Search SJML Archives! (Powered by Google)

Previous Message: Re: More on Air Consumption....
Next Message: RE:Re: But Aren't They _Made_ From Plants?
Month Index: June, 1996


From:     Jeff Goodson <jeffqyzt@????.??.???.edu>
Date:     Fri, 28 Jun 1996 01:13:07 -0400 (EDT)
Subject:  Re: But Aren't They _Made_ From Plants?

On Thu, 27 Jun 1996, Ken Lipka wrote:

> Leroy Van Camp III wrote:
> >
> >     Elven ships are made from plants.  And there is mention in several
> > books about plants being used to keep an atmosphere fresh.  So, why don't

> 	Part of this may be due to the fact that I interpreet
> the elven ships NOT to be plants.  Yes, the canon does state
> that these vessels are "organically grown", but that doesn't
> necessarily mean that they are plants per se.  I base this
> assumption on the fact that elven ships save as ceramic.  I
> can't recall the last time I saw a ceramic plant.

Hrm...well, there are many parts of plants that don't produce oxygen, and
are still organic.  Tree trunks come to mind.  Of course, that would seem
to indicate that they should save as thin or thick wood...

Of course, certain forms of bamboo form silicate residues in their joints,
which are actually hard enough to be polished as gemstones; assuming that
the elven ships had enough mineral based substrate to grow in, they might
synthesize an inorganic substance which resembled porcelain.  No mention
is ever made regarding "elven miracle-grow" or whatever tho...

> 	On the other hand, if the ships were plants, then
> yes, there should be some kind of an air bonus to elven vessels.
> Perhaps something on the order of 50% more air capacity.  Thus,
> a 60 ton vessel could carry 90 peole and still act as if it
> had 60.

Much of the previous discussion re: air consumption dealt with the thought
that it wasn't just the O2/CO2 cycle, but rather the production of other
noxious wastes, such as carbon monoxide, which caused much of the decay in
air quality.  Would plants remove all of these toxic chemicals?

Also, suppose that only a very small portion of the plant were actually
growing, much the way that your hair is dead but grows from a living
follicle, or the way that the interior of a tree trunk is dead once you
go past the very thin layer of cambrium?

Just some food for thought.


(")-(")  If the mice are eating more than you are, buy cheaper food.
 (O O)      If they're eating better than you are, eat the mice.
 =\ /= ---------------------------------------------------------------
   *   Jeff Goodson * jeffqyzt@????.??.???.edu, or @??????.???.???.edu




Previous Message: Re: More on Air Consumption....
Next Message: RE:Re: But Aren't They _Made_ From Plants?
Month Index: June, 1996

SubjectFromDate (UTC)
But Aren't They _Made_ From Plants?    Leroy Van Camp III    27 Jun 1996 07:44:39
Re: But Aren't They _Made_ From Plants?    Ken Lipka    27 Jun 1996 12:15:03
Re: But Aren't They _Made_ From Plants?    Eugene Shumu1insky    27 Jun 1996 14:50:03
Re: But Aren't They _Made_ From Plants?    James Perry    27 Jun 1996 15:07:11
Re: But Aren't They _Made_ From Plants?    James Perry    27 Jun 1996 15:10:10
Re: But Aren't They _Made_ From Plants?    Leroy Van Camp III    27 Jun 1996 19:51:05
Re: But Aren't They _Made_ From Plants?    Thomas O. Magann Jr.    27 Jun 1996 19:59:43
Re: But Aren't They _Made_ From Plants?    Russ 'Argel' LeBar    27 Jun 1996 21:32:59
Re: But Aren't They _Made_ From Plants?    Thomas O. Magann Jr.    27 Jun 1996 22:27:37
Re: But Aren't They _Made_ From Plants?    Jeff Goodson    28 Jun 1996 05:13:07

[ SPJ-L@Cornell.edu ] [ Spelljammer@Leicester.ac.uk ] [ Spelljammer@MPGN.com ] [ Spelljammer-L@Oracle.Wizards.com ]