Do-It-Yourself Photosynthesis Is Here!

[@AaronSteele]

So wait a second, you are telling me that to make photosynthesis better, we need to give electrolytes to plants? So Brawndo was right all along? It's what plants crave!

[@thathobbitlife]

Oh good lord no way of all movies to be coming true NOOOOT THAAAT ONNNE!!!

[@sloanNYC]

@@thathobbitlife Did you forget about tRump becoming president? LOL

[@shoot-n-scoot3539]

@@thathobbitlife That wasn't a movie. That was a documentary. :)

[@atlanciaza]

I always knew that movie was a documentary.

[@ashleylentz2651]

Um, it's got electrolytes. Mhm.

[@Str8UpFax]

As someone working with methanogens and the methane -> methanol biochemical process, it's kinda cool to hear something I've already read before get cited in a video like this lol

[@kaydee5334]

I am on the other side. I am working on solar water splitting. Nice to see it in such a video.

[@Jazzafritsch]

@@kaydee5334 solar water splitting I assume is basically H2 O2 gas production from splitting water using solar energy? Is that direct or indirect like solar panels or finding a way to use the actual sunlight to split the water?

[@arielmscisney6128]

2:26 I just have to tease the animation, it has 2 molecules bonded together, but each one says H2 (what a normal diatomic hydrogen molecule looks like), which means they're really showing H4, which doesn't exist. Also I never new that plants were only 1% efficient, really puts things in perspective!

[@beastamer1990s]

I think whoever put that together saw 2:49 and got a bit confused

[@jwnomad]

2:22 too late now, but you should really have made that H-H instead of H2-H2

[@illustriouschin]

Yeah and they used the same goofy animation for a community post.

[@hawks9142]

No mistake H2-H2 is the future of energy. They're just 3 steps ahead of you

[@divinebitter1638]

Yeah. I winced at that. Disappointing and sloppy, SciShow. Too many people rely on this channel to be putting out this kind of misinformation.

[@lonestarr1490]

@@divinebitter1638 That's not misinformation, that's just an ordinary mistake. Please refrain from slinging around the hefty words without consideration. Because that's actually closer to misinformation than that one blooper from the video.

[@TragoudistrosMPH]

​@@lonestarr1490 misinformation and disinformation are two similar concepts. Disinformation involves intent. Misinformation doesn't require intentional release, just misinforming. (Ironically, your response is misinformation) ...I also checked a dictionary just before hitting send 😅 (I'd burn with deserved shame otherwise lol)

[@Chris_Denora]

Even if it's not perfect at the moment, someone may have the key idea to make everything work perfect or near-perfect (which I'd still take).

[@gothnate]

I think that's a major issue some people run into. Like with electric vehicles back in the 90s. No one wanted one because they didn't get 300 miles to a charge, not even thinking only 40 to 50 miles of range is good enough for daily commutes and running about town. Sometimes just putting the tech out there for everyone to access is the thing that pushes the innovation. Like, if there was a vehicle that could run on water, I wouldn't care if I got 5 miles per gallon. In a 14 gallon tank, that's still 70 miles. Perfect for short trips. Just get it out there. Give the technology away to everyone for free. Develop new iterations and save the world without seeking monetary gain. We need it.

[@mysteryuser7062]

@@gothnate Tesla ran into similar problems when he invented the first Electric Vehicle in 1883. Electricity was so incredibly expensive and unaffordable, the designs were of no use

[@johnnyearp52]

Nothing is perfect. Probably never even near perfect.

[@kamro404]

@@gothnate though anyone who has made any steps toward water-fueled (Hydrogen sourced from water) transportation has died of "natural" or "accidental" causes (see: Stanley Meyer).

[@cru3her608]

Nature has the blueprints for everything. We just need to figure out how it works and how to recreate it.

[@TheBananaman491]

"Thank you to all the plants out there for giving us the blueprint err greenprint?" I think you mean "thanks to all the plants out there for giving us the roots of this research"

[@justins8802]

Ok, so my first thought was “why not just use solar panels to power the electrolysis of water into Hydrogen ?” And then the basically that’s what this is, but slightly different.

