Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

ziplock9000 t1_iuvwltu wrote

No they couldn't. They would never give off enough illumination by orders of magnitude.

71

helliun t1_iuvyedl wrote

Can you think of any situations where they'd be a suitable replacement for electric lights? I think the illumination is both a blessing and a curse when you think about the light pollution and stuff

4

helliun t1_iuvyfs8 wrote

Can you think of any situations where they'd be a suitable replacement for electric lights? I think the illumination is both a blessing and a curse when you think about the light pollution and stuff

17

helliun t1_iuw0s0y wrote

yeah that makes sense it's definitely weird that they don't already do that. but per my first question is there no application that you could think of for this? I'm willing to accept if there's not but I just feel like there could be

12

tatleoat t1_iuw95ag wrote

Why don't we make glow in the dark paper out of those plants so our books always glow in the dark~

20

civilrunner t1_iuw9mpw wrote

I mean they do care about light pollution, and you could have all the street lighting you want without light pollution if you just prevent the light from going up. Good lighting prevents crime and improves safety.

But when it comes to anything cities have to weigh budget priorities and shading the top of light posts just doesn't have the priority as other things.

3

civilrunner t1_iuwbooe wrote

It's something pretty commonly discussed. There just isn't the budget for the solution most of the time. Money and production drives everything and causes people to need to make trade offs and prioritize things. If they had all the money and production imaginable then they wouldn't have to pick trade offs but sadly we do.

3

SWATSgradyBABY t1_iuwcq4l wrote

We have these organizations called NPUs, neighborhood planning units. I've been attending various ones for 2 decades now. I see the budgets and understand the tradeoffs. Residents don't want em more than they want plenty of other nonsense.

1

genshiryoku t1_iuwjvhe wrote

Also the amount of power street lights consume is negligible in the grand scheme of things. Better put the resources at building more windmills and solar power plants. Which is probably a better return on investment.

1

FelixTheEngine t1_iuwkxwu wrote

People will immediately try to smoke this and start feeding it to their neighbours pets.

37

tedd321 t1_iuwlrhl wrote

Cool story. None of this research exists until you sell a product and a normal person can buy it

0

stewartm0205 t1_iuwufwj wrote

Why? The night should be dark. Humans have night vision. We can see in the dark if there is just a little light.

8

nblack88 t1_iuwvvpf wrote

Residents DON'T want them? That surprises me. Can you give insight as to why?

I'm a big fan of Dark Sky friendly lighting, and donate to the International Dark Sky Association (IDA) sometimes. Every resident I've spoken to who experienced the transition has enjoyed the new lighting, provided it's implemented well.

1

blueSGL t1_iux9hew wrote

it'd be infrastructure costs. If you can get lights that direct light correctly but are not slot in replacements and need to replace/retofit the attachments/poles they will not get used as they cost more money.

and the above holds true if there are slot in replacements but they cost more money.

The solution needs to be cheap and easy to implement otherwise it will face massive barriers to being done.

1

imnos t1_iuxawjn wrote

As long as they don't spread their seeds far and wide so that we have entire fields lit up at night. I'm sure the ecosystem would love that!

1

Rebatu t1_iuxd1u0 wrote

Anyone who truly believes that a chemical reaction of bioluminescence could ever replace the light emitted from a 1000°C hot metal is out of their minds.

8

kelvin_bot t1_iuxd2w2 wrote

1000°C is equivalent to 1832°F, which is 1273K.

^(I'm a bot that converts temperature between two units humans can understand, then convert it to Kelvin for bots and physicists to understand)

7

ShadowPooper t1_iuxdfbb wrote

ZOMG! I've been waiting for these for so long!!

Imagine entire cities lit by the chemical energy of plants!

ugh...this is through injection of nanoparticles, not a genetically engineered process. A technology dead end and doomed to fail in regards to producing anything practical and/or more importantly scalable.

6

duffmanhb t1_iuxf3lg wrote

This tech is literally a more complicated and less powerful glow in the dark transparent paint. I read it and was massively disappointed to find out the plants are coated and don’t actually glow

5

WillBigly t1_iuylgo1 wrote

Zog zoggenstein, very nice

2

archpawn t1_iuypump wrote

It reflects when it hits the ground, which is how it helps us see.

What I have seen done is using sodium lamps which emit a very specific frequency of yellow, so it's easy to filter out.

3

archpawn t1_iuyq20x wrote

Fun fact: they add florescent dye to paper to make it appear whiter. So if you have an ultraviolet light, you can make it appear to glow when everything else is dark. Except all the other stuff we add florescent dye to, like clothes.

7

GodOfThunder101 t1_iuzif3b wrote

I mean it will only work half the year. Since plants die in winter.

1

michiel_vorster t1_iuzjp00 wrote

After watching Avatar and smoking weed, scientists create glow in the dark plants to replace streetlights ..

0