[HN Gopher] In Cleveland, mushrooms digest entire houses
___________________________________________________________________
In Cleveland, mushrooms digest entire houses
Author : geox
Score : 79 points
Date : 2024-03-17 02:49 UTC (20 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.bbc.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.bbc.com)
| tlhighbaugh wrote:
| Years ago, in a pool of improperly disposed of motor oil in the
| corner of my ex-girlfriend's parent's yard, I was amazed to
| discover mushrooms that started growing in the oil and looked
| like they were consuming the oil. Each winter, when mushroom
| conditions were ripest, they returned until the stump the pool of
| oil gathered around sprouted new branches and started growing
| again. Turns out there are species of mushrooms that consume oil
| on the surface of the planet.
|
| So this doesn't shock me at all, its an example of how regardless
| of humanity's arrogance, life on Earth will be around long after
| our species and its descendants cease to exist, to think
| otherwise is to prove one's ignorance.
| x86x87 wrote:
| Yeah. Lookup Mycellium Running by that wacky dude Stamets.
| There are mushroom species that can be emplotey to cleanup
| nasty oil spills and stuff.
|
| Also, there are mushroom species that can breakdown plastics in
| effect getting rid of stuff that woulf take hundreds/thousads
| of years to decompose.
|
| Mushrooms are amazing
| x86x87 wrote:
| Here: https://www.ted.com/talks/paul_stamets_6_ways_mushrooms
| _can_...
| ProllyInfamous wrote:
| >Mushrooms are amazing
|
| Lichens are incredible. Check out the book _Entangled Life_ ,
| which Paul Stamets proclaims is "a must-read!"
| x86x87 wrote:
| Lichens are a mix of algae & fungi. :)
| ProllyInfamous wrote:
| & bacteria. :)
| DANmode wrote:
| Any evidence, here or elsewhere, that it _completely_ consumed
| the toxic compounds?
|
| Neat evidence either way, that they thrive in that condition.
| lioeters wrote:
| > Mycoremediation (from ancient Greek mukes (mukes), meaning
| "fungus", and the suffix -remedium, in Latin meaning 'restoring
| balance') is a form of bioremediation in which fungi-based
| remediation methods are used to decontaminate the environment.
|
| > Fungi have been proven to be a cheap, effective and
| environmentally sound way for removing a wide array of
| contaminants from damaged environments or wastewater. These
| contaminants include heavy metals, organic pollutants, textile
| dyes, leather tanning chemicals and wastewater, petroleum
| fuels, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, pharmaceuticals and
| personal care products, pesticides and herbicides in land,
| fresh water, and marine environments.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mycoremediation
| wolverine876 wrote:
| > life on Earth will be around long after our species and its
| descendants cease to exist, to think otherwise is to prove
| one's ignorance.
|
| Who says otherwise?
| medoc wrote:
| It's a common misconception that the reason we should be more
| frugal is to save the planet, ecosystems, or cute animals.
| mandmandam wrote:
| What is the misconception?
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_extinction
|
| We are killing species at 100-1,000 times the background
| rate. The damage can never be undone. The Earth may
| recover, on geological time scales, but 99.9% of those
| species aren't ever coming back. It's extremely unwise to
| be committing mass murder on the biosphere like this, and
| not a matter of "frugality".
| ceejayoz wrote:
| "Save the planet" is a short slogan for "not have sentient
| cockroaches wondering what happened to the folks who dug up
| all the coal".
|
| No one asserts climate change is gonna crack the planet in
| half.
| adammarples wrote:
| Yeah, ecosystems are fragile, they're equilibria. Of course
| if you disrupt them you eventually get another one, but I'm
| quite fond of the ones we have and not looking forward to a
| cool fungi and jellyfish locust swarm ecosystem or whatever
| comes next.