[@Karont3s0]

the "tiny" electrode part

[@deisisase]

​@@mysteryuser7062 not really, most of the heat from combustion is simply lost.

[@LuisAldamiz]

@@mysteryuser7062 - Hydrogen is produced from electrolysis (at least if you want to be ecological and use renewable clean sources such as water) but the system is addicted to oil and the other fossil fuels, especially the USA and Russia. In any case combustion is not more efficient if you count from the necessary sunlight at the origin, which also applies to fossil fuels. We're burning old plant corpses that will in the best case be gone in a few decades (and would have caused by then extreme climate changes and mass extinctions, quite possibly including our own).

[@justins8802]

@@mysteryuser7062 you are proposing a system that takes in hydrogen and gives you back more hydrogen than you put in. This is of course impossible and a variation of a perpetual motion machine.

[@paradiseexpress3639]

@@mysteryuser7062 What if we made a wheel that becomes heavy at the top and weightless at the bottom

[@RGLove13]

very cool to here about MOFs in this context, they've been researched for a while now and there are millions of MOFs that can theoretically be synthesized for carbon capture - not my area of research but I have colleagues working in ML/experimental who look at their properties

[@photoo848]

01:53 "you need a pretty big battery to get a Boeing off the ground" but what if we kept the battery on the ground and connected it to the craft by cables? Obviously you couldn't go very high so you'd be looking for some track only these vehicles can go on. Probably need steel wheels for stability and staying on the track. So what I'm asking is ... how about trains? We can build pipelines all across the US. Surely we can install some high speed rail and provide electric alternatives to all interstate flights?

[@jansenart0]

I'd argue with that. Whatever process it is that allows fungus and/or lichen to break down rock, that was pretty damn important too.

[@Jazzafritsch]

You didn't mention the two main types of photosynthesis which you know kind of important seeing as most people think all plants do the same but c4 photosynthesis performed mainly by grasses such as sugarcane or bamboo which make up the bulk of land based oxygen generated from photosynthesis while most other plants perform c3 photosynthesis which is less efficient because of a few reasons mainly CO2 concentration methodology

[@dhawthorne1634]

Anyone with a septic system rather than sewer already has the start of a methane bioreactor. Rather than letting it escape through the lid and standpipe, the system could be sealed off and the gas collected and compressed as a substitute for propane. Purpose built anaerobic digesters can turn food scraps and feces into methane and a compost slurry that can be used to feed lawns and gardens. Adding in a grinder pump and filters, it can even be sent through a sprinkler system.

[@rod-no-tube]

Cool we improved photosintesys to create methane. But wait, methane is not that greenhouse gas 80 times stronger than CO2? A 1% leak is enough to offset the whole co2 capture

[@Exiide89]

Ever heard about Biogas plants to generate methane to be used as a cooking gas in Indian villages? You don't need hifi tech to make it.

[@theresjer]

Thank you plants! Let's reward them by not cutting them all down 😊

[@mattiarenzi5673]

i mean, it didn't have to be a reward, poor living things :')

[@Zamtrios245]

Hell yea! Time to late down outside! Photosynthesis. Photosynthesis. Photosynthesis

[@LuisAldamiz]

If plants are "inneficient", secondary consumers like us are much more so, and I don't care if we're talking of beans, steaks or oil, all of which is/was made from photosynthesis one way or another. By comparison even the most mediocre renewable energy source is a smash of efficiency. I think we have a problem of carrion-eating in the form of oil/coal/gas addiction.

[@BurningheartofSILVER]

Forgive my dumb question, but how is “green methane” even a thing? Like, I get that the methane is more energy dense than other fuels, so theoretically we could use less overall. But at the end of the day, isn’t it still just burning up potent greenhouse gasses into our atmosphere?

[@Shuizid]

If the green methane is created by using CO2 from the atmosphere - it would be greenhouse-neutral so to speak. Plus given it's energy density it could help reduce net carbon emissions by virtue of replacing fossil-fuels with what is basically recycled methan.

