[angli]

It's not as surprising as you'd think. The basic problem is energy density and availability.

Human beings don't directly photosynthesize for clear reasons. Solar power isn't available constantly and is too diffuse to power us in real-time. Instead, we eat plants (or animals, which is just another layer of indirection) that have photosynthesized over time and stored up that energy - we then convert that energy so we can metabolize it as needed.

The same thing is happening with petroleum. It's denser and more flexible than the sun. These are real constraints that have led us to use these sources of energy and prioritize them. They're not insurmountable - I think as prices fall we'll see more research into storage, I believe panel efficiency is going up - but the path of least resistance is a powerful force.

[toomuchtodo]

> Human beings don't directly photosynthesize for clear reasons.

I've always wondered why humans did not evolve to photosynthesize, and am interested if they could be permitted to evolve to using CRISPR.

[icefo]

Photosynthesis is terribly inefficient, something like 5-6% of the light is actually used to make glucose out of CO2 because the process is quite complex and humans don't have a huge skin surface.

That's my opinion

[WillAbides]

> humans don't have a huge skin surface

That's easy to solve. We just start growing leaves.

[toomuchtodo]

Remember, it doesn't need to be terribly efficient. Just efficient enough. I agree that its probably 100-200 years off though (if it can be done at all).