3 ms·
Plants are already pretty inefficient (~1-3%) at converting solar energy to stored chemical energy (glucose -> fats/carbs) https://www.ars.usda.gov/news-events
by nojvek 3y ago
Plants are already pretty inefficient (~1-3%) at converting solar energy to stored chemical energy (glucose -> fats/carbs)
https://www.ars.usda.gov/news-events/news/research-news/2012/comparing-energy-conversion-of-plants-and-solar-cells https://www.ars.usda.gov/news-events/news/research-news/2012...
However ignore the solar conversion, we put in a ratio of 3:1 i.e 3 calories of energy in for 1 calorie of energy out in plant energy (30%).
https://sustainability.emory.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/InfoSheet-Energy26FoodProduction.pdf https://sustainability.emory.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/...
Add the mix of energy required for irrigation, producing industrial fertilizers, harvesting and then feeding to another inefficient organism (cows, pigs, chicken).
https://cbey.yale.edu/our-stories/disrupting-meat https://cbey.yale.edu/our-stories/disrupting-meat
Cows are 25:1 ratio (4%) calories of feed in to calories of meat out. Pigs are 1:15 (6%), and Chicken is 1:9 (11%).
So if you take the total amount of energy received from sun being converted to chemical energy in cows that is only 0.012% of solar energy output into beef.
---
The biggest breakthrough we can make as humans is to efficiently convert solar energy into chemical energy. chemical energy we can eat as food for humans that tastes great, and chemical energy we can use for homes, transport and industrial processes.
And the thing about converting solar -> chemical energy is that it is carbon negative. Plants and phytoplankton are 1% efficient, yet they convert billions of tons of C02 + solar energy into chemical energy.
https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/Phytoplankton https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/features/Phytoplankton
---
I'm hoping in our lifetimes we can crack artificial high efficiency photosynthesis at scale with engineered algae.
Oil is only cheap because of 10s of 1000s of years it has been compacted underground, but at our rate, we may deplete it in 100-200 years.
Engineered algae would be way cheaper and distributed than oil. Most humans live where there is sunshine and water.
Our future depends on how efficiently and cheaply we can convert solar -> chemical energy.
- heisenzombie 3y agoThe hyper-efficient algae you describe sounds a bit like ice-9…
- karmakurtisaani 3y agoI think you're optimizing the wrong thing here. We don't need to be hyper efficient in terms of Sun's energy, as it's one of the most abundant sources of energy available and will not run out any time soon. First one should optimize over land and resource use, as well as sustainability (CO2, fertilizer run-off etc.). Not to mention cost (including subsidies).