[@illustriouschin]

We'll never see this 'breakthrough' again.

[@andrewdemello7653]

2:26 love the H2-H2 molecule animation

[@matildastanford7019]

There is a similar apparatus/ experiment being done in Switzerland that uses the Fischer Tropsch process. Basically CO2&H2O vapour is converted into syngas (CO&H2) then coverting that into synthetic and pure Kerosine (jet fuel), Cetane (Diesel) and various other parrafin and monomer hydrocarbons for industrial use. I think this is more effective, efficient, economic and environmentally sound methods to replace fossil based fuels than introducing widespread Electric Vehicles. I would actually like to see a video on that.

[@robertsteffler5155]

"We have a crisis caused by emitting carbon dioxide as a waste product of our energy production." "Well what if we used photosynthesis instead?": "That could work. Plants are good, and they're carbon-neutral." "We're going to use it to make hydrocarbons like methane." I think somebody somewhere might have missed the point. Possibly me.

[@filonin2]

They're going to make the hydrocarbons from the co2 in the air, not carbon in the ground. This is the same process plants use except that we will produce methane instead of sugar. Instead of the sugar being eaten by an animal and turned into co2 and water, the methane will be burned in an engine of some sort and it will produce co2 and water. You then harvest more co2 from the atmosphere to make more methane.

[@vincentqiu8905]

Artificial photosynthesis, awesome stuff

[@SolarScion]

**Brawndo** It's got what cars crave; it's got *electrolytes*

[@meejinhuang]

Photosynthesis is the fuel maker of the future.

[@adityakhanna113]

"Durable, efficient and cheap" Well, if you do that in the case of materials, you get plastic. And see where that leads us!

[@flytrapYTP]

Plastic is undoubtedly one of the best and worst human inventions. A million uses, and it might be slowly killing us.

[@aslandus]

To be fair, a big part of the reason plastic's so cheap is that it's a byproduct of oil refining. If we got off fossil fuels, there'd be a lot less plastic flowing into the environment.

[@michaelrae9599]

Plastic is amazing. Period. Full stop. Plastic waste management is the problem. The plastic not breaking down is what we want, and we can UNmake plastic and/or recycle it. Nothing bad about plastic though.

[@gothboschincarnate3931]

Plastic isnt that cheap.

[@filonin2]

@@gothboschincarnate3931 That must be why everything cheap is made from it. Because it's expensive.

[@Neuralatrophy]

They're working on those electric Boeings though ! The traditional tube and wings design will need re-imagining though. They have a few new wing designs as well as the flying wing concept.

[@commandersteve7644]

when you said you should remember from high school, i immediately feared the krebs cycle

[@bomafett]

Come on SciShow! Photosynthesis is not "relatively simple." The equation makes it look like a quick, easy, single step. But it is actually a complex, multi-step process. I expect better out of you!

[@ariel1088]

We can feel Stefan had fun making this episode

[@tyler5914]

Yaaaaa new video!!! ❤ 🎉🎉 & I am 1st commentor sweet!

[@michaelrae9599]

Sounds similar to stomach fermentation. I say we just build big shelters for cows with air funnelling up to catch the methane. We've got a lot of cows already. Simple architecture.

[@aakashgsamy2312]

Green House gas emmisions

[@michaelrae9599]

@@aakashgsamy2312 they are talking about making a green house gas as a biofuel. I am saying filter the methane out of the cow farts by funnelling it up and compressing it. They should invent THAT if it hasn't been invented already.

[@Rouverius]

Fun thing is when the former CEO of Toyota suggested that transportation needs other zero-carbon power solutions than just electrification (ex. hydrogen) the media threw him under the bus. 🤷‍♂

[@williamgidrewicz4775]

I used a weird psychic technique and devined that they need to use some sort foam like MOFs in the form of fiber optic networks. When the quartz silica specialty graphene quantum dots are stimulated, they consequently produce immense amounts of any substance. Maybe molybdenum is used!

[@benjaminalbert5443]

those off grid methane stoves are super exiting.