| wolverine876 wrote:
| Personally, I think it's very important, and I think most
| people would agree, to prevent harm and cost to humans, and
| to enable them to be free, live long, and prosper. [0] I
| don't think there's a higher moral or practical imperative
| - if you don't care about that, what do you care about? The
| GGP said "life on Earth will be around long after our
| species and its descendants cease to exist", implying that
| the extinction of humans was not an issue!
|
| Damage to nature, as a general concept, can often shorten
| lives, cause great harm to the living (warfare,
| starvation), and cost enormous amounts of money - climate
| change is very expensive. One reason is that we have
| enormous amounts of fixed capital - 10,000 years worth, in
| a way - invested in the ecosystems as they currently are,
| including all our agriculture, ports, cities,
| infrastructure, borders, food and water supply, etc. etc.
| It will be very expensive and pointless to rebuild it all
| for new ecosystems instead of just retaining what we have.
|
| Also, most people agree that harming animals is also wrong,
| though not nearly on the level of harming humans. If you
| physically abuse your dog, for example, people will be
| angry and there are laws against it in most places.
|
| And I think most people value what is 'natural' to some
| degree; it seems like a common value of humanity across
| time and cultures. They prefer the natural hill to the
| strip-mined one, the green field to the parking lot. They
| also like coal and parking their car, so there are
| competing values too.
|
| [0] :)
| CSMastermind wrote:
| The biology and evolutionary history of fungi is incredibly
| fascinating.
|
| To my (admittedly layman) understanding, they're sort of life's
| premiere resource extractors. Their whole thing is breaking
| down things that other life can't, so it's not surprising at
| all that some species can consume oil.
|
| We know they co-evolved with plants, and one theory suggests
| that fungi allowed plants to make the jump from water to land
| by using their hyphae to act as a proto-root system, unlock
| nutrients like phosphorus from the soil, and transport water,
| while early land plants provided sugars produced from
| photosynthesis in return.
|
| One of the main differentiations that might have led to the
| split between proto-fungi and proto-animals is their nutrient
| acquisition strategy. The organism that would become fungi had
| extracellular digestion, while the organism that would become
| animals captured and ingested other organisms.
|
| This split led to different approaches to cellular adhesion
| along with different developmental and signaling pathways
| (different strategies for achieving homeostasis for instance).
|
| ---
|
| If you want to read about some really wild stuff, look up the
| Late Paleozoic era in the Carboniferous period. Basically
| plants evolved Lignin (wood) but there was nothing in the world
| that could break it down so it rapidly accumulated along with a
| hyperoxgenated atmosphere due to the extensive growth. This
| meant there were 8 foot long millipedes and dragonflies that
| size of crows flying around. There were also massive forest
| fires spanning the globe since fire was one of the only ways to
| get rid of the lignin until, eventually, some fungi evolved to
| take care of the problem.
| Shekelphile wrote:
| We are actually in the last 20% of time remaining for life on
| earth to exist. Multicellular life will likely go extinct
| within a few hundred million years.
| whutsurnaym wrote:
| That's not information I'd heard before. Do you have a
| source?
| philipkglass wrote:
| Not a "few" hundred million years, but less than a billion
| years:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_far_future#Ea
| r...
|
| _500-600 million years: The Sun 's increasing luminosity
| begins to disrupt the carbonate-silicate cycle; higher
| luminosity increases weathering of surface rocks, which
| traps carbon dioxide in the ground as carbonate. As water
| evaporates from the Earth's surface, rocks harden, causing
| plate tectonics to slow and eventually stop once the oceans
| evaporate completely. With less volcanism to recycle carbon
| into the Earth's atmosphere, carbon dioxide levels begin to
| fall. By this time, carbon dioxide levels will fall to the
| point at which C3 photosynthesis is no longer possible. All
| plants that use C3 photosynthesis ([?]99 percent of
| present-day species) will die._
|
| ...
|
| _800-900 million years: Carbon dioxide levels will fall to
| the point at which C4 photosynthesis is no longer possible.
