Guys, it's not one or the other. We can have trees and algae tanks. Trees can still offer all of the benefits they do like shade and beauty while algae tanks can be used to increase fresh oxygen. Algae is much better at absorbing CO2 than trees and providing clean air which is a big problem in a busy city.
It is one or the other because they’ll come out of the same budget - it’s an “opportunity cost”. So if the city has $1000 to spend on either a tree or a tank, then they can’t spend the same $1000 on both items. We’d need some balance between the two.
All these people being like “why don’t we just use trees” as if the capitalists could profit from them like this. And not to say this is cost efficient, of course planting a tree would be better for everyone, but whoever installs these things will have a contract guaranteeing them money that taxpayers will be told is being put toward green initiatives and so will be eager to part with it I guess
This whole thread is a great example of why I’m continually disappointed with Lemmy. Half the comments are just some variation of “capitalism bad”. I hate capitalism as much as the next guy, but it sure would be nice if people would stop grinding their axes for a few minutes to talk about the actual subject of the post. Or just not comment at all if they don’t have anything relevant to say.
Cato_the_podasist did. The OP of this thread said that this post has nothing to do with capitalism and that we should therefore stop talking about it here. Cato_the_podasist argued against that saying that pointing out the source of the problem is always relevant, THEREBY IMPLYING that pointing out capitalism is always relevant (because capitalism doesnt have anything to do with this post specifically) so if its relevant here, then were is it not relevant?
(What I meant is: Capitalism is not relevant here. Maybe sometimes it is the root of the problem but not in every case (and certainly not in this one).
People tend to forget that trees have roots.
Roots cause problems with infrastructure.
Hence why when a problem arises you try to "get to the root of it".
Also, trees that get too big have roots that damage infrastructure and have to be cut down. I’m not saying I like the dirty fishtank look more, but I can see how this might be easier to maintain in urban spaces.
And you can’t grow trees on concrete. This one is particular is just the first one of it’s kind and it’s mostly in a spot to show off the technology. I’m not aware of any other ones that have been built yet.
I saw something like this, which piped exhaust from a generator thru a container of water and algae, with the idea to capture the co2, etc produced. Sure why not. I'll still prefer trees.
God, yes. Trees provide shade, transpirative cooling, homes for animals (birds, mammals, insects), and a particular natural beauty that tanks of algae do not.
That was my thought as well. I’ve seen what some homeless people are capable of. (Not trying to dump on unhoused people, here, but there are some seriously ill people left out on the streets). This glass needs to be nearly unbreakable for it to work
Add comment