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

Science Memes

14572 readers
1116 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
[–] Prunebutt@slrpnk.net 149 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (6 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

[–] tostiman@sh.itjust.works 65 points 1 week ago

They can thrive in tap water and can withstand temperature extremes.

So maybe they can be used in regions that are too hot for trees, like desert cities

[–] kameecoding@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago (1 children)

And for people who think that the trillion tree idea is anything else than just the oil lobby running with a feel good solution, I have a great podcast episode for you

https://open.spotify.com/episode/3AZIvnCFvavc9Qfs10XPxW

[–] Prunebutt@slrpnk.net 23 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (7 children)

Spotify doesn't work on my phone. Care to link the podcast page on a platform not trying to corner the market, please?

[–] zea_64@lemmy.blahaj.zone 15 points 1 week ago (1 children)

They seem to be focusing on CO2. Trees in cities are going to capture a negligible amount of CO2 and for relatively high cost versus doing things outside a city. The point of trees in cities is shade and looking nice (good for mental health). Liquid trees solve neither of those.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] rivvvver@lemmy.dbzer0.com 120 points 1 week ago (5 children)

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

[–] RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works 66 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Also, where do I find the shade?

[–] NoForwardslashS@sopuli.xyz 33 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You will shelter next to the goo tank and you will like it.

[–] RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works 19 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Only until a person who is unhoused tries it and they decide to install spikes all the way around.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Flames5123@sh.itjust.works 16 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Exactly what I love about the Seattle tree coverage. So much shade.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] bratorange@feddit.org 95 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (13 children)

Like I always think that people don’t get one thing about trees in a city. There purpose is is not about co2. The co2 reduction of city trees is neglectable. The reason you need them in a city is temperature regulation, shade, air quality, mood, the local eco system and maybe solidifying unsealed ground. Putting these tanks in a city is laughably inefficient w.r.t. co2 conversion if you compare this to any effort to do this in instustrial capacity ( which is is also still laughably inefficient)

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] CaptPretentious@lemmy.world 72 points 1 week ago (2 children)

ITT: People who looked at some random headline, didn't bother looking further and assumed they knew everything.

It's a stupid headline. These tanks, are to directly affect air polution/quality in urban areas. Trees are terrible at that. The microalgae is 10-50x more effective in cleaning the air.

They aren't going to rip out trees for these. It would have taken you 10 seconds to find the source of the image and the article from 3 years ago to find out, the social media post was misleading. You spent more time making incorrect and wild accusations.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Phegan@lemmy.world 71 points 1 week ago (3 children)

This is missing out on likely the most important part of trees in urban areas. Shade. They give you a cooler place to stand or walk through.

[–] Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 49 points 1 week ago

No standing or sitting allowed. Resume consumerism!

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 62 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (6 children)

They get in the way of parking spots. The steel cages must rule supreme.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] MrsDoyle@sh.itjust.works 57 points 1 week ago (8 children)

I discovered when I joined a volunteer litter-picking group in my town that some people really hate trees. And I must emphasise HATE. They hate the shade they cast in summer, the way the leaves block the all-important View. They hate the fallen leaves in autumn. They hate the bare branches in winter. They hate the risk of branches falling in storms. They hate the racket the birds make. I was astonished - it never occurred to me that people would feel so strongly.

Turns out I'm a bloody tree-hugging extremist.

[–] bane_killgrind@slrpnk.net 15 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That's just unhinged. The trees are the view.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] bennypr0fane@discuss.tchncs.de 49 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (6 children)

I guess the "problem" with trees is obvious: it takes decades for them to produce the desired cooling effect in urban areas. You plant a dozen young trees today, you can begin to reap the cooldown 10 years later at best. Also, they need a lot if water, and many of them just don't make it - urban surroundings are just much hotter and more stressful (smog, salt...) then standing with other trees in a forest. I fail to see though how these artificial "trees" provide any kind of benefit at all.

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 18 points 1 week ago (4 children)

The amount of water required is trivial compared to most other water uses. Especially if correct species are selected.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] termaxima@programming.dev 43 points 1 week ago

We can have both trees and this ! Let’s replace the stupid ad spots on bus stops with these 😮

[–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 43 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Real answer is probably that they'd be used in addition to trees, designed to fit in places unsuitable for a tree.

