/sci/ - Science & Math

>>14766226
Houseplants or something idk.

>>14766227
Try doing a back of the envelope calculation. You need hundreds of plants for a single person.
>>14766226
>any other ideas?
Open a window.

>>14766227
only things like a tank of microalgae would be viable for this

>>14766242
>Try doing a back of the envelope calculation. You need hundreds of plants for a single person.
I have 35 plants in my 1 room appartment
Do you think its enough?

>>14766255
you produce 1 kg of CO2 per day
so not likely

>>14766226
Do you want to reduce co2 or inceease o2 concentration? Turn your room into a hyperbaric chamber and all you will need is an air compressor

Completely infeasible without spending big bucks on real lithium-based CO2 scrubber. And no, plants/algae won't do shit.
t. looked into this extensively

I never open windows because I have an expensive Japanese air purifier
Am I fucked

>>14766344
Crack the windows. You want like 90% recirculation and 10% outside air. They work together for best air quality.

>>14766226
>what's a good /sci/ way to reduce indoor CO2 levels?
open the window you absolute mong

>>14766341
why lithium specifically? not like I'm on a sub or spacecraft where weight and heat generation matters.

microalgae works, but you need a lot of it in a bioreactor with lights and circulation.

>>14766591
at 417 ppm the indoor air quickly goes bad again.

>>14766683
>why lithium specifically?
Because it's the only chemical that absorbs CO2 fast enough to make a practical difference. It's chemistry, I don't make the rules.
>>14766683
>at 417 ppm the indoor air quickly goes bad again.
Connect your purifier's intake to your window with a short piece of duct. IQAir sells a premade version of this but it's expensive.

I work in an isotope lab with a 0 ppm CO2 atmosphere. There’s no difference that I can discern

>>14766730
The "carbonation capacity" of the two compounds seem to be pretty equivalent in this study though?
>Post combustion CO2 capture with calcium and lithium hydroxide, Costagliola, Nature (2022)
(spam filter)

>>14766825
>MUH DRUQS

>>14766835
can't beat the filter = low iq

>>14766261
Simply grow 1 kg of plants every day. Choose fast growing food plants that you will harvest regularly. Lettuce, watercress, nasturtiums, radishes, chives, scallions, peppers, microgreens ect.

>>14766835
Well now I'm curious. Get yourself a CO2 meter and try it out. Tell us your results. Maybe you can even get them published.

>>14766683
>at 417 ppm the indoor air quickly goes bad again.
Well, it was at 280 ppm, but some people NEED to drive to McDonald's

>>14766226
May I ask why you want to lower CO2?

>>14766847
Or just eat the far easier grown algea. If you live in a humid sealed off space you won't be happier with "proper" foods.

>>14766843
the intuitive way (spacing, replacing symbols) seemed wasted because the filter counterintuitively blocked a Nature.com link on a science board. pretty disincentivizing, especially given captchas. optimized for time.

>>14766853
hehe cheers. gonna connect a CO2 sensor (not "CO2-equivalent") to a WiFi-enabled MCU for starters.

>>14766226
Just bioengineer a plant that you can live inside of.

>>14766840
you got triggered because plants is the best way to reduce indoor co2 levels.

>>14766847
not too sure that this is "simply" done unless all of my walls are covered with vertical hydroponics. also not a 1:1 CO2 plant mass ratio


>>14766933
I think humanity is globally cognitively gimped by current CO2 levels and especially the indoor CO2 levels. would like to see to what extent it can affect n=1 by bringing it down to a few notches.

>>14767145
feel free to calculate how many cannabis plants (or other plants) you need to sequester 1 kg of CO2 daily

>>14767165
go live in a greenhouse and see how much your iq increases. greenhouse atmospheres without co2 generators or substantial ventilation can become so CO2 deprived that the plants stop growing.

>>14766933
Anything above 300ppm is unnatural for humans.

>>14767191
>so CO2 deprived that the plants stop growing
Bullshit. CO2 burners are used to slightly improve growth rate and yield when all other growth factors are maximized. We're talking like a 20% improvement here. The plants don't just suffocate without them.