[@xCrossBite]

It's got electrolytes! It's what plants crave!

[@greycastro1009]

Am I wrong in thinking this is the worst possible moment in all of human history for us to be trying to use *more* methane? Is there something I’m missing here?

[@jericho86]

Methane derived from carbon already in the air would be inherently carbon neutral, which would reduce the impact of existing natural gas infrastructure.

[@filonin2]

Yes, you are missing that they used co2 from the air and water to make the methane which will, when burned, produce co2 and water, the same amount we started with. This is how your own metabolism works.

[@NegnosDk]

what would plants do without this video

[@1969kodiakbear]

Needs to live. By the way, I have difficulty communicating because I had a stroke in Broca’s area, the part of the brain that controls speech. 2/8/2021 but I lived again. (My wife helped me compose this.)

[@DanielSMatthews]

A plant may not be efficient but if can operate for thousands of years and maintain itself, whereas puny humans have trouble making anything that can last even a decade or two.

[@Svensk7119]

I liked that. Bovine burps! I had never heard of artificial photosynthesis before. Nor that plants are so inefficient. Interesting.... If they become quite skilled at artificial photosynthesis, pulling carbon from the air, then perhaps the day will be reached that more fossil fuels are required. I never expected to hear that glass can be recycled more cheaply than making new glass, nor that we are running out of the sands needed to make new glass. Yet I watched such a video just today. I remember when every bottle was glass.

[@Karont3s0]

maybe the plants aren't inefficient, our needs are. ruling a planet with 1% efficiency may hint at something

[@alifelessrock48]

@Daniel Meyers Rather than pulling carbon reserves from the ground and rereleasing them back into the atmosphere, increasing the carbon in the atmosphere, we are simply reusing the carbon already in the atmosphere. We aren't going carbon negative at all with it, but it will be a carbon neutral fuel source. Make sure to check the math.

[@alifelessrock48]

@Daniel Meyers sorry man im half brain dead today

[@gl15col]

Yes, recycle all glass bottles you can. Recycled glass takes less heat to melt, and added to new glass reduces the heat needed to melt it too. Aluminum and glass that is recycled will be back on a retail shelf in less than a week.

[@bramvanduijn8086]

Saying that plants are only 1% efficient is unfair to plants since it is judging plants on their ability to store fuel (among other factors). That's like judging a jogger on the weight of what they're carrying. "This jogger is very inefficient, they're just carrying some very thin clothes, a phone, and earbuds!"

[@BariScienceLab]

Oh yeah I love eating the sun

[@u0432865]

Isn’t the byproduct of burning methane CO2? And if so, isn’t that kinda not what we want to put in the atmosphere?

[@98Zai]

Also, aren't we kinda introducing it to the system = not carbon neutral?

[@filonin2]

You both missed that we are making the methane from the co2 in the air instead of the ground, making this carbon neutral. Same thing as burning wood. The tree takes in carbon from the air, then you burn it and put it back, in a cycle that just reuses the same carbon over and over, using the atmosphere itself to store it. No need to add any more carbon to the atmosphere, we already did that.

[@98Zai]

@@filonin2 I did miss that! I don't see why we would make methane instead of hydrogen though, because of existing infrastructure?

[@defaultcubestudio]

I guess he was talking about SOEC (Solid Oxide Electrolysis Cell) which involves a solid electrolyte and water vapor and the process is also known to be highly efficient. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, I'd be happy.

[@raptor4916]

2:31 Why did you draw a hydrogen molecule like that? 2 spheres with Hs connected by a bar would fine a single single sphere labeled H2 would be ok but you went with both and it's awful.

[@ryanblystone5153]

Thank you

[@YoungGandalf2325]

I used to think that robots with Artificial Intelligence would destroy humanity. Now I'm worried about plants with Artificial Photosynthesis taking over the world!

[@TheWebstaff]

The green goo. Or the grey goo.

[@Soraviel]

Lol, people like you need to learn to relax.

[@Soraviel]

Plants will not kill humans, general A.I. will also not kill humans. Only humans will kill themselves not tech or advanced science.

