|
|
Sean Houtman wrote in message news:1095655347.512RUex2R1ahcHuyJgpTGw@teranews. ..
You could put some Cyanobacteria in your blood, but you do need light for them to take care of the CO2. Cyanobacteria are photosynthetic. Wouldn't chemosynthetic bacteria be better for this application? |
|
|
Sean Houtman wrote in message news:1096397186.3WUZQGoSSox59jJh7ILi3A@teranews. ..
(Curious) wrote in om: Sean Houtman wrote in message news:1095655347.512RUex2R1ahcHuyJgpTGw@teranews. .. You could put some Cyanobacteria in your blood, but you do need light for them to take care of the CO2. Cyanobacteria are photosynthetic. Wouldn't chemosynthetic bacteria be better for this application? No, because the chemical energy they need has to come from somewhere, and the chemicals that can be used by chemosynthetic bacteria are generally immediatly toxic to humans. If you want them to use sugars from your blood, well, the inefficiencies of thermodynamics mean that they will end up creating more CO2 than they use. Sean There are some bacteria that use CO2 and give out oxygen |
Sean Houtman wrote in message news:1097638184.eLdCiXkY8VVSsCiH6cCP0g@teranews. ..
Yes. There are. Parts of this thread actually discuss that, they are called Cyanobacteria, and they are photosynthetic. Sean Is it feasible to genetically-engineer bacteria to use acids, acidic substances, sulphides, oxides [including smoke], ketones, skatole, phosphides, sulfates, phopshates, halogens [atomic, ionic, isotopic], carbon [ash, charcoal, etc.] lipids [including gasoline], chlorine [atomic, ionic, and isotopic], alcohols [organic OH- compounds], radioactive wastes, histamines, salts, and urea for energy? |
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:17 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
GardenBanter