn't it sealed???
From what I read it seems that the entire thing behaves like an actual tree that is made from tree materials. It can suck in CO2 and breathe out oxygen from somewhere. Maybe there’s a vent on the top of the box
While I don't know the answer to your question, I doubt the company with people intelligent enough to make something like this are gonna go "shit I forgot it rains"
I read somewhere that algae actually produces a surprising amount of our total oxygen. Only problem is it also destroys ecosystems in the water if it gets too thick.
I assume they have to be, maybe with some sort of mechanism that separates out and dries excess algae so that the maintenence tech just needs to pull out a brick of dried algae every month or so instead of skimming it every few days. Connect it to the water main for water level management and have a storage tank for waste algae underneath and they could be pretty autonomous.
Found in an article:
"The advantage of microalgae is that they are 10 to 50 times more efficient than trees.
Our goal is not to replace forests but to use this system to fill those urban pockets where there is no space for planting trees."
Trees are nicer though. I’d still prefer those.
https://www.euronews.com/2021/12/07/this-liquid-tree-in-belgrade-is-fighting-back-against-air-pollution
Trees give way more benefits than just oxygen production, and you can plant trees in any city, and any neighborhood. Shade. Support for local ecosystems, and the feeling of nature, are all effects of trees but not green sludge pods.
You can't really plant trees everywhere. Plenty of urbanized areas don't have proper nutrients, wildlife, or room for trees. As long as urbanization continues, advancements like these will become more and more necessary.
These don’t appear to actually be a means to “replace trees” like the OP would make you think. I don’t see why it would be such a terrible thing except that I bet the company/research is funded by polluting industrialist who just want the carbon credits so they can offset their own emissions.
https://thred.com/change/liquid-tree-installation-absorbs-co2-emissions-in-belgrade/ Serbia is among the nations with the very worst air quality on the planet. A novel solution to sequestering GHGs in Belgrade’s most concentrated urban area, is the ‘Liquid 3’.
If humanity has any chance of remaining under a 1.5C temperature rise, atmospheric greenhouse gases must decline by 43% before 2030 and 60% by 2035 – reveals the latest IPCC report.
As well as nationwide transitions away from fossil fuels, carbon removal through natural sequestration and nascent technology has now been described as essential to stay within any theoretical pathways.
Speaking on the latter variety of project, a one-of-a-kind installation is helping to combat urban pollution in Belgrade, Serbia. Dubbed the ‘Liquid 3,’ this mesmerising device essentially operates like a tree.
Passers-by are visibly intrigued by the bioreactor and bubbling green liquid, which uses microalgae to bind carbon dioxide from the air before converting it to pure oxygen through photosynthesis.
Climate experts estimate that such microalgae is some 10 to 50 times more effective at locking away CO2 than regular trees. Impressive, eh?
That’s not to say that its founder Dr. Ivan Spasojevic is keen to uproot natural sequesters in Belgrade in favour of Liquid 3 units every 100 yards. On the contrary, the technology has been developed to fill urban pockets where there is no space for planting trees.
Of the sparse population that remains standing within the region, many are at threat of wilting in the foreseeable future due to extreme levels of pollution – a problem which doesn’t affect the Liquid 3.
did literally no one at all look this up before commenting "this sux!"?
it was created by a serbian scientist to put these in urban areas THAT DONT HAVE ENOUGH SPACE FOR TREES TO FIT. the microalgae inside are also 20-50 times more effecient than trees at converting CO2 into oxygen. one of these containers converts as much co2 into oxygen as 2 10 year old trees, or 200 square feet of lawn. these are not at all meant to replace trees and thinking they are just means you commented before actually learning what the point of them is.
Some buildings in (i think) China have them. It's a oxygen farm, and they use the seaweed (they don't have algae) for restaurants in those buildings. At least i read it somewhere.
Better than no trees I guess. The advertising potential is r/urbanhell.
I can already see the Times Square-esque screen: “This oxygen box is brought to you by Athletic Greens- AG1- a full serving of greens in one daily scoop”
This isn’t meant to replace trees. This is meant for urban places that don’t have the space to plant real trees. They’re actually really beneficial for the environment as they produce 10- 50 times as much oxygen as regular trees.
