

Will man mimick nature to power the hydrogen economy?













Comments     Threshold


By Darkskypoet on 2/19/2008 7:24:00 AM , Rating: 4
Actually it's not poor journalism. Poor journalism would be adding a derogatory adjective to the initial summary when describing the net efficiency. Any decently studied biology student / professional would probably understand photosynthesis isn't too much more efficient, and so the number would make sense to them, and definitively not seem to be bashing this new technology.

Considering that on Daily Tech, the majority of the tech articles expect, (nay demand), a certain baseline of knowledge to be understood properly in context; I believe your comment stems from the fact that that you lack such baseline knowledge to have gotten full value out of the little bold summary up top of this article.

I am not slagging you, and I understand that one could argue that this article is not the standard tech piece we usually read here, and as such shouldn't assume we know that 0.3% is pretty damn good. However, you must admit, that if you possessed the knowledge that Nature Brand photosynthesis was only 2-3% efficient, that you would indeed have gleaned the useful information right away, and we would not be having this discussion.

I'll reserve my calls of 'Bad Journalism' for when the summary up top reads something more like, "Idiot Professor's crazed synthetic Photo Synth barely better then doing nothing at all! Grade school teacher confirms he's 'never done much real work, always daydreaming with those small shifty eyes of his'."