[@LaineyBug2020]

Just wait until they build an AI robot that runs on Artificial Photosynthesis.... I bet one of those quantum computers they're building could come up with the process, tap into the internet to make itself immortal and hack all the crypto currency to build itself an invulnerable body before anyone even realized anything was wrong...Don't get me started on the nanobot armada it would build itself too...

[@NoNameAtAll2]

Triffids

[@MinutePlant]

Anton made a video about giving Acetate obtained by electricity from Solar panels to plants to increase efficiency.

[@chuchu9649]

Just reduce commercial flights to use less fuel

[@oliverralph663]

My man wearing the solar panel shirt!

[@bemybff205]

Scientists just walked into a room, pointed at a plant by the window and said "I do what they do, but better"

[@williamgidrewicz4775]

Maybe some sort of low energy masers are used as they say they shall be in many ways to enhance processes.

[@Kavriel]

At 1:40 You say that rougly 40 % of global transportation is incapable of being electrified, so i thought, says who ? With what technology ? This needs an enormous asterisk. I've found who said that in your sources: "Nathan Lewis, an inorganic chemist at Caltech and JCAP's scientific director, says that some 40% of current global transportation cannot be electrified." He also says : "For example, barring a major breakthrough, there will never be a plug-in hybrid plane: no craft could hold enough batteries." While he's probably very recognized to be the director, i don't think it's appropriate to show one man's opinion as truth in a scientific video. Is it based on something else ? Maybe. But see, people thought you wouldn't be able to make an electric semi truck. Tesla made one. So i believe that reporting something is not possible should be done with the utmost care, and because Nathan Lewis said so is not justification enough for me.

[@techheck3358]

Where is the electric semi truck?

[@Kavriel]

@@techheck3358 On the roads? It's being produced near Nevada.

[@CymruCreator]

We didn't have freshman biology in the UK. what about regular school biology class?

[@fitnessmarc7302]

Love this content, very educational

[@Rebar77_real]

If they become sentient I hope they're still cool with the whole "being edible" thing.

[@BossOfAllTrades]

One issue I'm thinking about is we may get the reverse problem instead of to much c02 we would be producing to much oxygen.

[@daniel_rossy_explica]

The one thing I don't understand about Hydrogen production is this: If we split water to produce (and later burn) Hydrogen, aren't we destroying water? Water is, however plentiful, still a scarce and finite resource.

[@hendraibaraki]

are we there yet? are we there yet? are we there yet? are we there yet?

[@orangebeagle3068]

I need to go to the bathroom!

[@jfolz]

I guess never explicitly converting to electricity is a good way to obfuscate the ludicrous amounts of energy needed for these kinds of processes.

[@filonin2]

Luckily we have a ludicrous amount hitting us every day.

[@jfolz]

@@filonin2 it depends. The touted advantage over solar PV is that energy is stored. The big problems are conversion efficiency and long term stability. "Long term" in this context meaning years. We know solar PV cells last for decades and industrial-scale electrolysers to create hydrogen are already in operation. Maybe I'm just misunderstanding and this improved photosynthesis is cheaper and scales down better, so you could put this on your roof. It's unlikely you'll ever have an electrolyser in your home. The video doesn't really explain what the advantages are and what it's for.

[@shorgoth]

I want to be altered to be able to photosynthesize, with the upcoming job market crash due to AI this would be a real evolutionary advantage to sustain myself during the miserable system transition period XD Food is basically 65% of my running cost :p

[@filonin2]

You'd need more water than before and would have to be in sunlight or artificial light while you were sleeping.

[@mollykins8h]

Thanks

[@phillipjoubert1119]

JESSE ! we have to cook green methane !

[@iamadave]

I wish i understood crispr better but i feel like Red Woods mixed with Bamboo grow speed would be dope.

[@rainydaylady6596]

Wow! Would the red woods take over the forests? Could we live in them? People used to drive cars through them in the 50s. My folks had pictures.