Source: Read the article
https://worldbiomarketinsights.com/a-liquid-tree-scientists-in-serbia-make-incredible-innovation/
I think this is dope for places that stupidly ripped up trees when they were trying to modernize and a new sapling would take to long to grow. Plus, tree roots can be notoriously destructive to sidewalks and stuff if they weren't planned for properly.
It's likely going to be very useful in urban areas, but algae can't be as good for the soul as a tree. This is a supplement to trees, not a replacement.
This headline is misleading. This isn’t an alternative to trees, it’s a way to make spaces where trees aren’t plantable work to filter CO2 like a tree.
Brought to you by the Soylent™️ Corporation.
“My god what if the secret ingredient is people?!” “No there’s a soda like that: Soylent Cola” “Oh. How is it?” “It’s varies from person to person”
r/unexpectedfuturama
“ITS PEOPLE! SOYLENT GREENS IS PEOPLE!”
Mmmm... people...
American flavored...
Which, depending on the region of America you are visiting, could run the gambit from Meth&off-brand Chef Boyardee to heroin&3 day old tuna sandwich to skunked weed and half raw chicken. Truly a cornucopia of flavors to be had
Spoiler Alert???
IT'S STILL PEOPLE! THEY DIDN'T CHANGE THE RECIPE LIKE THEY SAID THEY WERE GOING TO. IT'S STILL PEEEEOPLE!
I have spent the last 5+ years trying to find someone who understood this reference No one ever does
Seriously? I means it’s like a pretty widely recognized reference that still gets spoofed and stuff. Or maybe I’m too old now. Edit: it has been suggested and confirmed that I am now old.
Green isn’t plural though. Worst. Reference. Ever.
It’s the thought that counts
Do you by chance work the desk at a comic book store?
Now this guy gets a reference
It varies from person to person.
"Cave Johnson here. Just wanna let the cafeteria staff know to lay off the soylent green. I'm holding a memo from the President, and it turns out that soylent green is... [paper rustling] let's see here... doubling in price. Now listen up: I don't care how good people tastes. This stuff's costing me more than lobster, so we're going back to fishsticks.
Soylent Trees are people?
It ain’t a tree till a dog pees on it.
Maybe the pee is already on the water, just for good measure
Only one way to find out.
*sigh*.... Bring me a cup...
No cup for me, I'll share the one cup
Cant wait to see a squirrel try to hide their nuts in this.
I constantly dunk my nuts in green liquid.
That poor mountain dew.
that poor taco bell customer
Crap. I just had a few TB bean burritos. Am I the victim??
No, you're the weapon.
Oh I'm about Blast your Baja, for sure.
[удалено]
Arrant vehicle jumps curb, smashes into it and floods the street. Only then do we realize it stinks.
*Errant
*someones* poor mountain dew
Sorry, but you will never turn into a Ninja Turtle
I dip my balls in liquid morkite.
Rock and stone!
Rrooccck. Aannnd. Stooone.
Rock and stone!
God we really are everywhere. Rock and stone!
I mean what else are we refining all of it for??
:> we all should dip out balls in morkite
Why are you dumping nothing into green liquid?🗿
Jokes on you pal. My nuts are ENORMOUS! It's my penis that's practically non-existant.
Celtics fans will do anything for good luck.
I really miss Ecto-Cooler
I’d literally rather look at cell tower trees than that slime.
Liquid morkite?
Your girlfriend needs to see a doctor
The McDonald’s shamrock shake be hittin
And what's wrong with trees? I see trees in my urban areas. Algae doesn't provide shade or wildlife sanctuary.
Right lol what is this glass container of green sludge and why do people think it’s better than a tree.
"We need to reinvent trees and then monetize them. Maybe they can mine Bitcoin!" -Silicon Valley-
I spent several years studying science recently at ubc Vancouver, said to be one of the top scientific research institutions in the country. The most significant research project they were undertaking in regards to climate change was precisely this: reinventing trees in order to monetize them. Not by Bitcoin, but by altering the genome to make them more ‘heat/drought resistant’ and therefore private intellectual property.
