惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

腾讯CDC
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
P
Proofpoint News Feed
D
DataBreaches.Net
D
Docker
云风的 BLOG
云风的 BLOG
大猫的无限游戏
大猫的无限游戏
月光博客
月光博客
J
Java Code Geeks
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
罗磊的独立博客
Martin Fowler
Martin Fowler
U
Unit 42
Engineering at Meta
Engineering at Meta
IT之家
IT之家
Vercel News
Vercel News
B
Blog RSS Feed
人人都是产品经理
人人都是产品经理
博客园 - Franky
博客园 - 【当耐特】
Stack Overflow Blog
Stack Overflow Blog
G
Google Developers Blog
MongoDB | Blog
MongoDB | Blog

DYNOMIGHT

Thoughts I had while reading your comment Indirect lessons from human alignment Does every question mark deserve a Betteridge? Does creatine make you smarter? Pseudpocalypse Life with hazard ratios Blink if you’re human The worthlessness of vitamin D is mildly exaggerated Is “colorectal cancer” rising in “young people”? What’s with all the slide decks? You’re probably taking the wrong painkiller I quit drinking for a year LLMs predict my coffee The modern formatting addiction in writing Maybe there’s a pattern here? Heritability of human life span is about 50% when heritability is redefined to be something different Why read novels? Good if make prior after data instead of before Why the chicken crossed the road, according to various entities Underrated reasons to be thankful V Make product worse, get money Dating: A mysterious constellation of facts Pointing machines, population pyramids, post office scandal, type species, and horse urine Will the explainer post go extinct? Y’all are over-complicating these AI-risk arguments Shoes, Algernon, Pangea, and Sea Peoples Dear PendingKetchup You can try to like stuff I guess I was wrong about AI persuasion Futarchy’s fundamental flaw — the market — the blog post
So you want to use plants to reduce CO₂
dynomight · 2026-07-30 · via DYNOMIGHT

Humans make carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide is bad for cognition. But plants turn carbon dioxide back into oxygen. And plants are the one true home decoration strategy. So maybe if you get a lot of plants, you can you can keep carbon dioxide in check and keep your brain working?

It’s theoretically possible. It’s probably just barely possible in practice. But it won’t be easy.

People produce ~1 kilogram of carbon dioxide per day. That’s around 5.7 × 10²³ molecules or 0.948 moles per hour. (You may remember from high school that a mole is a gigantic number made up to avoid having factors of 10²³ everywhere.) Let’s keep it simple and call it one mole per hour.

Meanwhile, plants turn carbon dioxide into oxygen through photosynthesis, i.e. the chemical reaction of (6 water molecules) + (6 carbon dioxide molecules) + (energy) → (1 glucose molecule) + (6 oxygen molecules). The minimum energy physically needed to convert 1 mole of carbon dioxide into glucose and oxygen via the above reaction is ~477 kilojoules.

So we’ve already got a lower bound. Say you have magical plants that somehow channel all incoming energy into photosynthesis with perfect efficiency. They’ll need ~477 kilojoules per hour, which converts to a continuous usage of 132.5 watts.1 That’s a bit more than what’s used by two incandescent light bulbs, which isn’t too bad.

But you don’t have magical plants. Real plants do photosynthesis through a physical process with two steps, each of which involves four electrons absorbing a photon. That means you need eight photons per carbon dioxide molecule. If you want to tune your lights for maximum efficiency, you should give each photon exactly the minimum energy necessary to excite an electron, which happens to be ~1.8 eV. That corresponds to pure red light with a wavelength of 680 nm, and a continuous usage of 386 watts.2 No physical system using chloroplasts can neutralize your CO₂ using less than that. Somewhat high, but still manageable.

But your houseplants won’t be able to grab every single photon that hits them and direct it towards photosynthesis. In practice, ~30% of photons will reflect off the plant, or go through it, or hit some part of the plant other than the chloroplasts. That brings us to 551 watts.3

And there’s another issue. After plants make glucose, what happens to it? Some is used to grow more plant, which permanently sequesters carbon from the environment. But lots is also burned by the plant for the general business of staying alive, releasing the carbon back into the air. The exact amount burned in this way varies based on species and conditions, but around 40% loss reasonable,4 bringing us to 918 watts.5

That doesn’t sound that bad. But have you considered what it would be like to live in the same room with 918 watts of pure red light? In terms of radiant power, that’s the same as produced by ~765 incandescent lightbulbs.6 Modern LED grow bulbs are ~50% efficient, meaning you’ll actually need to spend ~1836 watts. If you’re imagining plants that you can actually see, adjust that upwards again for all the light lost to the room. And if you want to use normal light frequencies instead of living Red Life, then your LED bulbs will be less efficient at creating light and your plants will be less efficient at capturing it. Realistically, we’re talking about something like 5,000-10,000 watts, most of which is lost to the room as heat. Imagine five space heaters blasting you on high all the time.

But maybe you’re OK living in a tanning booth. Or maybe you’ll keep your plants in a perfectly reflective chamber. Or maybe your house has a glass ceiling and infinite free sunlight and free climate control. That’s cool. But have you forgotten about your old friend, photosynthetic photon flux density?

Plants can’t absorb infinite amounts of light. Chloroplasts take time to “reset” before they can absorb more photons. Your pet fern can only absorb ~52 watts of energy per square meter of leaf surface area.7 So no matter how much light you can produce, if you want to neutralize the carbon dioxide you make, you will need at least 918 / 52 = 17.6 square meters of fern leaf. Picture a 4.2 meter square wall, packed solid with ferns. If there are any gaps, stems, soil, or wall showing, it needs to be even larger. That’s the absolute minimum.

But maybe that still sounds OK? Fine. But consider one last barrier: Plants obey the laws of physics [citation needed]. If they remove carbon from the air, they must put that carbon somewhere. The only place it can go other than back into the air is into the plant itself.

The 1 kg of carbon dioxide you produce each day corresponds to 273 grams of elemental carbon. The only way for a plant to hide that is by creating more plant. But dry plant matter is only ~50% carbon, and for each gram of dry plant matter, plants have 5-10 grams of water (varying a lot by species). So in order to sequester all the carbon you make, each day you will need to grow around

(1 kg carbon dioxide)
× (0.273 kg elemental carbon / kg carbon dioxide)
× (2 kg dry plant / kg elemental carbon)
× (8.5 kg actual plant / kg dry plant)
= 4.6 kg actual plant.

Your garden must grow that much, every day. That’s 140 kg per month. You must prune and discard all that outside, or your garden is not actually sequestering anything.

In conclusion:

  1. Build an industrial indoor farm.
  2. Weigh it.
  3. Wait two weeks.
  4. Weigh it again.
  5. Divide the increase in weight by your own body mass.
  6. That’s the fraction of your CO₂ that you’re removing from the environment.
  7. Open a window.
Subscribe using this form or substack or RSS.
Correct mistakes with this form.
Comment at substack or lemmy.

Does creatine make you smarter? · science health

Life with hazard ratios · science health math

The worthlessness of vitamin D is mildly exaggerated · science health effort

Is "colorectal cancer" rising in "young people"? · science health

I quit drinking for a year · life health