[@FrozEnbyWolf150]

Bamboo is already the fastest growing plant in the world, and the giant bamboo species can reach heights of 46 meters, which is about half the height of the tallest redwoods. Bamboo is also a great building material, and the shoots are edible. I'd say grow more bamboo for human consumption, which would buy the redwood forests time to regenerate themselves.

[@filonin2]

You cannot grow hard wood quickly.

[@thegrimmer]

It is not difficult at all to keep two different gases produced by an anode and cathode separate and harvest them. They can be in completely different containers as long as they are connected by a conductor

[@matthewtalbot-paine7977]

Hydrogen on it's own is pretty rare because if it's got oxygen anywhere near it 1 spark and the whole thing is water. Hydrogen as an atom though is the most common thing in the universe and making it from electricity is very easy although obviously doesn't yield as much energy from burning it as it did to create it so it's like paying a cost to make your energy more dense as hydrogen has a higher energy density than most other fuels and way more than batteries.

[@ThaTySkiE]

The methane topic doesn't need solarpower. Just use cowpoo and make your own biodigester, they do work, I've done it.

[@AceSpadeThePikachu]

Maybe artificial photosynthesis can also be used for large scale carbon-capture and converted into solid materials, like polymers and minerals, so they don't just end up back in the atmosphere again shortly after.

[@TheBoredPhysicist]

Did you guys really make a molecule animation of hydrogen where both atoms in the molecule are H2? 😂

[@davidpavel5017]

If methane turns into co2 after burning why is it such a great future fuel? 🤔

[@techheck3358]

Because producing methane would extract co2. It’s a cycle

[@bobman929]

I guess rather than adding new co2, we would be using what's already there.

[@vis8259]

Exactly! Methane has a much shorter atmospheric lifetime than CO2 (around 12 years compared with centuries for CO2), but it is a much more potent greenhouse gas, absorbing much more energy while it exists in the atmosphere. It's about 80 times more warming than C02

[@filonin2]

@@vis8259 That's if you just spray it at the atmosphere, so it's warming potential isn't relevant when talking about burning it since it isn't methane anymore.

[@filonin2]

It's a great future fuel because you can make it from the co2 that is in the air instead of out of the carbon in the ground. This means you would not be adding carbon to the air and if your entire refining process is powered by renewables you won't add anything.

[@TysonBuilds]

Now relate this to TB

[@johnmillerpere_grin6371]

The metal-organic frameworks actually remind me of Vision in the MCU. He's made of printed cells mixed with vibranium.

[@james4thedoctor482]

2:26 H2 is the molecule, so each “ball” in the model should just say “H”. By saying “H2” in each ball, it is inaccurately depicting the molecules as H4.

[@SenseOfWonder2]

Capture all of the available methane and you won't need to make it. Landfills, sewer plants and oil and gas refineries, as well as other natural sources underground.

[@General12th]

Hi Stefan!

[@arkinyte13]

I live for this stuff.

[@neophoys]

2:35 that animation of hydrogen is kinda wonky. You got two connected spheres, each representing a hydrogen atom. So far so good. But then why is each sphere labeled H2?! Just caught my eye.

[@matthewtalbot-paine7977]

Seems to me what you are saying is they fixed the problem with corrosion of electrodes in electrolysis and that's it. Nothing to do with photosynthesis like at all.

[@ThatBidsh]

omg lol you sounded just like hank and then when it showed you talking I was super confused like wow hank changed a lot...

[@CaineMarlette]

This is gonna sound dumb but how and where do they get the electrodes

[@Crokto]

im sorry, im having trouble understanding the difference between the "artificial leaf" and just...normal electrolysis but its powered by solar panels...

[@dachanist]

We can already make methane with a bio-digester at the homesteader level. It takes up less than a toolshed of space and produces its own heat as well as enough methane to cook daily, and yet it is more convenient to just buy propane.

[@filonin2]

You are not making methane from sunlight but from waste. This is already done at scale at land fills but does not produce enough.

[@thegrimmer]

You don't need that big of a battery to get an airplane off the ground. That is a question of amperage and power in a short burst. This problem is solved for electric motors. The reason we don't have electric aircraft is because large batteries would be needed for long-range flight. Very different.