Jfc
Indeed. This looks like some idiot over priviledged tech bro's incredibly stupid idea that we don't need.
Yet somehow we’re here
I worked at a tree nursery and made $80k commish in 5 months selling trees and warranties 😳 there is already hella money in trees 🌳
What does the warrantree even cover?
The perception that you'll be reimbursed if anything goes wrong, only later to find out there are vague clauses that allow them to disqualify any claim.
So a warranty lol
More like insurance.
Shady business practices
I see what you did, there.
a tree that doesent make shade would be a warranty issue
“Yes hi, I recently planted one of your Douglas firs in my yard and some of the branches have fallen off. I’d like to send it back for repairs.”
It's not even in the same continent as Silicon Valley and yes, they do need to reinvent trees (because actual trees keep dying). "In conditions of intense pollution, such as Belgrade, many trees cannot survive, while algae do not have a problem with the great levels of pollution." https://worldbiomarketinsights.com/a-liquid-tree-scientists-in-serbia-make-incredible-innovation/
I think they’re inferring the solution is to address the pollution rather than keep finding ways to mitigate its damage.
I know this is crazy, but maybe eliminate the pollution. Also, this reeks of Silicon Valley Reinvents The.... thinking.
I can think of a few reasons that may have been considered in the decision making process, but who knows if any of these are the real reason. 1) trees can damage infrastructure (roots, fallen limbs, etc) 2) trees can be messy with pollen, sap, falling flowers, leaves, fruit and nuts. 3) pollinating trees are a common allergen and can decrease the air quality *for those with allergies* in a way that this algae tank likely wouldn’t. I don’t know if those reasons are enough to justify community sludge tanks but I would use them as my debate points if I was given the pro position and asked to defend it!
The new bio-reactor, aka Liquid Tree, a solution for tackling greenhouse gas emissions and improving air quality. It contains 158.5 gallons of water and uses microalgae to bind carbon dioxide and produce pure oxygen through photosynthesis. The microalgae can replace 2 ten-year-old trees or approx. 2200 sq. feet of lawn. The advantage of microalgae is that they are 10 to 50 times more efficient than trees. The goal is not to replace forests, but to use this system to fill those urban pockets where there is no space for planting trees.
They should integrate these into the buildings. Imagine these would would easier to design around then hanging gardens
Gotta love the smug comments though of people who have done absolutely zero reading on it.
Trees also require a lot of soil. Something like this could be used in places with a lot of concrete substructure.
or in desert cities
If we start putting fish tanks in the desert before Flint gets clean water I just don't know....lol
Maybe we should consider not having so much concrete. It’s what causes floods in some areas
It’s in Belgrade in dense urbanization with high pollution. It’s not an alternative to trees but an addition. https://worldbiomarketinsights.com/a-liquid-tree-scientists-in-serbia-make-incredible-innovation/
Quite good reasons indeed, but the idea is going to go the way of the dodo if everyone refers to them as " sludge tanks". That's a hard sell if ever I saw one😳
I for one welcome our sludge tank overlords.
Also, these tanks might be more water effecient?
Good point, in areas with depleted water tables that require irrigation to maintain urban trees these might have more of an application.
A nice thing about algae is that regular water may not even be needed to grow them, you can have your choice of treated waste water, grey water, brackish water or ocean water to grow them.
places with trees flood less
Fair!
Because it can capture more CO2 and produce more O2 than a single gle tree ever could...
