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

Science Memes

14549 readers
515 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 21 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

[–] matlag@sh.itjust.works 26 points 6 days ago (3 children)

The issue with trees is you need to adapt the city to them, you can't adapt them to the city. And people have proven once and again that they would invent anything to not move by an inch when our way of life is put in question.

So we push forward with absurd solutions one after the other: carbon capture, atmospheric geo-engineering, a damned nuke in antarctica, and now "liquid trees".

Because the alternative is to change our ways, and we can't face that.

[–] ThatGuy46475@lemmy.world 10 points 6 days ago

I would be fine with changing my ways if changing my anything didn’t require endless paperwork. How is it fair that some guy invents agriculture and now I have to have a credit score

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 3 points 6 days ago (2 children)

That's an incredibly negative spin.

All these technologies are improvements on the natural version, not a replacement for the natural version, but an upgrade. If you want nice trees go take a walk in a city park, these aren't for looking at they have a different objective. We can have both things, one isn't trying to replace the other.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] 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 9 points 6 days ago (3 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.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works 12 points 6 days ago (3 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

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] 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.

[–] Sunflier@lemmy.world 14 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Few things about trees in cities: (1) tree roots ruin sidewalks because they upend that stuff; (2) tree roots get into and ruin infrastructure, (3) not every curb can sustain a tree, so these could fit where a tree could not; and (4) they damage stuff when they fall over in storms.

[–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 15 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Crazy thought - instead of just putting trees near curbs, have dedicated green spaces in cities where there aren't sidewalks or other important infrastructure near the trees.

[–] trolololol@lemmy.world 10 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Where did you get these ideas you freak

[–] captainjaneway@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Parks? Gross. I like parking lots.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] echodot@feddit.uk 6 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

I think the current plan is to simply depopulate the United States through fiscal policies and have everyone move back to Europe.

[–] Sunflier@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Why not both green spaces (central park anyone?) and these alge pods everywhere else?

[–] CaptainHowdy@lemm.ee 15 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Dumb take. If someone crashes their car into one of these, it can be replaced in a few days. Trees take decades to grow in ideal conditions. Between tall buildings in a city is far from ideal conditions.

Also algae is way more efficient at converting CO2 into O2; I think it's maybe multiple times more efficient using the same amount of light.

[–] smeenz@lemmy.nz 28 points 6 days ago (3 children)

As an emergency responder, I can say with confidence that when a car hits a tree, it's rare that the car wins. The tree usually just shrugs it off.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 14 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Dumb take, by the guy who has no idea how much it costs to maintain these tanks or any understanding of the scales involved, all while wanting to live in a world of green goo in tanks instead of one with trees in their cities.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RedFrank24@lemmy.world 14 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Trees take ages to grow, and their root systems damage buildings and pavements.

[–] Oni_eyes@sh.itjust.works 9 points 6 days ago

Also really really hard to keep trees alive on the sides of buildings where these units could conceivably be used. Modular trees plus trees where we can fit them.

[–] Kekzkrieger@feddit.org 7 points 6 days ago

But the shade of a tree is far superior and reduces the overall temperature around them if many are planted, so overall much better.

Also certain trees dont need deep roots and can grow without neccessairliy damaging the pavement.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] 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...

[–] Charlxmagne@lemmy.world 8 points 6 days ago (1 children)

All these braindead silicon valley tech bros trynna reinvent existing solutions to problems in very expensive and unnecessary ways, marketing it as "revolutionary" and "groundbreaking"

[–] BussyCat@lemmy.world 15 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

The majority of our oxygen comes from algae, they aren’t reinventing existing solutions they just put a tank of them in a city and blow air into it so that a city can use the same more efficient ~~fauna~~ flora that is available in coastal cities

[–] NichtElias@sh.itjust.works 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I believe algae are flora, not fauna

[–] BussyCat@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

You are absolutely correct and that was a stupid on my part

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] FrowingFostek@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago

I would support legislation that mandated these be used around the highest carbon emitting facilities. Maybe a few very well designed structures (algae tanks) in very densely populated cities.

These would be in no way a replacement for trees in a community but, I could see forcing the corporations to use them. Such as those that must pollute because, they can not manufacture these products without polluting.

[–] wildcardology@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago

The problem with trees is they are used as lumber. The national parks has always been protected. But Trump has unprotected parts of the national parks to be cut down for lumber.

[–] 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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] 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.

load more comments
view more: next ›