[@satolah]

In the same way, we shifted away from "global warming" to "climate change" we should consider shifting from "carbon neutral" to "greenhouse negative". Many companies talk about being carbon neutral, but is this aggressive enough? Since we are on the precipice of global disaster, perhaps we should consider a more dramatic approach.

[@mikelarry2602]

@ Scishow it's yellow print !

[@tiliaoliveri6066]

plants know they can do it efficiently but they didn't do it. in the end, we are all the same.

[@FelixTheAnimator]

Solarpunk AF

[@u0432865]

Did BP sponsor this episode?

[@biorotterdamforenergyconsu1241]

Do-It-Yourself Photosynthesis Is Here!

[@tomholroyd7519]

What's all this about the "initial phase" of photosynthesis and why are energy conversion numbers always so crazy? I've heard everything from 1% ~ 100%

[@mauriciovaldez4270]

Woah... Solar energy 200% xd

[@CampingforCool41]

Wait does the methane one /release/ the methane? If so, why would we want to use that as a fuel source? Like you said, it’s a terrible greenhouse gas.

[@filonin2]

It is a terrible greenhouse gas when it is methane, but like most fuels it is a different chemical after it is burned.

[@silentgamer666]

Did you just spray fuel on the spark plug?

[@Scott-vy4zj]

SO...ROBOT TREES THAT LIVE OFF METHANE?

[@atlanciaza]

It is way higher then 40%, because trucks will never be battery powered, and as seeing the vast majority of land transport is done by trucks, this leads to a nearly sector wide incapacity to use batteries as a power source. Even distances as short as a 100 miles at 30 tons cargo, is impossible with batteries. Not to mention how tesla trucks are proving even smaller distances are a major challenge for batteries.

[@vlander1992able]

The first example sounds like the process of electrolysis but with a solid electrolyte and a water spritzer. Now the question is how do I make a solid electrolyte so I can test this out, I've made hho before so I'm curious if an amateur could make this work.

[@calebschenck4493]

One common solid state electrolyte is YSZ

[@vlander1992able]

@@calebschenck4493 thanks I'll check it out

[@calebschenck4493]

@@vlander1992able it needs to be very dense aka no pores or cracks because they effectively act as a short in the circuit.

[@vlander1992able]

@@calebschenck4493 makes sense, I'm going to do some research and see if there is some commercially available, I appreciate the help.

[@calebschenck4493]

@@vlander1992able good luck! You'll need very high temperature furnace, like 1200*C or something

[@stevenjohnson2520]

Using photosynthesis to power things like cars is ... dun dun da da ... an ox, eating grass, then pulling a wagon.

[@filonin2]

Except this would be far more efficient because there is no need for the ox to exist and waste energy on things like respiration when you aren't using it.

[@stevenjohnson2520]

@filonin2 ooh. This is fun. My critique of this idea is that this form of efficiency is myopic and self-serving. Highlighting the advantages to a very narrow window of existence, namely moving a bipedal ape's stuff faster and farther than it would otherwise go on its own. Rather than considering the totality of the systems involved. An ox, when it's being inefficient as a carrier of human things, provides home and hearth for a broad spectrum of the wondrous creatures that make up our biosphere. Worms in its gut, parasites in its hair, cartage and forage for resting birds. Its footfalls open up new lowlands for aquatic life. Its emissions act as incubators for beetles and fungi. It is all that is beautiful, in a meat suit. A unique chord of conscience in the breathtaking web of life. And that is before considering the pasture, or the prairie ... Surely, we can do better than celebrating the reductivist nature of some aspects of human endeavour, in the name of selfish efficiency.

[@DrShoesMcGee]

Plants are only %1 "efficient" because they SHARE with the other living beings around them. This tech is great as long as it isn’t privatised and hoarded, and the electrolyte production is sustainable...

[@filonin2]

Sharing would increase efficiency if it was a good thing. Also, citation needed for wild claims.

[@posthocprior]

It wasn't explained why one would want to generate methane, if it's a greenhouse gas.