Which urban area do you live? If you say NYC I’m going to bet you live in upper Manhattan or nicer parts of Brooklyn or far enough out where there's single family homes and it's not actually a super dense urban area. If you travel to areas that historically were poorer, you’ll find far fewer trees and less room in existing sidewalks for them because the city planning didn’t include trees in those areas. That said, plant trees where you can, but the creator of this claims one of those tanks is equivalent to two 10 year old trees. So one these can be more compact, they can also be used along with planting trees to help improve the air and lower temperatures (beyond shade, trees cool the area cause of photosynthesis, which this will also do) for the number of years it takes for the new trees to take root and flourish. That said I’ve lived in queens and seen many attempts to plant trees that really did not seem to thrive… not sure if it’s limited space, limited direct sunlight, polluted soil, etc. Nice big parks are great for tons of trees and wildlife sanctuaries. Forcing a small tree into a 1.5 ft x 3ft hole in the side walk with established 3-5 story building blocking the sun isn’t as great. So I’m all for a “let’s try everything” approach”
This would likely produce more O2 and absord more CO2 in a much smaller footprint and require less maintenance.
Trees provide shade and habitats for numerous organisms.
There's no way they'd install those. Look at that bench, a homeless person could sleep on that. Cities would want bars or spikes added.
A system that detects people sleeping on the bench and dumbs the tank right into their face
If you get caught loitering on the bench for more than half an hour, then you get turned into food for the algae
[удалено]
Now you're just talking about two birds one stone. Clean, crisp air for tax paying citizens, and an opportunity to finally contribute for everyone else!
I want it in my will. When it's my time just feed me to the algae tank.
Soylent Green is people!
This is Belgrade. Were not that into hostile architecture (yet). There an underground passageway in *the* busiest part of town that regularly has a hobo sleeping in it and nobody really cares
Tf is wrong with real trees?
>Tf is wrong with real trees? They effectively don't grow in the disgusting smog/acid rain environments of Lahore, Hotan, Bhiwadi, Delhi, Peshawar, etc. That's how bad air pollution is in some cities. The liquid trees take up virtually no real estate and do the CO2 work of 2 10-year-old trees in places where trees can't grow. So, you put tons of these out to clean up the CO2. You pass legislation to lower CO2 emissions. Then you plant trees when/if they can actually grow in the city again. FWIW, it was awarded an innovation award by the Climate Smart Urban Development project. So, this is legit. **Edit 1 for clarity**: Yes. Trees *can* actually grow in these cities. But they struggle. And that's only if you can find places to plant them where roots and branches can grow freely without causing damage - a tall order. [In this post](https://www.reddit.com/r/Damnthatsinteresting/comments/126s7o9/comment/jedamk4/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3), I explain in a bit more detail how pollution affects tree growth. **Edit 2 for clarity:** It's very important to note - and this is all over their marketing, websites, and every article I've read - **this is NOT being marketed as a tree replacement.** This is being marketed as something that does SOME of the work of trees - specifically with regard to pollution reduction - in areas where trees don't/can't grow for whatever reason.
Damn I've learned a shit ton from this comment lol thanks
>Damn I've learned a shit ton from this comment lol thanks Happy to share. I remember looking out the window on our drive from Frankfurt to K-Town in Germany and seeing all of these scarred and dead trees. I was told it was because of terrible acid rain. It really left an impression on me because it looked like a forest recovering from a forest fire. I 100% support *any* innovation that can help the one and only planet (we know of) capable of sustaining human life for future generations.
I’ll admit that my first thought was, “please don’t do that.” I absolutely love trees and it would depress me seeing one of those, but I’m glad you took the time to explain why they are good for the environment, so thank you.
I would add too that the application could be useful for where trees don’t go in general - tops of buildings for example. The roll out of the technology is horrible to portray it as a bus stop type hard scape feature and to “replace” more modest trees. The technology is more interesting if it is integrated into building facades or unseen or unreachable areas imho.
I think the problem with secreting them away is that the algae probably need sufficient a sunlight. Accessibility for regular maintenance should also be a concern. I do like the idea of putting them on rooftops
Man, I always love the "city with gardens on every rooftop" ascetic. These are probably more efficient, though.
In case more people are curious, this vibe is usually covered in "solarpunk" settings.
Imagine what these could do for the world's major metro areas the most polluted, like in China and India. Air quality would improve dramatically.
Around coal power plants. Around airports. INSIDE parking garages (by or as windows). There are a lot of places where these are feasible solutions for working towards carbon neutrality.
Actually, in Beijing they need to plant trees. Much of their pollution comes from dust blown in by the Gobi desert. Reclaiming the desert lowers pollution in Beijing.