>>14767145
This is your brain on drugs
>>14766226
Why do you need to reduce indoor co2 levels?

>>14767215
>t. i have never even been in a greenhouse, but i consider myself an expert

>>14767378
this is where you could have pointed out possible errors and shared your eventual knowledge instead of posting useless ad homs. if you think someone is incorrect then explain why

>>14766226
Why would you want to do this?

>>14766226
open a window, and don't as much as possible keep bedroom doors, etc. open so your rooms can ventilate.
>>14767305
>>14767594
OP probably doesn't want brain damage from exposure to excessive levels of CO2, as the indoor levels can easily rise to 2000 ppm if ventilation is poor.

Can't you just get a higher capacity air exchanger? you don't live on a spaceship

>>14767594 see >>14767165

>>14767625
>>14767614
the issue with increased air exchange is the drastically elevated levels of atmospheric CO2 compared to just a few decades ago. these levels may already be clinically relevant and problematic(TM) given chronic exposure

get a ventilation system, pump fresh air in and pump old air out
or are you guys trying to come up with overly complex new ideas?

>>14767644
I guess, but the CO2 level outdoors is still usually lower than the CO2 level indoors unless you have some kind of expensive scrubbing system.

>>14767644
>the issue with increased air exchange is the drastically elevated levels of atmospheric CO2 compared to just a few decades ago. these levels may already be clinically relevant and problematic(TM) given chronic exposure
Why do you believe something like that? There's no experimental or observational evidence for it. It sounds like green party propaganda.

>>14767718
> the CO2 level outdoors is still usually lower than the CO2 level indoors unless you have some kind of expensive scrubbing system.
the outdoor co2 level fluctuates massively during the day due to plant respiration, its probably higher than the indoor level from a few hours after sunset to about noon on most days. you'd have known that if you'd ever owned a co2 meter, but you're clearly not interested in the topic enough to be bothered with that, spouting poorly drawn conclusions based on ignorance is the best you can muster.

>>14767644
Why not just buy one of the electric oxygen conentrators that people with COPD use?

>>14767746
>the outdoor co2 level fluctuates massively during the day due to plant respiration, its probably higher than the indoor level from a few hours after sunset to about noon on most days.
I do know a CO2 meter and can tell this is bait.

>>14767056
You have to regularly dispose of the algae or the decomposition will release the CO2. Not worth the effort for something you just throw away.

>>14767165
Shelving exists. Look into microgreens. They take very little space, need very little light, and provide significantly more nutrition than mature vegetables. Most microgreens don't even need soil.

>>14767191
>>14767378
>Imagine being this retarded

>>14767165
>>14767826
I did the math for you. The yield is 8-12 oz every 7-14 days per 10" x 20" tray. You would need 20-60 trays to sink 1 kg of CO2 each day. Pic related can hold 3 trays per shelf if you angle them slightly, which means you need 2-4 with indirect sunlight or grow lighting to hold all of your trays. I recommend getting heat mats to speed up germination.

>>14767740
>Why do you believe something like that? I don't. I said:
>these levels may already be clinically relevant and problematic(TM) given chronic exposure
"may".
Kinda what I want to experiment a bit with. Given how shorter exposures at higher concentrations rapidly demonstrate negative cognitive effects, a reduced effect given lower concentrations and greater duration could be plausible.

>>14767750
Only seems to increase O2 but not reduce CO2, right?

>>14767921
What is grown here? Any kind of small seed?

>>14767165
>I think humanity is globally cognitively gimped by current CO2
what is the basis for this opinion
what if it's the opposite

>>14768114
If it's the opposite I have to eat less meat, stop heating my flat to 25°C in winter and fly less. So I believe what suits me best.

>>14768114
things like this study (for example)
https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/10.1289/ehp.1104789
but on a more chronic level

>>14767972
Usually stuff like basil, beetroot, arugula, kale, coriander.

>>14766226
KOH, NaOH, Ca(OH)2
real lime (CaCO3) is useless until heated and converted to Ca(OH)2
but if you want to scrub it in the water phase, this won't work since lyes would dissolve, I guess column with algae (and outlet filter to prevent them further circulating) it the only approach

>>14767972
Pretty much. Things like broccoli, kale, beets, radishes, cabbage, arugula, basil, garden/water cress, cilantro, dill, fennel, celery, nasturtiums, ect. Some things can be grown as microgreens without any light, like corn which gets bitter if it gets too much light.

