It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

First Vertical Forest In Asia Turns CO2 Into 132 Pounds Of Oxygen Per Day

page: 1
20
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 04:06 PM
link   



It’s a good job that these vertical forests in Nanjing, China are going to produce 132 pounds (60kg) of oxygen every day, because they’ll literally take your breath away when you see them.
They’re called the Nanjing Towers, and once they’re complete in 2018 they’ll be Asia’s first ever vertical forests. Designed by Italian architect Stefano Boeri, each tower will stand 656ft and 354ft respectively, and between them they’ll house over 1,000 trees and approximately 2,500 shrubs from 23 different local species. The taller tower will contain offices, a museum, a green architecture school and a rooftop club, while the smaller tower will house a rooftop pool and a 247-room Hyatt hotel. Balconies will afford visitors stunning views of the dizzying vertical forests that are intended to help regenerate local biodiversity. These aren’t the first vertical forests that Stefano has designed however. Two have already been built in Milan and similar buildings have been planned for Lausanne, Switzerland. In an increasingly polluted world, these green designs are a real breath of fresh air.


Very cool, not only in function but aesthetically as well. These will serve the tenants, the city and the planet. I hope some fruit trees are included of course. Imagine if numerous cities started doing this. Could this effect atmosphere in a significant way? I would hope so with enough of them. Naturally I am curious about any negative aspects and I wonder about water provision and the fact that vegetive matter can wreak havoc on concrete and building materials, but I'm sure that is considered in the design.

These towers would also provide habitat for birds, insects, fungus and other wildlife perhaps. The insect part may require management to some degree, unless the birds and reptiles could take care of them.

Heck they should incorporate some innovative photosynthesis energy production in the process at some point. More

Artificial Photosynthesis Projects
However, a number of recent breakthroughs offer promise.

Scientists at the California Institute of Technology created a lab-scale device that converts 10% of the sunlight received into fuel.

Other researchers at the Lawrence Berkeley National Lab and the University of California at Berkeley say they’ve created a system that can capture carbon dioxide emissions before they’re released into the atmosphere and convert them directly into fuels.

Their system uses an array of tiny silicon and titanium oxide wires studded with a bacteria – sporomusa ovata.

The nanowires capture sunlight and deliver it to the bacteria, which in turn convert CO2 into acetate. Acetate is a key building block for more complex organic molecules.

The efficiency of the system, however, is currently only 3%.

More promising is research from Monash University in Melbourne, Australia that’s focusing on generating hydrogen for fuel cells.

Their process closely mimics natural photosynthesis, using solar energy to convert water into hydrogen and oxygen. One key difference between them and the others, however, is that instead of using expensive precious metals as a catalyst, their method uses common (and cheap) nickel.

And energy efficiency came in at an impressive 22.4%. The prior record was 18% efficiency.



Similar buildings have also been planned by the architect for Lausanne, Switzerland




And two vertical forests, called Bosco Verticale, have already been built in Milan, Italy



Source

Glad to see China doing this with their pollution levels, and they seem to be leading out of the gate with this notion of eco cities.


In fact, over 80 per cent of all prefecture level cities in the country (the administrative division below “province”) have at least one ecocity project in the works. Over the coming decades, it has been estimated, 50 per cent of China’s new urban developments will be stamped with labels such as “eco,” “green,” “low carbon,” or “smart”.

China's Ecocities

I'm one of those techno-optimist so I say yay humans




posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 04:16 PM
link   
a reply to: waftist

Looks cool.

Fertilizer?
If food is going to be grown insecticide?
Container gardening is water intensive.
Who or how do you trim this?



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 04:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: waftist

Looks cool.

Fertilizer?
If food is going to be grown insecticide?
Container gardening is water intensive.
Who or how do you trim this?


Good questions and yes fertilizer will be required no doubt. Some type of pest management could be tenants responsibility, in small individual applications perhaps. Trimming may provide jobs or at least more work for existing landscapers. I'd imagine some of that responsibility could be with tenants too. The water should be included in design, with a central system branching out to each dwelling. Then, recycle that potable water which could also include shower and sink water waste. Maybe gravity could be used and some type of energy would be derived from that as well.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 04:28 PM
link   
I think it looks beautiful and the vision is creative, I wonder at the reality. The weight of tress, all the roots, the logistics of maintaining proper care. What about the winds? A falling tree limb would be disastrous below.

I wonder if we can design new plants or find other options that would work better for this situation?



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 04:30 PM
link   
Actually I am not a fan of this.

Really not.

Instead of monkeys living in trees.

Humans are building their own.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 04:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: 0nerabbit
I think it looks beautiful and the vision is creative, I wonder at the reality. The weight of tress, all the roots, the logistics of maintaining proper care. What about the winds? A falling tree limb would be disastrous below.

I wonder if we can design new plants or find other options that would work better for this situation?


That makes sense to incorporate and design plants that work best with this application and at least there is a plethora of variety available by nature and crafty horticulturist. Certainly some varieties would be ideal for this set up.
Trees, shrubs veggies and herbs could be used. As far as reality, I too wonder but I'm sure the designers are considering all this and at least have most of it figured out. There will be much to learn in the process and over time too.

I think all plants would put in individual containers would ease management, but they may use beds too. It really is an opportunity to create a complex ecosystem if engineered right.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 04:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
Actually I am not a fan of this.