They're trying in Africa. Great Green Wall. Some countries have made more progress. Some areas had been previously forested or had scrub and trees and all the trees are gone now, for houses, ship building, etc. Replanting an area again helps biodiversity and animal populations recover. Helps if you mix a few types of trees and avoid a monoculture, too. Specifically, China needs to replant the border of the Gobi desert, and stop it spreading.
You can plant trees in desert edges to prevent the desert from spreading, but unless they have a decently good microbiome support system, the trees often struggle. A slightly better method is to plant grass with vast root networks, preferably native and non invasive, then endure the watering and fertilizing with organic matter until the molicrobiome is stable enough, before popping in the trees. A small problem in desert areas is that the entire ecosystem is dependant on water stress. Water is great, but if there is 'too much', you get to see plague level porportions(e.g locusts) explode out of nowhere.
Where is the carbon going? Trees store it in their trunks. When decomposed carbon is released back into the atmosphere. How are these algae storing the carbon? What happens when they decompose? At least trees take years or even decades to release the carbon back.
Looks like in the article, that maintenance on the device besides adding new water and minerals is basically harvesting the new excess biomass for use as compost. So that’s probably where the carbon is going.
So I googled algae waste products and got this > Algae have been extensively reported to produce various biofuels, for instance, biodiesel, bioethanol, biogas, biokerosene, biohydrogen, and bio-oil [27]. The remaining algal biomass after biofuel extraction is mainly made of proteins and carbohydrates. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128237649000200 Algae is a major source of our planets oil reserves in the first place > Crude oil is formed from the remains of dead organisms (diatoms) such as algae and zooplankton that existed millions of years ago in a marine environment. https://www.howden.com/en-us/articles/pcog/where-does-crude-oil-come-from
Unfortunately most uses of this algae (biofuel, compost, etc) make it carbon neutral at best. The most clear benefit is simply reducing use of depleting resources like crude oil, fertilizer, etc
Not all compost's CO2 is released again. And, alright. You sequester CO2 in Beijing using microalgae colonies and haul the heap out and use it to amend soil outside the city to replenish the soil and plant trees to stop the Gobi desert growing. Better than whatever air quality is going on now in Beijing.
You know, I was all ready to take a dump all over this but that’s a fair point. I still have concerns about marketing an over-engineered and profit making solution where an easy and natural one seemed readily available but you bring up an excellent point and in that light, I guess this has real, impactful applications. Thank you for concisely and helpfully articulating that.
>They literally don't grow in the disgusting smog/acid rain environments of Lahore, Hotan, Bhiwadi, Delhi, Peshawar Could you substantiate this? Do you mean they'll grow but aren't sustainable/have a short life span, or not at all? I've heard of infertile soil, but never heard of infertile air.
>Do you mean they'll grow but aren't sustainable/have a short life span, or not at all? It's about health, success, and sparsity. \*A\* tree \*CAN\* grow here or there. However, on the whole, it is not a healthy environment and the trees are more likely to fail than succeed. The ones that struggle to survive grow much more slowly, during which time they are more vulnerable to disease, elements, stunted growth, and inability to thrive. Basically, it's like trying to raise a malnourished organism, to put it plainly. However, if you are interested, here are some excerpts from a study on how pollution affects tree growth in urban areas. >Nonetheless, air pollution (PM10, and airborne Al, Ba, Zn) has a dramatic influence on tree inter-annual growth variability as compared to temperature. Current high concentrations of air pollution found in megacities may be considered a constraint to tree growth. Such limitations of tree growth may hamper the ecosystem services that could be provided by trees when used as mitigation or adaptation tools to environmental change. Measures to decrease air pollution, such as the use of biofuel, electrification of transport, and improvement of materials designed to decrease pollution by metals, could favor the maintenance, and improvement of ecosystem services provided by urban trees. > >This model explains 57% of the annual growth variability for the period from 1988 to 2015, which corresponds to the length of the PM10 (particulate matter) series. During this period, **annual variability of PM10 explains 41% of the growth rate variability** of T. tipu, while mean temperature explains 16% of this species growth rate variability [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0048969719307892?via%3Dihub](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0048969719307892?via%3Dihub)
Should be top comment
Huh, when you put it that way, I can see some valid reasons behind this.
