943
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by HiddenLayer5@lemmy.ml to c/mildlyinteresting@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

You haven't misunderstood it! You're just coupling cellular respiration with photosynthesis, which on the surface seems to balance to net zero -- 6 CO2 molecules and sunlight create 1 glucose molecule, and we break down 1 glucose molecule for energy and generate 6 CO2 molecules.

There's one big factor though which isn't immediately obvious, and that's the rate of reaction. The chemical equations say nothing about how many molecules are consumed per second. In order for the net CO2 to be zero, they'd need to consume and generate CO2, respectively, at the same rate, which isn't the case.

It's actually a really good thing, because photosynthesis happens faster. Plants are net negative CO2 because of that. What we'd need to complete this comparison now is how much CO2 a human generates by existing, and we can determine how many plants are needed per human to have the same net CO2.

[-] vashti@feddit.uk 4 points 1 year ago

Thank you! What a great explanation. I'm always amazed by how much cooler things are than I expect.

Please accept this lemmygold: 🥇

[-] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Glad I could help!

this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2023
943 points (96.9% liked)

Mildly Interesting

17059 readers
6 users here now

This is for strictly mildly interesting material. If it's too interesting, it doesn't belong. If it's not interesting, it doesn't belong.

This is obviously an objective criteria, so the mods are always right. Or maybe mildly right? Ahh.. what do we know?

Just post some stuff and don't spam.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS