Ok I was watching PBS last night Art 21th century 21st episode and they mentioned the revival project in which plants that remove toxic metals and containaments are planted in a dead zone after a time they are removed burned producing a pure 'clean' metal. This removes the toxins from the soil and reviving ecosystem and reclaims 'lost' material during the smelting process. I was thinking, this 'technology' has been availible scense before industry and yet it wasnt developed despite the fact that 'organic minning' would have been and will be far less destructive. Today the science of it is being pared with art and discrediting (for the majority) the possibility of real research being done.

The possibilities here are endless, yet first and foremost cleaning of Earth (without too much war), second up is organic minning, which would be basically growing these (what looked like alf alfa) plants were the deposites or around waste sites and industrial facilities. There is also the possibility that these plants could help clean up neuclear waste, from nuclear winter or something, or not even, say natural deseastor of a meteor hitting the earth... Then there are nasa applications, colonizing and fertilizing mars (and in a few hundred years Venus Titus and some of the larger astroids in the belt) it would cut down on the equipment needed and the cost of everything, just a few seeds and a growlight (hahaha) instead of a minning system which is impractical.

thoughts on this?

I believe research has been conducted on this idea since the early 90s. Hyperaccumulators, as they are called, contain up to 1000 times larger metal concentrations in their aboveground parts than normal species. Their distribution is global, including many different families of flowering plants of varying growth forms, from herbaceous plants to trees. These plants are relatively rare with small population sizes, occurring in remote areas or, ironically, in areas often threatened by mining activities.

Metal uptake into plant biomass is clearly limited by plant productivity. Many hyperaccumulator plants are of small biomass, although considerable natural variation exists within populations. Selection trials would be needed to identify the fastest growing (largest potential biomass and greatest nutrient responses) and most strongly metal-accumulating genotypes. Selection also could identify the individuals with greatest resistance to disease the deepest and those with the most extensive and efficient root systems. Root depth is an important consideration in relation to the depth to which the metals concentrate in the ground as a result of sludge or waste treated soil. Breeding experiments could incorporate all these desirable properties into one plant. Future work could involve genetic engineering to further improve metal-uptake characteristics, if the genes for metal accumulation can be identified and manipulated. The possibility would then exist to transfer genes for metal hyperaccumulation into a very productive but inedible host plant.

Consideration must also be given to the disposal of large quantities of harvested metal-enriched biomass. One possibility would be to reduce the mass by a controlled, low-temperature ashing procedure whereby metals would be further concentrated into the ash. I do not know what concentrations would be required that economical biorecovery and recycling of metals. An alternative would be to treat the concentrate as a hazardous waste by landfill disposal.

Peace.

Wait till we develop the robots (topic in elsewhere of this forum) and advanced fuel cells to provide power. Then we can put them to work - refining heavy metals and burying it in the ground just like we do for nuclear spent fuels. Then the Earth will get mad and spew out the stuff using vulcanoes....:D