Apr
04
Forests in the sky could be built to clean air of pollution
ByVisionary architects have designed a revolutionary skyscraper to combat global warming by growing trees hundreds of feet in the air.
News link: here
Clean Air Accessories
| Eureka HF2 Replacement Vacuum Cleaner HEPA Filter |
 |
Overall Rating: |
| List Price: Varies based on product options |
| Amazon Price: $5.25 |
| Honeywell HHT-011 Compact Air Purifier with Permanent HEPA Filter |
 |
Overall Rating: |
| List Price: $59.99 |
| Amazon Price: $40.99 |
| Dirt Devil Universal HEPA Filter for Bagless Uprights |
 |
Overall Rating: |
| List Price: $19.99 |
| Amazon Price: $6.50 |
| Bissell Style 8/14 Lift-Off Bagless HEPA Filter, 3091 |
 |
Overall Rating: |
| List Price: $14.99 |
| Amazon Price: $3.98 |
| 2 Kenmore HEPA Filter #86889 |
 |
Overall Rating: |
| List Price: $39.99 |
| Amazon Price: $7.70 |
I think this may the single dumbest thing I have ever see on Digg and let me tell you, it was no easy call. It would require an absolutely inconceivable amount of building materials and resources to make even the tiniest dent in the levels of pollution. The material necessary and the weight that would have to be supported to mimic even a single acre of dense forest land would probably never provide a return on initial investment. Given the millions of unoccupied acres on the planet, why wouldn’t you just plant more trees in the open space? What the hell?
Too bad we’re so busy tearing down the natural forests. I guess something has no value unless it’s manmade.
Another extremely expensive and inefficient way to "help" the environment.
Why just put the trees on the ground and redirect the pollution?
DailyFail 2 thumbs down.
So the solution is to hang up a Pine Air Freshener?
Wonderful, a multi-billion dollar placebo.
why not just add them to existing buildings?
FOREST IN SKY?????!!Oh Daily Mail…. LOL
thats just retarded, plant trees on ***** mountains, the construction of the building would create more C02 than the trees could counteract
We actually have more trees now than we did 50 years ago…
Agreed. 1 they need a TON of soil and a pretty big volume if they want to have big thriving trees, 2 soil is heavy, trees are heavy, a WET soil is even heavier once it rains. Such a bad idea
……….Meet George Jetson
source: forestry.about.com/library/bl_us_forest_acr …
even if it is a hoax, living a more sustainable lifestyle is not a bad thing. in fact, I might go so far to say that *gasp* I’d actually enjoy an environment in 50 years.
Some people like to find the most complicated solutions to our problems possible.
I wonder how much these people get paid to sit on their asses and think of this *****.
hmm, chalk this one up to another bio-sphere project. a bunch of idiot wackadoodles pretending to be scientists.
ack, what an eye sore that building would be. imagine having cities full of those things
Four hundred trees for each factory…….and you have to wait for the trees to grow
OMG you’re right I never looked up before
Show me a model to prove its efficacy. This is just a publicity stunt, but a funny one. I don’t think 400 trees will make much difference, and areas concentrated with factories (like Gary, Indiana) are deliberately located in rather desolate areas where there is no benefits for habitation anyway. This will be a waste of money, and as said, more CO2 will most likely be emitted building the thing than it would "filter". Funny though, 400 trees will miraculously turn polluted air into a "pleasant smell."Oh, and to reply to gostohilt(?), this is not an interesting concept, its utterly ridiculous.
Can we get a perma-ban on any dailymail articles? I mean really. Why do people keep digging this *****?
WHY TREES? There are othe muchhh more efficient plants…
Plants are not air Filters ..You don’t blow CO2 in from one side and expect cool(!?) oxygen to come out on the other side.
round here, we call that roof garden.
You know what annoys me to no end with all this green technology? It reminds me of all those assumptions about the future we had in the 60s. "Did you know that in the year 2000 we might be using solar powered cars that go at the speed of sound?"
Fact.
This almost looks like an Onion article. Plus having them on the ground would be just as good as in the air.
Problems I foresee.First the roots, they go down multiple feet for support. The wind pushing on the trees will cause them to move and bend.Trees do not absorb enough pollution for 400 trees to clean up an entire power plants smell, toxins, and gases each day.You will have to get these trees from somewhere else and they cannot be setup until the trees have taken root or they could be pulled out.All the needles and leaves could be a fire hazard and would need to be cleaned.Also this is a gigantic sail…bad BAD Idea. Unless this was designed by a structural engineer who builds sky scrappers I feel this is not a viable solution. KEEP TRYING THOUGH!
Stay in school. FOREEVER!
NASA: Space penUSSR: PencilDailyMail: ***** gigantic ridiculous tree holder
source?
This is a wonderful idea!!!Then, when they’re built, we can deforest them as well when it becomes more economical to "grow cattle" on them.
So dumb that I don’t have anything else to say.
It looks like a giant Ionic Breeze.
Ah, the Daily Mail. Still spouting made-up news.
This looks like a candidate for failblog.org imo
A much better idea would be to build cities UP, so you would be in a building with thousands of people, on different floors there ares stores, and work. And you leave the vast countryside for trees and the natural environment. At least the mess humans make would be confined. I under stand thats what cities are, but if it were more concentrated like a cruise ship it might be better.But then who the ***** would want to live in a cruise ship type cabin there whole life.
Why not have a giant fan on the back so the polution smells pine fresh!
Wouldn’t it make more sense to grow the trees somewhere less expensive. Like on some old barge, for example?
They are architects of fantasy
rather than making buildings to put trees on, i say we just mexipack any area with trees that isn’t currently being used for infrastructure.ex. Put 50X as many trees in central park(NY)
only a freaking jobless-hippy would want to cure pollution with a wall of trees…
It’s so simple, why didn’t I think of that!! To solve pollution, all we have to do is plant forests in the sky! Hold on here folks… I am sensing a precense in the room with me. Holy Sh!t – hey, it’s William of Ockham, back from the dead! How’s it hanging Bill? You know that whole razor thing really had legs, you should be proud. Anyway, what brings you back from the netherworld? What? No.. it wasn’t my idea… stop looking at me that way…. nooooooooooooo I’m just an innocent digger! Aaaargh!
This is nothing. I have got an idea that is so revolutionary it could change the earth forever.I propose that we take those same trees and plant them…..in the ground??? (last I checked there was no shortage of it)
this is stupid… if they want to have trees up around where crap is vented, why don’t they just dig a hole and put the plant/factory in the ground, and plant trees around the hole?
Bring on the Integral Trees..
You know, the smoke coming out of that stack could be filtered instead if building a building on top of it.