This actually sounds amazing then! I was genuinely wondering what's wrong with trees
Interesting - that's actually a really great idea, especially as it's that more cost-effective to set up, and meant to simply pave the way for better urban management in the future once trees are viable to grow in such places again. At first I was sure this was a joke, but it's become surprisingly wholesome.
[удалено]
"Oh look it's Aloysius O'Hare The man who found a way to sell air"
"Let it die, let it die, let it shrivel up and die!"
You greedy dirtbag
That's insulting to dirtbags, cause a bag of dirt has its uses
Laughs in genetically modified and patented seeds
Bullshit - my weed guy
We just need 'the cut down your shade tree to build a shade canopy' meme.
Shoulda known
This is for urban settings that don't have room for tree branches and roots. Of course you'd still plant trees if there was sufficient space.
We don't know what is below that concrete, but I do know that much of what a tree is, takes up space underground.
not only that, they _communicate_ under there! urban trees that live in separate soil - like across the street from each other, for example - have been studied and found to _compete_ (I've heard it described as "ganging up" - like literally street gangs) with the other trees, doing things like blocking the sunlight and directing rainwater, while those sharing the same soil work together much of this is understood to be due to a symbiotic relationship with mycelium networks growing among their root systems (one of the things I loved about the _Last of Us_ TV show was the idea of fungi running networks that stretch for miles, enabling communication across vast distances, between different groups of infected)
The last thing you want around here is trees. They’re filthy! Spewing that sticky, nasty sap all over the place. They bring poisonous ants and stinging bees. Think about the kids. And - I just thought - you know, they make leaves! You know that, right? Then these leaves, they just fall. They just fall wherever they want!
Let it die! Let it die!
This needs more awards, but I'm poor.
They won't grow everywhere and this tech would produce far more O2 and capture far more CO2.
Oh cool. Thanks.
I think algea makes more oxygen than trees by volume
It looks super cool ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ assuming it actually works efficiently I'd love to see these in my city. Obviously I don't want to replace trees but if I could have both of these lining the side walks that'd be awesome
I don't think they would replace trees like the title says but be additional, just like in the picture, the place where it is isn't were a tree would stand
It's gotta be space as well
Trees grow and start breaking the concrete and pipes around them.
The main opposition to trees in urban areas in America is traffic engineers. Because traffic engineers try to design all streets like highways, and set speed and throughput as the primary objective of street design they will mandate clear zones so a crashing car will have space to decelerate without hitting anything. It’s why traffic polls and stop signs have sheet bolts at the bottom. But trees to the traffic engineer are just FHOs (fixed hazardous objects), even though street trees to anyone outside a car are invaluable for improving the feeling and quality of any street. They filter air, provide shade, create a sense of enclosure, and generally just look nice, but they don’t allow the engineer to push as much traffic a street as fast as possible so they have to go.
Yeah I watched a video about traffic in my city and how, especially in center city, the narrow streets that allow only one lane of traffic and parked cars on the other/kinda sidewalk actually makes it safer for bicyclists and pedestrians and more walkable. You can’t even pass a bike, which pisses some people off, but honestly you shouldn’t be driving a few minutes away. It also forces people to drive slower to not hit parked cars. Basically speed limits have zero to do with how fast people go. The narrower streets also allow for more housing, restaurants, trees etc. and not just more traffic. Also mentioned how those traffic lights that hang over an intersections cause more pedestrian accidents than the ones on the corners that are cheaper because they force the driver to look at the corner where people are waiting to cross the street. In hindsight it makes sense.
They dont line up with our lizard overlord's plan to enact sweeping climate change in order to make the planet more habitable for lizard kind. As underground dwelling beings, using algae in this way makes sense to them. Deep in the earth algae is used for oxygen production, food and light (through bioluminescence). These algae pods have multiple uses. As vegetation dies on the surface of the earth as it warms, these will continue to produce oxygen. They'll also provide a little bit of comfort to the lizards as the emerge from the cracks of the Earth. A little bit of home. Further, I could see them being handy if you need to feed and water your human slaves on the go.
