Re:I Bought a CO2 Monitor, and It Broke Me
by _ache_ on Friday February 03, 2023 @06:30PM
(#34649344)
Don't you mean 0.5ppm/m3 per minutes?
Because you need to take time into account and it's more coherent with the result of other studies (an optimist case with good sunlight but 0.4ppm/m3/m is ok I guess for young plant).
Re:I Bought a CO2 Monitor, and It Broke Me
by etrautmann on Friday February 03, 2023 @11:08PM
(#34651406)
yeah I'm not sure what the timebase is but I wondered that myself. I assumed it was per hour or day, but not an expert in plant biology and my assumption sounds like it was wrong.
Re:I Bought a CO2 Monitor, and It Broke Me
by etrautmann on Friday February 03, 2023 @11:12PM
(#34651432)
from [1]
'The approximate amount of carbon exhaled by a single human in 1 d is 300 g, whereas the carbon content of 1 L of gasoline is 640 g. In comparison, a single Spathiphyllum in a 15-cm pot grown at a PPF of 20 mmolm–2s–1 fixed 0.8 g C per day, so it would take 400 plants to offset a single human or 845 plants to offset a gasoline use of 1 Ld–1.'
[1] https://www.realhomes.com/news/do-house-plants-remove-carbon...
"In a study at Naresuan University, Phitsanulok, Thailand, the snake plant can absorb CO2 at 0.49 ppm/m3 in the closed system."
That would require an enormous number of snake plants to do anything. A tiny apartment is 50m^2 * 3m = 150 cubic meters, so it requires 300 snake plants just to bring down by 1ppm (though not sure over what timescale or other assumptions in the work cited)