Priligy online now, save money

JUN 24

Recent Comment

"This is a waste of grant money that could better be spent on things li..."

View all Comments

Can a Synthetic Tree Beat the Real Thing?

We all know that trees are great absorbers of CO2 and the idea of increasing the planting of trees to cheap cialis super active act as carbon sinks, especially in areas around coal plants and other offenders, has been floated around for a while.  But can you make a better tree?  A Columbia University professor thinks so.  He and his company, Global Research Technologies, have created a synthetic tree that they say captures CO2 1,000 times faster than regular trees and without the need for direct sunlight.

The trees feature plastic leaves that trap the CO2 in a chamber.  The gas is then compressed into a liquid and could be used in fuels or fertilizers. The trees collect 1,000 kg of CO2 for every 200 kg it emits and each tree could capture up to 90,000 tons of CO2 per year.

The trees are expensive to produce - about the same as a new car - but their performance could warrant the enter site cialis free pills price.  The trees' ability to capture CO2 without the aid of international shipping order viagra sunlight means they could be used in dark, enclosed places where most trees couldn't survive.  They could be used to retrofit coal plants or placed in other areas that are subject to high CO2 emissions to curb the amount reaching the atmosphere.

via Popular Science


Hits: 13753
Comments (15)Add Comment
Carbon - Oxygen balance with CO2 capture
written by shek, June 24, 2009
If we start to sequester large amounds of CO2, is it refined in some way to allow the oxygen to escape? Otherwise I'd wonder if there would be any long term affect on the amount of O2 in the atmosphere, since the oxygen had previously been free in the air.
written by Flahooler, June 25, 2009
Humans have yet to develop any technology that rivals it's natural equivalent. Yes, perhaps these structures can capture more CO2 per year than a natural tree, but one should not neglect all of the brand name cialis for sale additional benefits that trees provide ... wildlife habitat, O2 production, erosion protection, etc. Fill the world with real trees, I say, and leave this foolishness on the drawing board.
written by Mr. Sinister, June 25, 2009

Amen to that! Perfect example is a recent story on the discovery of a process that uses ordinary chicken feathers to store hydrogen as efficiently as carbon nanotubes. Look how long it took humans to we recommend buy levitra online without a prescription come up with the carbon nanotube ... chickens, on the other hand, have been making feathers for quite some time.
written by Fred, June 25, 2009
Well at least they wont die. We wont be able to use them for paper. What happens overtime? Will they deteriorate?
written by Matthew, June 25, 2009
Ok, so these things absorb carbon 1000 times as quickly as trees. But I bet they cost way more than 1000 times as much as planting a tree, so the economics probably just aren't there. And what's the value of capturing the carbon close to the release site? It makes no difference to the atmosphere whether the CO2 is absorbed next door to the coal plant or on canadian healthcare pharmacy the other side of the world.

Planting natural trees probably costs less, has fewer embodied emissions, and contributes many ancillary environmental benefits beyond carbon absorption.
written by Alternative Green Technologies, June 25, 2009
I can't see using synthetic trees as a long term goal. I mean, that's just asking for trouble. I'm sure creating these trees is the best place levitra online switzerland using some form of buy cialis pill energy that could be better spent somewhere else.

I say plant a thousand trees instead of one synthetic tree.
written by Josh, June 25, 2009
Why do something if nature already provides it?
Plastic leaves?!
written by Laurent, June 25, 2009
Ok, I am not Einstein, but isn't it plastic one of the major toxic pollutants of our time ? (composed of toxic chemicals [hydrocarbons, sufur, chlorine ...etc], which pollute earth, air and water)

What is the cialis tablets for sale composition of these plastic leaves ? (quantity/tree)

Could the trees be recycled, when a more developed kind is developed ?

What is the goal of these trees ? Hope it won't be a way to justify more deforestation...

At the end, the tree might have untold impacts on the environment !

Thanks to give us more information smilies/smiley.gif
written by Ben, June 26, 2009
This really depresses me. Are you serious? Synthetic trees?
Why stop at coal nuggets?
written by Sam Crutsinger, June 26, 2009
Heck, if you're capturing CO2, releasing the oxygen and compressing the carbon, keep compressing it and just crank out diamond glass panes. No need to shuttle carbon off to the coal mines. It's quite useful right here, just not floating around in the air.

For those dogging artificial trees, not ever climate is capable of which is better viagra cialis growing trees. A good chunk of Arizona can't support anything taller than a 1' shrub.
written by Herno, June 27, 2009
The problem is the large amount of energy it probably needs to absorb and viagra no rx required then compress the CO2 into a liquid form
Fast and concentrated
written by Tem, June 27, 2009
i think the whole idea of the plastic tree was to capture a ton of CO2 at the point of production/emission, which sounds good on paper, but I think it would be impractical in the long run. The real solution is to plant "and protect" at least 100,000 new trees year to revitalize/expand all the generic levitra pills forests (and related habitat) that used to scrub our air clean for free, oh and keep it cool too. This would also include protectingour existing forests, but the much more expensive selective logging that ecologically friendly forest management supports should be the status quo, producing prices for hardwood that bring the true cost of foresting to the consumer (just grow bamboo, and use recyceled wood as ther is tons of that stuff around) Oh, and stop cutting down all of our exisitng forests right away. We've had cheap energy for seveal decades, as well as cheap wood, and cheap clean drinking water. If we decide to change our habits of over consuming and start to reuse, recycle and rethink how our large populations consume, then ... well we will have to buy viagra online without a prescription find another planet to start all over again ;-), I suppose that is canadian tramadol no prescription why we have NASA? So, now that i have solved all of the worlds problems i will go to bed now ;-). Good night!
written by Patrick, June 30, 2009
Instead of putting so much effort into making a synthetic tree, why not plant real trees that do the same thing. It's extremely hard for us as humans to even reproduce what nature already does, let alone try to improve upon it.
written by Alexis, July 31, 2009
I think we should stop synthezizing, co2 is not only bad , there is probably a reason for it ... now we want to stop cows from farting ???
written by Kye, August 31, 2009
This is a waste of grant money that could better be spent on things like wind energy and the like....rubber trees?!? Have they thought about what this could possibly do to Wildlife?? Leave to Humans to waste time, money, energy on making fake trees instead of just planting the real deal..smilies/angry.gif

Write comment

security code
Write the displayed characters


Are you an EcoGeek?

We've got to keep 7 billion people happy without destroying our planet. It's the biggest challenge we've ever faced....but we're taking it on. Are you with us?

The Most Popular Articles