[–] DasFaultier@sh.itjust.works 26 points 1 week ago

This. Trees (especially large ones) are a pain to irrigate properly, might not be drought-resistant, grow very slowly until they reach their full potential at removing CO2, interfere with infrastructure that we humans are used to (piping, electricity, telco), roots break up pavements, branches can be a hazard after storms, fruit might attract rats, ...

I'm very much pro trees (despite what I've listed in the first paragraph), but I'm sure there are places in cities where you can't plant trees but could put up algae tanks.

If you understand German (specifically Austrian dialect) you might like this podcast episode about challenges and methods to overcome them in the context of greenery in the city of Graz:

Simple Smart Buildings: Bäume in der Stadt

Webseite der Episode: https://podcasted3e6b.podigee.io/153-baume-in-der-stadt

Mediendatei: https://audio.podigee-cdn.net/1742586-m-9ecab280e580cd07f75c83ed9379b970.mp3?source=feed

TL;DL of this episode: it's not as simple as "just plant more trees".

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] notthebees@reddthat.com 35 points 1 week ago (6 children)

A few reasons: Trees need a lot of space and the space underneath a sidewalk isn't enough for long term life. They can die after like 30 years? This is tree dependent and location dependent.

Tree roots can destroy sidewalks making it harder for people to go over them. (Think people in wheel chairs)

Liability in terms of damage (have you seen trees after a storm?)

[–] MightBeFluffy@pawb.social 17 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Sounds like we need to remove the need for sidewalks. Rip up all the roads in the city and replace them with green space. Problem solved

[–] stray@pawb.social 28 points 1 week ago

I disagree. Pavement is valuable to pedestrians, cyclists, emergency and service vehicles, and the disabled. While it's important to preserve nature as much as possible, some urbanisation is also a good thing. That said, I'm not sure algae tanks would be necessary in areas where huge tracts of land aren't dedicated to parking. I can't really think of where my city would benefit from them.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Whats_your_reasoning@lemmy.world 33 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I recently learned that there's a group dedicated to planting 1000 trees in the city of Trenton, NJ, USA. I'm really glad to see a city working to bring back a little nature!

[–] bennypr0fane@discuss.tchncs.de 21 points 1 week ago (5 children)

In Vienna, Austria, Europe, every tree removed has to be replaced with a new as per regulation

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 28 points 1 week ago (7 children)

Trees don’t attract VC funding the way some dumb new invention does.

I guess this could be useful in places trees don’t fit but I think there are other simpler solutions.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] matlag@sh.itjust.works 26 points 1 week ago (5 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.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] DandomRude@lemmy.world 25 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Has the manufacturer even calculated how much energy is needed for production and how long it will take for the corresponding CO2 emissions to be amortized?

We are living in strange times...

[–] SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago

And trees that are planted in cities are not seeded. They are grown in a forestry until they reach a certain height. And then dug up with machines transported with machines and then planted with machines. The CO2 produced to plant a single tree also takes quite a while to be absorbed by that tree.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] iamkindasomeone@feddit.org 24 points 1 week ago (1 children)

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

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] TxzK@lemmy.zip 24 points 1 week ago

trees are not as profitable

[–] umbraroze@slrpnk.net 23 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Insert random copypasta about biotech breakthrough that turns water and CO2 and nutrients into sustainable building materials which sounds like space age technology but it's just trees

[–] Madrigal@lemmy.world 21 points 1 week ago (2 children)

You can’t charge a subscription fee for trees.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Xatolos@reddthat.com 21 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The problem with trees in an urban setting is trees have roots, and these cause issues. The can damage pipes and other underground objects. And many trees that are designed to not have these issues, end up with stunted/damaged roots which severely effects the trees growth. Planting trees in urban settings take quite a lot of pre-planning, and aren't drop in solutions, and if the areas weren't originally designed with trees in mind, you are likely to cause more problems than solutions.

https://greenblue.com/gb/avoid-root-heave-pavement-damage-caused-urban-trees/ https://tiptoptreeandgroundcare.co.uk/2025/01/06/tree-roots-in-urban-spaces/

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] shrugs@lemmy.world 21 points 1 week 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

[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Trees don’t create shareholder profits

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] VampirePenguin@midwest.social 18 points 1 week ago (4 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.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] CaptainHowdy@lemm.ee 15 points 1 week ago (3 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 1 week 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)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Sunflier@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week 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 1 week ago (5 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.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›