| Without plant life to recycle oxygen in the atmosphere,
| free oxygen and the ozone layer will disappear from the
| atmosphere allowing for intense levels of deadly UV light
| to reach the surface. Animals in food chains that were
| dependent on live plants will disappear shortly afterward.
| At most, animal life could survive about 3 to 100 million
| years after plant life dies out. Just like plants, the
| extinction of animals will likely coincide with the loss of
| plants. It will start with large animals, then smaller
| animals and flying creatures, then amphibians, followed by
| reptiles, and finally, invertebrates. In the book The Life
| and Death of Planet Earth, authors Peter D. Ward and Donald
| Brownlee state that some animal life may be able to survive
| in the oceans. Eventually, however, all multicellular life
| will die out._
| rad_gruchalski wrote:
| We better find the Planet B.
| Log_out_ wrote:
| So encode human genomes into mushrooms, so we rise again? Great
| idea
| justrealist wrote:
| I like the idea in principle but I would love a more clear
| analysis of where the lead paint from old dismantled houses ends
| up. I wouldn't want to use mycelium bricks in my house, if I
| thought they were going to leach toxins into everything they
| touch...
| bongodongobob wrote:
| Please explain how something as inert as lead "leaches".
| justrealist wrote:
| It literally contaminates into the soil. This happens with
| all sorts of lead pipes, cables, etc.
|
| This is not me making things up, it's a huge concern when
| urban gardening.
| Anotheroneagain wrote:
| If somebody tells you that the vegetables from their garden
| taste 100 times better than those from the store, this is
| why.
| klyrs wrote:
| Unless the lead is transmuted into something benign (spoiler:
| nope), one must account for where it's going.
| lightedman wrote:
| Simple warm pH-imbalanced water is all you need. I can make
| cerrusite artificially with older lead-plumbed copper pipe
| and a moderate temperature (50C) pH-imbalanced hard water
| source, run that whole discharge through a water carbonation
| system and let the results evaporate under pressure. Bam. In
| a day I've leached lead out and crystallized it into another
| form that you would find in volcanic fields.
|
| Note: The leaching takes almost no time, the evaporation is
| the majority of time needed for forming the cerrusite. Lead
| is nowhere near as inert as you imagine it to be. It oxidizes
| readily.
| bongodongobob wrote:
| So as long as you don't kick them it's fine.
| patmorgan23 wrote:
| If lead never leached into anything, I'm sure you won't have
| a problem with installing lead pipes in your home.
| DonHopkins wrote:
| Maybe he gets his dangerously false and ignorant opinions
| about science from Kansas Republican Attorney General Kris
| Kobach.
|
| Pete Buttigieg Schools Republican Who Claimed Lead
| Poisoning Is Just 'Speculative'. After Kansas Republican
| Attorney General Kris Kobach claimed studies about how lead
| is poisonous for humans are 'entirely speculative,'
| Buttigieg sounded off on X, formerly Twitter, to lay out
| some basic science.
|
| https://www.comicsands.com/buttigieg-schools-kobach-lead-
| poi...
|
| >"Biden wants to replace lead pipes. He failed to mention
| that the unfunded mandate sets an almost impossible
| timeline, will cost billions, infringe on the rights of the
| States and their residents - all for benefits that may be
| entirely speculative." -Kris Kobach, science denier
|
| >"The benefit of *not being lead poisoned* is not
| speculative. It is enormous. And because lead poisoning
| leads to irreversible cognitive harm, massive economic
| loss, and even higher crime rates, this work represents one
| of the best returns on public investment ever observed."
| -Secretary Pete Buttigieg, science schooler
|
| >Readers added context: Lead is a highly poisonous metal
| and can affect almost every organ in the body and the
| nervous system.
|
| CDC: Health Effects of Lead Exposure
|
| https://www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/prevention/health-effects.htm
|
| Mayo Clinic: Lead poisoning
|
| https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/lead-
| poisonin...
