This isn’t a serious magazine. They cover quirky things, with zero depth.
Calling this goop “building material” is a bit far fetched.
Saying it does carbon sequestration (well, they’d have said that if the intended audience knew what sequestration means) is kinda dumb as well, as it ain’t gonna do much.Although the article and the magazine suck, they had poor material to work from. The research paper sucks too. They seem to claim some breakthrough or advancement. At best, they’ve got a clever way to keep a biofilm alive and green. It’s useless as such.
Dual carbon sequestration with photosynthetic living materials
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-58761-yWood?
Wood is billions of years more advanced than this stuff.
That was my thought too