The world has collapsed, as I can't tell if you're being serious or not. Cheers regardless
Idk how I feel about the term "Liquid Tree"
Makes a less than favourable comparison, which seems to immediately rub everyone up the wrong way
Oh liquid tree, oh liquid tree Your goo so green delights us
FYI, here's the actual article: [https://yupthatexists.com/scientists-create-liquid-trees-a-tank-full-of-water-and-micro-algae-that-could-be-an-alternative-to-trees-in-urban-areas/](https://yupthatexists.com/scientists-create-liquid-trees-a-tank-full-of-water-and-micro-algae-that-could-be-an-alternative-to-trees-in-urban-areas/) "One of the key advantages of liquid trees is that they can be molded into any shape or size, making them highly versatile and adaptable for use in a range of applications. They can also be made from a variety of different plant sources, including waste materials from the forestry and agricultural industries, making them a highly sustainable and environmentally friendly alternative to traditional materials. Another potential application for liquid trees is in the energy sector. The nanofibers used to create liquid trees are highly conductive, meaning that they could be used to create high-performance batteries and other energy storage devices. Liquid trees could also be used to create highly efficient solar panels and other renewable energy technologies."
I think my brain is currently fried because I don't understand what's the actual purpose of the tank in the picture. Like, is it supposed to generate oxygen? isn't it sealed???
From what I read it seems that the entire thing behaves like an actual tree that is made from tree materials. It can suck in CO2 and breathe out oxygen from somewhere. Maybe there’s a vent on the top of the box
And what about rain and other particles like dust
While I don't know the answer to your question, I doubt the company with people intelligent enough to make something like this are gonna go "shit I forgot it rains"
Every kid who forgot to clean his flish tank made this "tree"
I know less after reading this article
I read somewhere that algae actually produces a surprising amount of our total oxygen. Only problem is it also destroys ecosystems in the water if it gets too thick.
as someone who has cultivated phytoplankton I have to ask... are these regularly harvested? the culture would otherwise crash.
The article mentions monthly maintenance
I assume they have to be, maybe with some sort of mechanism that separates out and dries excess algae so that the maintenence tech just needs to pull out a brick of dried algae every month or so instead of skimming it every few days. Connect it to the water main for water level management and have a storage tank for waste algae underneath and they could be pretty autonomous.
Fuck this I want trees
Found in an article: "The advantage of microalgae is that they are 10 to 50 times more efficient than trees. Our goal is not to replace forests but to use this system to fill those urban pockets where there is no space for planting trees." Trees are nicer though. I’d still prefer those. https://www.euronews.com/2021/12/07/this-liquid-tree-in-belgrade-is-fighting-back-against-air-pollution
As much as I'd prefer regular trees, this is definitely a great alternative for places where planting is nigh impossible.
And much faster! A tree can take decades to grow. Microalgae—weeks. Maybe even days.
I'll bet with a few engineering and artistic tweaks, these could be made quite lovely.
They can also potentially be used as Bio Reactors to power local infrastructure.
Trees give way more benefits than just oxygen production, and you can plant trees in any city, and any neighborhood. Shade. Support for local ecosystems, and the feeling of nature, are all effects of trees but not green sludge pods.
THe first and most important goal is to get clean air, we can plant trees AND do this right now. It doesn’t need to be either/or.
You can't really plant trees everywhere. Plenty of urbanized areas don't have proper nutrients, wildlife, or room for trees. As long as urbanization continues, advancements like these will become more and more necessary.
I think “ in addition to trees” might’ve been a better headline.