|
| >EPA estimates that lead in drinking water can be 20% or
| more of a person's lead exposure.
|
| Clean Water Action: Lead and Drinking Water
|
| https://cleanwater.org/lead-and-drinking-water
|
| Study: More than 60% of Kansas, 80% of Missouri kids have
| lead in their blood. The findings of massive national study
| were published in JAMA Pediatrics this week.
|
| https://kansasreflector.com/2021/09/30/study-more-
| than-60-of...
|
| >KANSAS CITY, Mo. -- Children in Kansas had elevated levels
| of lead in their blood at a greater rate than almost any
| other state, according to a massive national study
| published this week.
|
| >And more than 80% of Missouri children had some level of
| lead in their blood.
|
| >The study, authored by doctors at Boston Children's
| Hospital and Quest Diagnostics, was published this week in
| JAMA Pediatrics, a peer-reviewed journal published by the
| American Medical Association. It included 1.1 million tests
| conducted by Quest Diagnostics nationwide between 2018 and
| 2020.
|
| >There is no safe level of lead in a child's blood.
| Exposure to the metal can cause brain and nervous system
| damage, slow a child's growth and development and lead to
| learning, behavior, hearing and speech problems.
|
| >But the study focused on both detectable blood lead
| levels, one microgram per deciliter, as well as elevated
| levels, 5 micrograms per deciliter.
|
| >In Missouri, 4.5% of children had elevated levels of lead
| in their blood. In Kansas, that figure was 2.6% of
| children, both far ahead of the 1.9% national average.
|
| >And the proportion of children with any detectable level
| of blood lead was higher in both states than the national
| average of about 50%. In Kansas 65% of kids had detectable
| levels of blood lead compared to 82% in Missouri.
|
| >According to the study, elevated blood levels were once
| ubiquitous but had fallen over the last 40 years because of
| policies limiting lead and eliminating it from gasoline,
| paint, plumbing pipes and consumer products.
|
| >But exposure is still possible and disproportionately
| affects children in families living at or below the poverty
| line, in older housing or communities with high
| concentrations of poverty.
|
| >"There has been significant progress in reducing lead
| exposure throughout the country," the study says. "This
| study demonstrates, however, that there are still
| substantial individual-and community-level disparities that
| have important implications for addressing childhood lead
| exposure."
|
| >Missouri and Kansas also have some of the highest numbers
| of lead service lines, the pipes running from water mains
| into homes and buildings, of any state.
|
| >Missouri ranked 6th for the most lead service lines -- 4th
| if calculated per 100,000 residents. Kansas had the third
| most per capita.
|
| Kobach leads coalition demanding Biden drop "unnecessary"
| EPA rule that would require the replacement of more than 9
| million lead pipes across the country.
|
| https://web.archive.org/web/20240308080847/https://ag.ks.go
| v...
|
| >"It sets an almost impossible timeline, will cost billions
| and will infringe on the rights of the States and their
| residents - all for benefits that may be entirely
| speculative," the joint letter reads.
|
| Kris Kobach's foolishly false and dangerously ignorant
| letter to the EPA:
|
| https://web.archive.org/web/20240309085310/https://ag.ks.go
| v...
|
| Kris Kobach leads effort to keep poisoning our drinking
| water. No one disputes that eliminating lead from drinking
| water is a needed but expensive undertaking. Rather than
| oppose the effort, the attorneys general should use their
| political influence to persuade their congressional
| delegations to fund it.
|
| https://www.iolaregister.com/opinion/columnists/kris-
| kobach-...
| bongodongobob wrote:
| So don't lick or eat the bricks.
| bongodongobob wrote:
| From a brick?
| bongodongobob wrote:
| Tons of homes have lead pipes. It's not a problem unless
| your water supply gets fucked up aka flint. The dangers of
| lead are over stated. As long as you don't vaporize,
| dissolve, or eat it, it's as harmful as any other metal.
