5 ms·

It's a concrete that: 1) breaks down in water in a day(!), and 2) has a "5 times higher impact on human health and 3 times higher impact on eco-toxicity as comp

It's a concrete that: 1) breaks down in water in a day(!), and 2) has a "5 times higher impact on human health and 3 times higher impact on eco-toxicity as compared to concrete.". Cool research, but I'll pass on using it.

klysm 2y ago
Having 'negative' results like this published is so good though because then it's harder to scam people with this idea in the future.
- mythas 2y ago
  Yeah when the CORN-FREAKING-CRETE skyscraper crowd funding video comes out we can all be more skeptical than we were for SOLAR-FREAKING-ROADWAYS.
  - disillusioned 2y ago
    Sweet jesus was anything stupider than the solar roadways idea? "Let's take a technology that can easily be aggregated in appropriate, economies-of-scale implementations and _distribute them_ and require them to be extraordinarily more durable while running voltage through a surface that's being contacted by random people thousands of times a day, with the miles and miles of additional distributed infrastructure necessary to boot!"
    - HideousKojima 2y ago
      My favorite part about the video was them talking about how much square footage roads take up and how that space could be used for solar panels, while showing footage of vast fields of open land right next to a road.
      - ben_w 2y ago
        Given how often I still see people dunking on PV due to the land usage, I unironically think that's one of the better points. Yes, I know there's plenty of better land, but comparing the scale needed to something we've already got likely helps change people's minds about the practicality of PV.
    - ben_w 2y ago
      Loads of things are stupider in that sense and actually done. They're a bad fit in practice on basically every count, but the idea was interesting enough to pass the elevator pitch sniff test. Ruggidised PV as footpaths might not even suck, though I suspect even then they'd be better as roofing over footpaths rather underfoot.
- candiddevmike 2y ago
  Why do we still use corn based ethanol?
  - 3eb7988a1663 2y ago
    Nobody is willing to upset farmers.
    - Spivak 2y ago
      I think this take is pretty funny because it's in instance where our elected officials are responding directly to the will of the votes that actually matter. Which is pretty refreshing compared to listening to the campaign donations that matter. I want more of this kind of thing, not less. Politicians should be scared to piss lots of different voting blocs off. The way we do democracy is terrible at rewarding politicians for enacting (roughly) the will of the people.
      - MBCook 2y ago
        The votes that matter? Or big agribusiness and their campaign donations?
      - _heimdall 2y ago
        Farmers are a tiny fraction of the voting population. Politicians are more concerned with farm lobbying money rather than the actual voters themselves.
        Spivak 2y ago
        Yes but they're a big voting population in swing states that actually decide elections which is why I say they're the votes that matter. It's why Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin are getting pelted with political ads right now.
    - _heimdall 2y ago
      Nobody is willing to upset massive industrial farmers. Small farmers and homesteaders are regularly upset by the government. If I want to sell you raw milk from a cow on my pasture it can only be for non-human consumption. If I want to sell you beef you either have to buy 1/4 or more of the animal before its processed or I have to load it onto a trailer and allow a state or USDA facility process it, leaving me with lovely packaged cuts that have a high level of stress hormones and was sprayed down with bleach.
szvsw 2y ago
Alternatively, some other researcher can say “cool, some problems I can try to address with future work!” Or it can go by the wayside. Both outcomes are fine. But no need to pre-emptively dismiss something that is obviously not being pitched as a production-ready building material…
adrian_b 2y ago
There has been another thread on HN, with a research starting from this, which has developed a concrete suitable for use on Moon or on Mars, where there is no danger of it being broken down by water and where its production would be simplified by this choice, because starch must be produced anyway for food, so making concrete does not require additional production facilities. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41751122 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41751122 Therefore even research results that do not seem useful in normal conditions may find some circumstances where their use becomes preferable.

klysm 2y ago

Having 'negative' results like this published is so good though because then it's harder to scam people with this idea in the future.

mythas 2y ago
Yeah when the CORN-FREAKING-CRETE skyscraper crowd funding video comes out we can all be more skeptical than we were for SOLAR-FREAKING-ROADWAYS.
- disillusioned 2y ago
  Sweet jesus was anything stupider than the solar roadways idea? "Let's take a technology that can easily be aggregated in appropriate, economies-of-scale implementations and _distribute them_ and require them to be extraordinarily more durable while running voltage through a surface that's being contacted by random people thousands of times a day, with the miles and miles of additional distributed infrastructure necessary to boot!"
  - HideousKojima 2y ago
    My favorite part about the video was them talking about how much square footage roads take up and how that space could be used for solar panels, while showing footage of vast fields of open land right next to a road.
    - ben_w 2y ago
      Given how often I still see people dunking on PV due to the land usage, I unironically think that's one of the better points. Yes, I know there's plenty of better land, but comparing the scale needed to something we've already got likely helps change people's minds about the practicality of PV.
  - ben_w 2y ago
    Loads of things are stupider in that sense and actually done. They're a bad fit in practice on basically every count, but the idea was interesting enough to pass the elevator pitch sniff test. Ruggidised PV as footpaths might not even suck, though I suspect even then they'd be better as roofing over footpaths rather underfoot.
candiddevmike 2y ago
Why do we still use corn based ethanol?
- 3eb7988a1663 2y ago
  Nobody is willing to upset farmers.
  - Spivak 2y ago
    I think this take is pretty funny because it's in instance where our elected officials are responding directly to the will of the votes that actually matter. Which is pretty refreshing compared to listening to the campaign donations that matter. I want more of this kind of thing, not less. Politicians should be scared to piss lots of different voting blocs off. The way we do democracy is terrible at rewarding politicians for enacting (roughly) the will of the people.
    - MBCook 2y ago
      The votes that matter? Or big agribusiness and their campaign donations?
    - _heimdall 2y ago
      Farmers are a tiny fraction of the voting population. Politicians are more concerned with farm lobbying money rather than the actual voters themselves.
      - Spivak 2y ago
        Yes but they're a big voting population in swing states that actually decide elections which is why I say they're the votes that matter. It's why Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin are getting pelted with political ads right now.
  - _heimdall 2y ago
    Nobody is willing to upset massive industrial farmers. Small farmers and homesteaders are regularly upset by the government. If I want to sell you raw milk from a cow on my pasture it can only be for non-human consumption. If I want to sell you beef you either have to buy 1/4 or more of the animal before its processed or I have to load it onto a trailer and allow a state or USDA facility process it, leaving me with lovely packaged cuts that have a high level of stress hormones and was sprayed down with bleach.

szvsw 2y ago

Alternatively, some other researcher can say “cool, some problems I can try to address with future work!” Or it can go by the wayside. Both outcomes are fine. But no need to pre-emptively dismiss something that is obviously not being pitched as a production-ready building material…

adrian_b 2y ago

There has been another thread on HN, with a research starting from this, which has developed a concrete suitable for use on Moon or on Mars, where there is no danger of it being broken down by water and where its production would be simplified by this choice, because starch must be produced anyway for food, so making concrete does not require additional production facilities. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41751122 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41751122 Therefore even research results that do not seem useful in normal conditions may find some circumstances where their use becomes preferable.