Really not.

Instead of monkeys living in trees.

Humans are building their own.



Uhh… okay So nothing positive to be gained here?



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 04:38 PM
link   
a reply to: waftist

There is a danger to it.

Over doing it will increase 02 levels, and increase fire damage.

Just because I'm not a fan really doesn't mean anything.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 04:40 PM
link   
a reply to: waftist

It's about time.

I genuinely hope it's the kind of thing that's rolled out like smart phones, eventually they'll be everywhere.

a reply to: seasonal

Most likely if any internal growing was done with such a system, it would be reasonable to assume that growth and care is incorporated with the design.

We've got good at hydroponics, fertilize the crop as it drinks... Don't even need soil.

Growing something for instance in a green house is a lot less resource intensive than in a field, yes nature takes care of the crop in a field to a degree but our crops grown outside are still generally resource intensive.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 04:41 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96
Perhaps, but surely that will be considered in design. I don't know, to me the positive outweighs the negative, at least in principle, but we shall see. I think it is a good direction to explore and a more symbiotic relationship between city and nature seems to be healthy, efficient and add balance to development. The pollution factor too is heavily significant too, imo.
edit on 6-2-2017 by waftist because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-2-2017 by waftist because: spelling



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 04:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: waftist

There is a danger to it.

Over doing it will increase 02 levels, and increase fire damage.

Just because I'm not a fan really doesn't mean anything.


So we shouldn't, ya know just in case?

Lmao.

I'd be more fearful of the immense amount of dangerous resources used in factories and powerplants, ever seen what's stored in a nuclear power station?

Real nasty stuff, it's resources usually transported by ship, rail and road.

I'm not scared of forest fires or high rise building fires, dangerous indeed though I'd rather be within 100 foot of such a fire rather than within a mile of a fire at a factory or power plant.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 04:46 PM
link   
a reply to: waftist

I gotta wonder about the negative aspects on the building structures long term.
Anyone that does home maintainence knows how much damage plant life can do to a structure.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 04:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Bluntone22

Well I'm guessing the same thoughts were applied to the hanging gardens of Babylon.

They managed it, I reckon we could manage it too considering we have plastics and other not natural products.

What's the average lease on a high rise tower anyway? They are not exactly built forever.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 04:50 PM
link   
a reply to: waftist




Perhaps, but surely that will be considered in design.


It's not just about the design.

Let's say it takes off.

Goes globally and transforms the urban landscapes.

Now instead of c02 levels rising, 02 levels would be rise.

I don't think man in his entire history ever learned the word moderation.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 04:51 PM
link   
Okay so artists conception and all... but, good idea. The worst energy wasting structure is the sky scraper.

They aren't first to discover what covering things with plants does for cooling, either.

images



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 04:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: waftist

I gotta wonder about the negative aspects on the building structures long term.
Anyone that does home maintainence knows how much damage plant life can do to a structure.

For sure and as a landscaper, I know trees and plants close to structure bring pest issues, so a real effort will have to be applied in that area. It is generally wood structure that stands to be harmed by pests, but the cracks and crevices will also invite critters. Hopefully they are really considering all this and it should be an interesting endeavor/experiment. Creating a genuine ecosystem sounds really tricky but I am optimistic it will become a real application in city designs of the future. I would think some geckos could help. That's a tricky part of nature design for sure, addressing predator prey balance.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 04:55 PM
link   
a reply to: RAY1990

You could be right.
But there are a lot of examples of men not being quite as smart as they thought they were.
Just my pessimistic attitude I guess.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 04:56 PM
link   
a reply to: waftist

I love the idea, a natural CO2 filtration system for the city.

But unless its heavily subsidised by the government its not viable. Numerous factors are important here.
1. Maintenance and cost. Which will be absailers/arborist.
2. Extreme fire hazard. This means no smoking even on the balcony.
3. Clean up of debris leaves and falling branches.
4. Wildlife attraction, more pigeons and their poo.
5. Not all sides of a building are bathed in sunlight only a 3rd of what is shown will grow.
5. Water, who pays? In the end the cost are passed down to the Tennant.

The one at Milan looks like a normal unit complex with a garden on there balcony very common in Australia.

This is not a solution and how this passes government building codes is beyond me, im guess its a knee jerk reaction like some of the above post.

Reminds me of Solar freaking roadways...

What a stupid idea.

edit on 6-2-2017 by muSSang because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-2-2017 by muSSang because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 05:00 PM
link   
Not very practical. Have you ever seen a forest floor? Can you imagine walking at street level and all sorts of debris falls on a regular basis?

Maybe this fine in China but in the US, I would rather see a lot more horizontal forests, fewer cut down or simply replanted. We have the land mass and not as many people as China.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 05:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Bluntone22

Humanity is the ultimate example of a species winging it, we're just monkeys on a rock after all.

In reality this is the kind of technology that will help us survive on another rock too, like Mars for instance.

Heck we've all heard about the ozone and it's nasty hole, we've come to accept our influence. We think cities are big, I've always considered the vast lands needed to support them.

People grow food and keep small animals at home, I'm one of them... I'm fond of the idea that everything I consume is grown in a very close location, possibly the same building.

It's like getting back to our roots




top topics



 
20
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join