| adammarples wrote:
| 2Pb(s)+ O2(g) + 2H2O(l) -> 2 Pb(OH)2(s)
| bongodongobob wrote:
| And how is the lead from that brick going to get into your
| body? Brick licking?
| dkbrk wrote:
| This is a good question and you shouldn't have been downvoted
| for it. I had a similar concern.
|
| I think the answer is this [0]:
|
| > Many fungi are hyperaccumulators, therefore they are able to
| concentrate toxins in their fruiting bodies for later removal.
|
| And the linked article alludes to that:
|
| > Heavy metals and other toxins are extracted and captured in
| the mushrooms that grow, while the substrate leftovers,
| including the mycelium, are compacted and heated to create
| clean bricks for new construction.
|
| Presumably they validate that the process results in the
| substrate having an acceptably low level of toxins before using
| it as material for new construction.
|
| [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mycoremediation
| echelon wrote:
| I'm worried of breathing in fungi. They're already known
| carcinogens. If these shed spores, they could establish a latent
| infection. This is what fungi do.
|
| We're already all encountering this on a day to day basis at a
| background level. No reason to increase exposure.
| mikeweiss wrote:
| Curious... do you eat mushrooms?
| Uptrenda wrote:
| I think I heard somewhere that if not for a few degrees in
| temperature human beings would be plagued by many fungal
| diseases. But because of our body temperature (and immune
| system) they find it very hard to live in our bodies. I'm
| wondering if global warming will accelerate the adaption of
| fungi to higher temperatures and therefore potentially allowing
| a new species to invade us. The future is fun and holds many
| things to look forward to. Perhaps we can become one with the
| mushrooms some day.
| Nux wrote:
| It was a film :) .. wouldn't let that in serious
| conversation.
|
| https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OLNagvJHl3g
| bamboozled wrote:
| In more worried about what is lurking in permafrost...
| CyberDildonics wrote:
| You realize there are already a lot of different climates on
| earth right?
| CarRamrod wrote:
| If you go inside, you get to choose from one of three treasure
| chests.
| mikewarot wrote:
| In nearby East Chicago, Indiana, the lead level in some tested
| soils reached 9.1% (91,000 ppm) [1] If this could be used to
| capture that lead, and separate it out, you could mine the soil,
| while you treat a superfund site at the same time.
|
| [1] https://www.nrdc.org/stories/east-chicago-knowing-your-
| soil-...
| rekabis wrote:
| Maybe with a little research and genetic manipulation we can
| engineer the world of Nausicaa, where an entire ecosystem of
| fungi purge the world of toxins from man's prior technological
| civilizations.
| nitwit005 wrote:
| Presumably, if the fungus takes in toxic metals, someone has to
| go through the wood and collect the body of the fungus, and do
| some significant chemistry later to extract it out?
| Sharlin wrote:
| Apparently they're able to concentrate absorbed contaminants in
| their fruiting bodies. Very convenient. At least as long as
| we're talking about species that are nonedible in the first
| place.
| Anotheroneagain wrote:
| I suppose it's to motivate animals to eat them. Even people
| prefer food high in heavy metals by taste.
| Sharlin wrote:
| I think it's more that the mushroom parts are expendable,
| they die anyway after they've done their job. I don't think
| fungi in general benefit much from animals eating them, not
| the way many plants do.
| Anotheroneagain wrote:
| They want animals to ingest their spores.
| nitwit005 wrote:
| That still means a fairly low concentration overall. It's not
| as if it's going to make a solid lead mushroom.
| t1c wrote:
| .......only in Ohio
| ginko wrote:
| > Effectively what we're doing is diverting tonnage from landfill
|
| Wouldn't digesting the house release more co2 to the atmosphere
| than just burying it in an anaerobic landfill?
| lossolo wrote:
| There are mushrooms that "eat" radiation from nuclear waste.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiotrophic_fungus
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-03-17 23:01 UTC)