artificial trees that absorb CO2

Why reinvent the wheel? Anyways, we're not even close. Check back in like a thousand years.

>>8513878
k I will, thanks for the tip

What's wrong with regular trees?

>>8514257
this

we should create artificial lagoons along desert coastlines and fill them with genetically modified superalgae

>>8514257
have a (you)

File: global_greening.jpg (35KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 500x375px

the gas of life
plants love it

>>8513873
We have the materials already. The problem being; the more CO2 they absorb, the less CO2 they are capable of absorbing. Its like trying to use a sponge to empty a bucket of water. You cant just leave it in the bucket, you need to wring it out and put it back in. So the artificial trees need to have the CO2 they absorb removed from them. You cant put it back in the air, so storing somewhere is your only option. Storing it, contained, under the tree seems like a good option. But it requires time, effort, and energy to remove the CO2 and store it. Which most likely created CO2 in the process. OR... you could plant a real fucking tree and let it store the carbon by growing, and power the process with sunlight. Artificial trees are a stupid idea.

>>8513873
They already have these, except they're not artificial

co2 is fertilizer of the air
its not a bad thing

>>8514953
Put in too much fertilizer and you kill the plant.

>>8514962
what ppm is too much fertilizer
1000?
10000?

File: Apple-Tree.jpg (23KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 300x300px

>>8513873
Watch Apple attempt to do this and put their logo on everything.

>>8513873
Who the fuck made that photoshop and why

>>8513873

>wasting your co2
>also the tech already exists, its called a tree, learn some biology pleb

>>8515131
and electric generators also exist, they're called electric eels, inventing other means to produce electricity was unnecessary.

File: plant-growth-co2.jpg (65KB, 612x556px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 612x556px

>>8514966
Many greenhouse growers supplement CO2. The Canadian Ministry of Agriculture recommends supplementation of 1000 ppm to reach 1400 ppm during the day. More has little effect on growth. Workplace safety regulations limit is 5000 ppm. To put it into perspective: 100 ppm means 1 CO2 molecule out of 10,000 air molecules. This is the difference in global CO2 concentration between 1900 and 2015.

>>8514257
Trees aren't designed to capture carbon, they evolved to survive and produce seeds. A mature forest is generally carbon neutral.

To make it fix carbon, you have to harvest wood, and not burn it or ever let it decompose.

Peat's what makes most of the coal, and it's slow-growing.

An "artificial tree" could work all year round regardless of temperature or water supply, not shed any leaves or sticks, and feed convenient carbon-containing products like plastic beads for molding, resin, or liquid fuel directly into supply lines.