- September 22, 2005 at 7:16 am #1952ZennParticipant
I was just wondering if anyone new why plants have not evolved to use the energetic ultra-violet wavelengths of light in photosynthesis. I would really appreciate a quick response.
- September 22, 2005 at 12:29 pm #29842
blocked by the ozone layer?
- September 22, 2005 at 12:43 pm #29846
I think it’s because their chlorophyll are for red (chlorophyll a) and green-blue (chlorophyll b). Beside, ultra-violet wavelength is much more shorter than those two and again, ultra-violet ray is harmful because of its radiation that can cause mutation of cells.
- September 22, 2005 at 8:06 pm #29861ZennParticipant
Thank you so much guys,
You are the BEST! I appreciate your help so much.
- September 23, 2005 at 11:39 am #29869
For further information, please search for yourself in google or yahoo since the info above is not the detail one.
/ ‘vikte /
- September 23, 2005 at 7:22 pm #29886
As victor said, it has to do with the molecular properties of the chlorophile molecule. Plus, ultraviolet is only 9% of the light, and most of it is blocked by the ozone layer, so such an evolutionary step would be pointless
- September 25, 2005 at 12:18 pm #29931
Ozone layer is ‘bleeding’ now because many use of CHCl3 (chloroform), freon, etc….so, I think it’d be possible now…
Hey Andrew, since this post is shown, I saw your total posts and the number is exactly the same with my country’s independence year (1945)… 😆 congrats..
- September 25, 2005 at 5:18 pm #29946
Even with the use of cloroflorocarbs, the ozone layer only bleeds where the temperature in the upper stratosphere is low enough. if the uv light gets through, there will be no more plants.
PS: I have more posts than your indepence year, victor 😛
- September 27, 2005 at 12:57 pm #30013
Well, just hope that “thrombocytes” will prevent the “bleeding”.. 😆
Hey, I’ve ever heard this theory but why they don’t have it applied in life?
now, world can make O2 by electrolysis of H2O. then this O2 can be made into O3 (ozon) trough process called electrical bow process (IMMSMR).
so: O2 —electric bow–> O3
This O3 can be released to the stratosphere, but, why they don’t do it???
- September 27, 2005 at 5:39 pm #30018quote victor:
1- Atmospheric ozone is toxic. It is a pollutant.
2- Production of O3 this way cost a lot of energy, that won’t help with global warming
3- It is not exactly easy to send enough O3 in the stratosphere you know… They a re talking about billion tons of the stuff that you would have to send a few kilometers above where you are making it. Needs a lot of pipes 😆
- September 29, 2005 at 12:33 pm #30116
…I think they will do anything to prevent that…now it’s proven that I was wrong.. 😆 ..I think they can use space cargo to deliver it…
- September 29, 2005 at 5:44 pm #30131
Space cargo? You mean to send it via a space shuttle? That is absurd… Or it sounds so anyway…
- September 29, 2005 at 9:52 pm #30145
Supposedly Bush said we should build more air conditioners to ease global warming. But that’s just Jay Leno joking.
Anyway, it would probably be easier to ease global warming in other ways than pumping ozone.
1.Fill the air with particles such as coal dust. This method been compared to when volcanos erupt spewing ashes. The dust supposedly blocks sunlight. It is also one of the hypotheses on how the Ice Age came about. Wired magazine had an article about it and promoted using more coal fired power-plants.
2.Find some sort of enzyme to decrease levels of greenhouse gas.
- September 30, 2005 at 12:23 am #30150quote mithrilhack:
I remind you, mithril, that the ozone layer has nothing to do with global warming, just with us frying under UV when the hole is too big.
As for your suggestions, the number one, if based on something true, lead to a completely stupid conclusion: coal fired power plants would generate a lot of CO2 and the dust will not go high enough in the atmosphere to shield us from the sun light. It would merely end up in our lungs which, IMHO, have enough to deal with soot from the cars, thak you.
The second enzyme, or enzyme sytem is called photosynthetic pathway… It seem indeed to be boosted by the increased CO2 concentration in the atmosphere (plants have fewer stomatas than a few centuries ago). But considering how fast we are burning forest it seems that this CO2 sink is very limited. But trapping CO2 and burying underground is already possible by chemistry and Canada is starting a program to try this method. But it has quite a lot of inconvenients:
– it’s expensive (more than the rights to pollute that you can buy in the Kyoto protocol framework)
– It uses a lot of energy (and if you are producing it wit a CO2 emitting plant that seem pointless)
– The liquid CO2 has to be trucked to the burial centers, thus releasing more CO2.
It seems that there is still room for improvements in here. Come on guys who’s gonna get a Nobel prize for the first artificial photosynthetic manufacture designed to consume C02?
- September 30, 2005 at 4:05 am #30159
There is a small connection
- September 30, 2005 at 6:37 pm #30182quote mithrilhack:
OK, but it states global warming increase the hole in the ozone layer, the oopsite is probably not true….
- September 30, 2005 at 9:43 pm #30193
Yeah, you’re probably right 😀
- October 1, 2005 at 11:59 am #30216
I can think like this, it’s a little childish answer maybe.. 😀 ..you can use the CO2 to oxydize something and the rest, carbon atoms can be heated till thousands degree celcius and then compress it with thousands atm… in result, from carbon, you can form a diamond… 😆 but, from the financial sites, I dunno…
- October 3, 2005 at 5:26 pm #30319clarenceParticipantquote Zenn:
Chlorophyll does not utilize high energy quanta because they contain too much energy. Each is powerful enough to remove electrons completely from the pigment, disrupting bonding orbitals, rendering the molecule useless. In other words, it is selectively disadvantageous for a plant to produce a pigment that is destroyed by the light it absorbs.
Hope this helps.
- October 3, 2005 at 5:29 pm #30321
You are totally right. How come i did not think of that? I didn’t think the day will come when i would be wrong at a question about photosynthesis since it is kinda my obsession… But i guess there is a first time for everything…
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.