>>14767921
If I had these but kept the window open, would the breeze help or hurt my efforts?

>>14768211
It wouldn't hurt the plants, but it would hurt your efforts to reduce the CO2 in your house

>>14766847
based and naturepilled

>>14766227
In order to affect indoor oxygen & CO2 levels by a meaningful amount, you would need plants covering literally every square inch of your house - walls and ceilings included.

>>14768215
That depends where you live though, citycucks obviously yes, the other you might just double the CO2 reduction by opening window

>>14768257
You'd still want it to be a window on the other side of the house from the plants. Otherwise a significant portion of the oxygen produced would be lost.

>>14766226
What a dumb question. CO2 is an incredibly important part of cellular respiration and it’s deficiency (and related excess of oxygen) leads to metabolic disorders over the long term and is involved in fatigue. Why would you want to get rid of it?

>>14768326
Oxygen is a carcinogen, thats why ppl eat anti-oxidants, to mitigate the carcinogenic effects of oxygen.

>>14767921
probably not so easy. As CO2 concentration decreases, the plants would work more slowly. Depends on what you're aiming for.
Best bet is probably buying O2 and nitrogen tanks and pressurizing your house

>>14768374
Not noticably. It really is that simple.

>>14768163
>to scrub it in the water phase, this won't work since lyes would dissolve
how do you mean; what wouldn't work? I intend to pass the air through a strongly alkaline solution and then have the partially or fully protolyzed CO2 react with the dissolved hydroxides.

>>14768185
sounds really cool - and nutritious. I'll look into this some more.

>>14768326
>incredibly important part of cellular respiration
lmao. it's a product of the respiration, not an ingredient or a requirement in itself. you don't need it for respiration specifically, but of course the body overall needs to prevent alkalosis for example. you won't get that from zero ambient CO2 levels since we produce it ourselves.

>>14766226
drill holes beneath window sills just like your ancestors.

>>14769280
well you can use it only for cleaning air, not water (with co2 dissolved in it). lyes would dissolve quickly and kill everything in the aqaurium. they still catch moisture from the air, so you would need to replace them quite often

>>14768347
Based cancer killer

>>14770598
sure, but the ambient CO2 levels are almost 50% higher than they had so

>>14770658
oh, right. well, I don't have an aquarium. was just thinking of using an aquarium pump as a cheap way to push a lot of air through water.

>>14766226
eat ze bugz and live in a pod, don't go outside, there's still pandemic going on

>>14766226
Wait till you realize high CO2 is good and we are actually better off getting used to a bit higher CO2 levels in our bloodstream. Tissue oxygenation is best with both O2 and CO2 at high levels. The oxygen molecules do not unbind without CO2. Its why you get lightheaded when you hyperventilate. Your blood is very saturated with oxygen but you have forcefully removed a lot of CO2 from your bloodstream, thus your tissues suffocating even with all the O2 they need circulating around in the body.

>>14766226
Open a window once in a while
At night if it's hot
During the day if it's cold

>>14766242
>Open a window
Not gonna be applicable in the next decade.

>>14771722
>realize high CO2 is good
look up "co2 concentration cognitive function" or something online and get back to us after reading some studies about it
there is absolutely no harm in reducing the PPM to historical levels

>>14773043
just the ~fifth time this brilliance has been posted ITT

>>14773124
Man, you really fell for their scare tactics. How much do you think the average temperature is going to increase in a decade lmfao. Do you really think you are just going to lose 3 out of the 4 seasons and it will always be over 75 F?

>>14773124
t. doesn't know about the mean value theorem.

>>14766252
I think tanks of spirulina have been proposed, the problem is that you need a lot of light to power the photosynthesis. Also the taste gets boring quickly.

>>14773856
I think he means that outdoor CO2 concentration will increase.
Preindustrial levels were ~280 PPM.
325 PPM in 1970.
416 PPM today.
The estimate for 2050 is 685 or something like that.