←back to thread

298 points Teever | 6 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom
Show context
kevinmershon ◴[] No.45032976[source]
> This is a similar reaction to photosynthesis in plants, which produces glucose instead of rocket fuel.

This is silly, but also begs the sillier question why we aren't bioengineering plants to produce rocket fuel

replies(13): >>45033082 #>>45033402 #>>45033527 #>>45034799 #>>45035729 #>>45035794 #>>45035914 #>>45036480 #>>45036510 #>>45037005 #>>45037021 #>>45038060 #>>45052243 #
andrewflnr ◴[] No.45033082[source]
Why aren't we engineering plants to produce automotive fuel? We ought to at least be able to do diesel.
replies(14): >>45033143 #>>45033153 #>>45033209 #>>45033372 #>>45033429 #>>45033480 #>>45033645 #>>45034388 #>>45034399 #>>45035296 #>>45035708 #>>45035938 #>>45037003 #>>45037073 #
1. asdff ◴[] No.45033143[source]
We do this for some plants. Hybrid palms are used for palm oil production due to the favorable yields and properties compared to parental species. One might ask why there are no cars powered off palm oil seeing as we can readily grow it across the world?
replies(2): >>45033186 #>>45033354 #
2. sandworm101 ◴[] No.45033186[source]
There are. Millions of them. Most any diesel can run just fine on veg oils, even used cooking oil. (Some very modern cars might need the electronic control systems tweaked.) There have been times/places where grocery stores put limits on oil once it became cheaper than diesel.

Mythbusters: https://youtu.be/QEX1YFXYTdI

TopGear: https://youtu.be/GOFbsaNeZps

3. abdullahkhalids ◴[] No.45033354[source]
So now, on top of clearing forests and destroying ecosystems for farmland and infinite suburbia, we should clear even more forests to get fuel for cars, so we can drive them through the infinite suburbia.
replies(1): >>45033478 #
4. asdff ◴[] No.45033478[source]
The forests are cleared because they are allowed to be sold for clearance. Doesn't matter if its palm oil or for cows or sugarcane or ranch homes or solar panels or data centers. People tend to want a return on their investment in land vs spending serious capital to not do anything with a jungle. If you want to limit this you need to prevent land from being sold to entities that would like to profit from it. The specific thing being grown is basically irrelevant.
replies(1): >>45035994 #
5. jajko ◴[] No.45035994{3}[source]
So many incorrect statements... you know the world is bigger than your (presumably US) backyard.

I suggest travelling around the world a bit and visiting ie Borneo how entire rainforest ecosystem is being reduced to nothing just due to palm oil plantations, mostly for biofuel and cheap&bad for health food additive.

Similar sight across many places out there. What you wrote ain't valid for a single one.

replies(1): >>45047486 #
6. asdff ◴[] No.45047486{4}[source]
The issue is once again the forest is allowed to be sold. If you open up land for development, that is typically what tends to happen. People will seek out whatever use case makes sense with that land. No one wants to lord over a nature preserve. Everyone wants to make their buck into a buck fifty. Clearcutting of the rainforest in Borneo could be solved with a pen stroke by the government in charge but it seems they are more interested in supporting industrialization than preservation.