Scientifically speaking this work is mighty interesting and desirable, there will be, I suppose, plenty of new discoveries/updates at the micro-molecular level about the photo-syn. processes. Two thumbs up and more power to you, we will learn a great deal about leaf tree photosynthetis on theoretical level.
Having said that, the naive and (forgive me for saying) faulty science behind the idea of using these for "stabilizing" climate is alarming. Ecology and the processes responsible for climate stability is infinitely more complex, and most importantly CO2 does not play central role in it per se. The amount of information processing by micro-biota to render the service of climate stabilization against equilibrium thermodynamics is unreachable in any foreseeable future by humans (ie. there is not even a hope to begin modeling this from first principles -- ignoring the fact for now that no theories exists on the hierarchical correlations among the ecological levels).
Of cause I understand the "advertising" element this work needs to attract funds and investments. That is why I would not unleash my criticism in full scale here (also not appropriate here), but (humbly) I would like to see that you attract real ecologists under the umbrella, and update the narrative to account for the dominant role forests play in on-land water cycle at least on the rudimentary level. Sure, I do not mean to uproot your efforts focusing on details of photosyntheis, but climate stabilization (mean for real, not just advertisement statements) is worth to acknowledge to come as a system. At the same time, I have anxiety that with all the good intentions we can easily cause more harm (as has been done many times prior , eg. corn-ethanol additives, palm oil, etc).
Having said that, the naive and (forgive me for saying) faulty science behind the idea of using these for "stabilizing" climate is alarming. Ecology and the processes responsible for climate stability is infinitely more complex, and most importantly CO2 does not play central role in it per se. The amount of information processing by micro-biota to render the service of climate stabilization against equilibrium thermodynamics is unreachable in any foreseeable future by humans (ie. there is not even a hope to begin modeling this from first principles -- ignoring the fact for now that no theories exists on the hierarchical correlations among the ecological levels).
Of cause I understand the "advertising" element this work needs to attract funds and investments. That is why I would not unleash my criticism in full scale here (also not appropriate here), but (humbly) I would like to see that you attract real ecologists under the umbrella, and update the narrative to account for the dominant role forests play in on-land water cycle at least on the rudimentary level. Sure, I do not mean to uproot your efforts focusing on details of photosyntheis, but climate stabilization (mean for real, not just advertisement statements) is worth to acknowledge to come as a system. At the same time, I have anxiety that with all the good intentions we can easily cause more harm (as has been done many times prior , eg. corn-ethanol additives, palm oil, etc).