Thursday, August 27, 2009

BBC NEWS | Science & Environment | 'Artificial trees' to cut carbon

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8223528.stm
Gott in himmel.

Under normal circumstances I'd dismiss this as the usual Silly Season padding - but for the fact that the Institute of Mechanical Engineers, the representatives and standard-bearers of my profession, have pinned their name to it. So now it's no longer a farce - it's a tragedy. This is just the kind of moronic mega-engineering bloke-in-a-shed sort of stuff that we should be avoiding - one of these might be far more efficient than a real tree, but the technical problems are still vast, the outcome is uncertain, and the cost (both financial and environmental) is going to be high.

My message to the IMechE is: be ashamed of your pompous, overstuffed selves. Drag your sorry asses out of the Victorian era and recognize that the world will not be saved by giant steel structures, but by doing small, boring things on a massive scale - like, for example, insulating houses. The IMechE could do so much more by mobilizing its members to voluntarily go and install insulation in houses. But no, it pays academics to come up with dross like this instead. Lordy lord. Good grief. Engineers are supposed to be down-to-earth types! This is so typical of the IMechE - technically sexy but completely otherworldly. Idiots.

8 comments:

Peter S said...

Come down off the fence, stop beating about the bush, and tell us what you really feel.

Not Mark Flynn said...

Even if it is kind of of stupid, the prospect of Robo-Trees is still excites me.

Paul M said...

Everything excites you.


{By the way, I think the article makes it pretty clear that more pedestrian tactics are still required for a long-term solution...}

Not Mark Flynn said...

OK, well, Robo-trees inspire more excitement than is usual.

Matt F said...

Yeah. Sorry, I flew off the handle a bit there. It was just the merest mention of the IMechE, an institute which I have no great opinion of, in the same article as this rather daft idea.

Matt F said...

I'm not the only one who thinks it's daft - David King, former Chief Scientific Advisor to the government, agrees. In fact, this morning on the radio he singled out Robo-trees as his least favourite geo-engineering idea.

Not Mark Flynn said...

Why, because they'll eventually become sentient and overthrow regular trees?

Anyway, I always get excited about dumb things like this because it's one more thing that humans can do or make, one more skill at our disposal if need be. I guess I'm a trans-humanist at heart. Any kind of invention piques my interest, even if at heart I know it's redundant, stupid, and, once again, redundant.

Paul M said...

It's bad because it's lazy.