• matlag@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    8 hours ago

    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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      7 hours 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

    • desktop_user@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 hours ago

      trees take don’t come with actual requirement lists. An algae pool can and will come with explicit instructions that are able to be met and won’t destroy the sidewalk for no reason.

  • Sunflier@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours ago

    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.

  • Captain Howdy@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    10 hours ago

    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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      9 hours ago

      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.

    • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      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.

  • The_Caretaker@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    8 hours ago

    You see, trees get in the way when we want to put down more asphalt to make more room for cars. We need more lanes for cars to park in and more parking lots for cars to park in. The goal is to turn the city into a place devoid of anything but asphalt. Then with no access to dirt to grow food or water to keep them alive, the people will be 100% dependent on their capitalist overlords. Everyone wins.

    • Kekzkrieger@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      9 hours 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.

    • Oni_eyes@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      10 hours 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.

  • FrowingFostek@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    9 hours 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.

  • Charlxmagne@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    11 hours ago

    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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      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

  • CaptPretentious@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    70
    ·
    16 hours ago

    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.

    • Oni_eyes@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Even with the misleading headline, has nobody commenting about how bad it is ever seen how many trees die when set up in low light conditions? These can be used in places trees wouldn’t be effective, and that’s before the whole “they’re better at cleaning the air” bit.

      • nickiwest@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Even with ideal light conditions, there’s still more to consider.

        I lived in Louisville for many years. It’s fairly green as cities go. In older parts of the city, trees had been planted between the streets and sidewalks … definitely a long time ago, maybe 30 to 50 years? Maybe longer?

        Every spring, we lost a number of those trees to thunderstorms. Enough rain, followed by strong winds, would topple multiple trees. Every single one that I saw had a root ball that was exactly the size of the opening where it had been planted, so maybe two square meters and maybe a meter or two deep. (For those keeping score at home, that’s not enough root volume to support a full-sized tree.)

        So we’d lose those lovely trees and on a good day, we’d lose the use of the street for a while. On a bad day, someone would lose a car or a chunk of their house.

        “Just plant more trees in the middle of the city” is not the brilliant fix that many people seem to think it is.

  • wildcardology@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    10 hours 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.

  • MrsDoyle@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    55
    ·
    17 hours ago

    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.

    • Lord Wiggle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Yeah trees are assholes. They always ring my doorbell trying to sell me the book of Gaia. Constantly telling me “you can’t smoke here, sir”. There’s a tree behind my house who constantly wears the same glasses as me. Whenever I buy new ones, a day later this tree has the same. He’s constantly mocking me for no reason.

      I think all trees should be cut down and burned. Algae never complain, are always kind and always say “good day sir” when you walk by.

        • Lord Wiggle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          So many trees have destroyed people their houses with stupid forest fires. Have you ever heard of algae fires? No! Because algae aren’t assholes!

    • desktop_user@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Leaves are annoying in urban areas with full concrete/asphalt/metal/glass environments. Different people like different things and some aesthetics are incompatible.

  • matlag@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 hours ago

    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.

  • Xatolos@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    16 hours ago

    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/

    • sqgl@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      In Australian temperate climate areas we have the brush box whose roots do not cause these problems. Unfortunately evergreen, casting shade in winter.

  • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    18 hours ago

    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.

      • BussyCat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        10 hours ago

        How much CO2 does the tree on your desk take in? Do you think it approaches 1/1000 of the amount that a bunch of algae can take in? So maybe it’s not the same and comparing it as being the same is done in bad faith. Trees are great and in many cases are superior as they also provide shade, but you can’t ignore the negatives of them(mostly related to their roots) and that they don’t work in every situation

      • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        16 hours ago

        Your potted tree isn’t a tree in the sense that I’m talking about. The environmental services trees provide are all based on size and so are predominantly provided by larger trees. Cities usually avoid planting these under electrical wires and in smaller tree basins to avoid damage to infrastructure. So practically, there are many urban locations where big trees won’t fit.

  • Phegan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    72
    ·
    22 hours ago

    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.