James Dyson Award winner Gabe Tavas invented the process
when he wanted to produce wood without having to cut down trees. Naturally, he
turned his attention to kombucha. Kombucha is produced by letting a bacteria
and yeast mixture called cellulose ferment in a sweet tea for one to three
weeks and then bottled for one to two weeks. The ease of which to make Kombucha
has made it a popular drink to homebrew in recent years.
Tavas’ process to create kombucha “wood,” dubbed
Pyrus, involves putting the cellulose film that is formed during the brewing
process in layers of sheets then merging the sheets into a single piece using a
gel. As the gel dries the sheets of cellulose are placed under a mechanical
press to form the wood-alternative. In all aspects the material is most similar
to wood, it can be sawed, have resin cast onto it, and be sanded. Pyrus presents
an alternative to current wood substitutes such as compressed sawdust, which
still requires wood to be removed from trees whereas Pyrus is totally
sustainable and requires no tree to fall.
But is Pyrus more efficient than planting more trees to
replace ones being used for consumer products? Many companies plant trees as
part of their strategy to appear environmentally conscious, such as search
engine Ecosia which had planted 63 million trees as of 2019. Granted, the
number of companies that actually do this is still small and limited mostly to
larger corporations. Amazon’s cardboard used for deliveries is 75% recycled
paper, and considering the millions of orders fulfilled by the online
marketplace worldwide daily, still accounts for a significant amount of deforestation.
If large companies like Amazon were able to commit to planting a tree per order
over a certain payment threshold then we might see an improvement to
deforestation levels, but it’s often more complicated than that.
Comparatively, Pyrus is totally eco-friendly and can be used
in a variety of woodworking projects. Pyrus also comes in a variety of colors
and textures making the invention more versatile and able to fit the needs of
consumers, all under the guidance of professional woodworkers. The process can
even potentially lower the costs of high-end wood products, as it may end up
being more affordable than some expensive types of wood such as mahogany or
maple. However, there’s one thing that Pyrus likely can’t replicate, and that’s
the smell. People buying wood products are sometimes influenced by the smell of
a particular type of tree. Pine or cedar, for example, have a distinct smell
that adds to their popularity. So far, there is no evidence to suggest that
Pyrus would smell like wood, so that could be a deal-breaker.
Is it better to plant more trees and ignore
Pyrus? No. Is it better to totally adopt Pyrus and let nature heal? From a
consumer perspective, no. The answer lies somewhere in the middle. The benefits
of Pyrus are too good to ignore for its totally eco-friendly cultivation and
effective use. However, if more trees are planted by companies and people then
the benefits would speak for themselves in terms of natural healing. A
combination of both is the healthiest course of action for the planet. Until
the day where Pyrus sees a worldwide rollout scientists will continue coming up
with innovative ways to fight climate change. Courtesy: www.screenrant.com