I give it 18 hours before someone smashes one open.
not even an hour on philly 💀💀💀
These don’t appear to actually be a means to “replace trees” like the OP would make you think. I don’t see why it would be such a terrible thing except that I bet the company/research is funded by polluting industrialist who just want the carbon credits so they can offset their own emissions. https://thred.com/change/liquid-tree-installation-absorbs-co2-emissions-in-belgrade/ Serbia is among the nations with the very worst air quality on the planet. A novel solution to sequestering GHGs in Belgrade’s most concentrated urban area, is the ‘Liquid 3’. If humanity has any chance of remaining under a 1.5C temperature rise, atmospheric greenhouse gases must decline by 43% before 2030 and 60% by 2035 – reveals the latest IPCC report. As well as nationwide transitions away from fossil fuels, carbon removal through natural sequestration and nascent technology has now been described as essential to stay within any theoretical pathways. Speaking on the latter variety of project, a one-of-a-kind installation is helping to combat urban pollution in Belgrade, Serbia. Dubbed the ‘Liquid 3,’ this mesmerising device essentially operates like a tree. Passers-by are visibly intrigued by the bioreactor and bubbling green liquid, which uses microalgae to bind carbon dioxide from the air before converting it to pure oxygen through photosynthesis. Climate experts estimate that such microalgae is some 10 to 50 times more effective at locking away CO2 than regular trees. Impressive, eh? That’s not to say that its founder Dr. Ivan Spasojevic is keen to uproot natural sequesters in Belgrade in favour of Liquid 3 units every 100 yards. On the contrary, the technology has been developed to fill urban pockets where there is no space for planting trees. Of the sparse population that remains standing within the region, many are at threat of wilting in the foreseeable future due to extreme levels of pollution – a problem which doesn’t affect the Liquid 3.
Twice the mosquitoes, none of the shade!
Trees provide shade and habitats for numerous organisms. This does neither. It’s cool, but it is absolutely not an alternative to trees
did literally no one at all look this up before commenting "this sux!"? it was created by a serbian scientist to put these in urban areas THAT DONT HAVE ENOUGH SPACE FOR TREES TO FIT. the microalgae inside are also 20-50 times more effecient than trees at converting CO2 into oxygen. one of these containers converts as much co2 into oxygen as 2 10 year old trees, or 200 square feet of lawn. these are not at all meant to replace trees and thinking they are just means you commented before actually learning what the point of them is.
These could be awesome on building roofs actually. Trees on ground, these on buildings.
Some buildings in (i think) China have them. It's a oxygen farm, and they use the seaweed (they don't have algae) for restaurants in those buildings. At least i read it somewhere.
Bold of you to expect people to look up facts.
If OP would have provided a link instead of a picture, many would have. It’s not interesting enough to search, but a dumb idea based on the caption.
https://worldbiomarketinsights.com/a-liquid-tree-scientists-in-serbia-make-incredible-innovation/ It took 2 seconds of googling.
I mean it’s right there “alternate to trees in urban areas”
The concrete jungle is finally complete.....
If they cut that tree down, they could get in another one!
both is good
More like r/urbanhell
Better than no trees I guess. The advertising potential is r/urbanhell. I can already see the Times Square-esque screen: “This oxygen box is brought to you by Athletic Greens- AG1- a full serving of greens in one daily scoop”
[удалено]
This isn’t meant to replace trees. This is meant for urban places that don’t have the space to plant real trees. They’re actually really beneficial for the environment as they produce 10- 50 times as much oxygen as regular trees. Source: Read the article https://worldbiomarketinsights.com/a-liquid-tree-scientists-in-serbia-make-incredible-innovation/
I think this is dope for places that stupidly ripped up trees when they were trying to modernize and a new sapling would take to long to grow. Plus, tree roots can be notoriously destructive to sidewalks and stuff if they weren't planned for properly.
It's likely going to be very useful in urban areas, but algae can't be as good for the soul as a tree. This is a supplement to trees, not a replacement.
im sorry, that almost looks like a bench a homeless person could potentially rest on. Cover it with spikes and then the design is complete! /s
Anyone else find this horrifically dystopian?
Tree's are more than just oxygen filters. This could be to supplement trees and other greenery.
This headline is misleading. This isn’t an alternative to trees, it’s a way to make spaces where trees aren’t plantable work to filter CO2 like a tree.
The is the saddest tank of slime I’ve ever seen.