this post was submitted on 04 May 2025
1311 points (97.7% liked)

Science Memes

14546 readers
661 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] iamkindasomeone@feddit.org 24 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Wake me up as soon as some goofy ass startup found out how to arrange the algae to display ads.

[–] InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago

Add a blockchain and you could get libertarians tripping over to invest

[–] shrugs@lemmy.world 22 points 6 days ago

let me introduce you to this: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/robo-bees-could-aid-insects-with-pollination-duties/

humans are crazy. You want to know whats wrong with trees and bees? It's pretty hard to make a profit of them

[–] VampirePenguin@midwest.social 18 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Welp, all the trees are gone but at least there are these cloudy stinking tanks of goo everywhere. Does anything not dystopian happen anymore? Like these things are a set piece from Blade Runner FFS.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 10 points 6 days ago (2 children)

It's a pretty bad example in this case because the picture is literally on a street with trees. What these are probably for is putting in places where no one's going to look at them but places where you can't put trees, like industrial estates and the rooftops of buildings. Aesthetics aren't important if no one is ever going to look at them aesthetically, and anyway they kind of look cool.

[–] VampirePenguin@midwest.social 2 points 6 days ago

I'm sure they're probably a good idea, I'm just crabby.

[–] arararagi@ani.social 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

The issue is that the roof is smaller than the bench, so it doesn't even provide shade.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 6 days ago

Like I said though that isn't what they're for. They're not going to replace trees they're just going to augment their CO2 absorption.

[–] Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works 12 points 6 days ago (2 children)

If it's actually more efficient then trees, could be a good idea. Saw a 51/49 video where he explained the urban development in the US requiring only male trees be planted leads to increased pollen levels and has made the "allergy season" 30+ days longer over the past 50 years or so.

[–] phx@lemmy.ca 2 points 6 days ago

I still want the trees outdoors, but this would be cool for indoor spaces. Each mall or parking lot could have a solar panel overhead and slime-tanks to produce useful byproducts.

Maybe it could be mixed with and aquaculture like fish and sea plants to create cool scenery

[–] korazail@lemmy.myserv.one 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

While I would hate to lose actual trees, I'm medium on the idea of this on it's own. People need lots of things and space, which causes the removal of trees. If we can replicate some of their functions, such as CO2 absorption with this tech, then that seems good. If upkeep is the same as a tree, I don't see a downside to the overall concept.

My thought would be that this shows up on top of the buildings instead of at ground level, though.... Plant real trees and put these on the roof. The real loss would be if we stop making green spaces because these things meet the need for O2. Green spaces in cities do way more than just clean the air, though, so I'm not sure we're that dystopian yet.

The photo looks like it doubles as a bench too, so maybe that helps justify its footprint. Make them a mini-light show with varied colors and it can become a functional art installation. How long until it has spikes to prevent someone from taking a nap on it, though?

[–] Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works 2 points 6 days ago

Yeah completely agree, I like trees and don't want them completely gone or anything.

[–] epicstove@lemmy.ca 10 points 6 days ago

When I was visiting Europe, seeing all the trees so well integrated into urban areas was so nice.

Then we git our flight back to Toronto. Concrete jungle.

[–] veggibles@lemmy.wtf 5 points 6 days ago

Back when I was a kid, trees still lived under water.

[–] CitizenKong@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago (1 children)

These algae also produce biogas that can be used for heating or producing electricity.

[–] BottleCaptain@lemmy.pt 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Damn if only trees created something gaseous that was useful

[–] AlolanYoda@mander.xyz 4 points 6 days ago

They emit carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, and oxygen, which causes rust in metals and aging in humans. So it's a negative really...

[–] DimFisher@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Keep in mind that tree roots can brake through anything

[–] ubergeek@lemmy.today 5 points 6 days ago

Not all do. That's an oak thing really. Pines, most stone fruits, etc, take a path of least resistance, unlike oaks which are more "I am going that way, and NOTHING will stop me!"

[–] quediuspayu@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Alternative in what sense?

[–] scala@lemmy.ml 12 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Pretty sure some cities have about zero areas for a tree to grow. Algae produces a much larger percentage of oxygen compared to any tree.

[–] quediuspayu@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Pretty sure trees in cities aren't there to produce oxygen or capture carbon.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 11 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Mostly they're there either for decoration or to lower street temperature. Depending on how long ago they were planted.

[–] MouldyCat@feddit.uk 8 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Trees do actually improve air quality, by absorbing harmful gases like sulphur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide through their leaves. Additionally they can reduce particulate pollution by up to 70% - https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200504-which-trees-reduce-air-pollution-best

[–] quediuspayu@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 days ago

I totally agree, and that's not the oxygen production these tech bros want to make more efficient.

[–] Etterra@discuss.online 1 points 6 days ago

Trees won't get some tech bros bought out by Google.

[–] Redredme@lemmy.world -1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Can we please, stop reposting this same shit pic for the last, I dunno, year?

This is the gazillionth time. I get it. Is a stupid algea tank. where a simple tree does the same for a fraction of the cost. It's of no use in the public space except as a tech demo or art object.

So. Yeah... Next?

[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago

This is only the second time I've seen it, but please... there was a time when complaining about reposts was the most often repeated thing I saw on reddit. Can we not have that bit of irony become a thing here?

[–] Prunebutt@slrpnk.net 149 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (16 children)

While I don't want to spoil the joke (but I will) and I hate techno-optimist solutions that displace actual solutions for our biosphere as much as the next person: supposedly, Belgrade is such a dense concrete hell that trees aren't viable solution (at least in the short term).

There is some rumbling that liquid trees are not the solution to the real problems caused by large-scale deforestation, nor does it reduce erosion or enrich the soil. However, much of this wrath is misplaced as Liquid tree designers say that it was not made as a replacement for trees but was designed to work in areas where growing trees would be non-viable. Initiatives like Trillion Trees are laudable, but there is something to be said for the true utility of this tiny bioreactor. The fact that they can capture useful amounts of carbon dioxide from day one is another benefit for them. Such bioreactors are expected to become widespread in urban areas around the world as the planet battles rising carbon levels in the atmosphere.

Source

load more comments (16 replies)
[–] rivvvver@lemmy.dbzer0.com 120 points 1 week ago (13 children)

im guessing "where will the animals go" is also a stupid question?

load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›