4 ms·
Headline is a lie; it's 90% cheaper only compared to a process that isn't actually used. Flagged.
by jimrandomh 7y ago
Headline is a lie; it's 90% cheaper only compared to a process that isn't actually used. Flagged.
- ChristianBundy 7y agoCould you add some more info on which process isn't actually used, or links to resources that discuss it? I'm not familiar with the state of the art of desalination.
- nullc 7y agoThe article is comparing to using atmospheric pressure distillation, which isn't used for commercial scale desalination... reverse osmosis is primarily. (Where waste heat is available for 'free' flash distillation , which is already a lot more efficient than atmospheric pressure distillation, can be attractive... but if heat isn't available for free, RO uses about 80% less energy than multi-stage flash) So it sound to me like it may well be in an apples to apples comparison the method discussed in the article may be similar to or less energy efficient than RO. But maybe it could be used to enhance the usefulness of flash distillation for lower levels of waste heat.
- asdf21 7y ago>Compared with the methods listed above, our technology allows to reduce the cost of obtaining one cubic meter of fresh water tenfold,” the scientist pointed out. Who knows what that quote is even referring to... I wouldn't assume that the scientist was able to see the print layout of the article he would be quoted in.