5 ms·
Hugely inefficient and expensive, but if the energy used is renewable I guess there's no downside. Certainly seems to be more environmentally friendly than desa
by Arn_Thor 6y ago
Hugely inefficient and expensive, but if the energy used is renewable I guess there's no downside. Certainly seems to be more environmentally friendly than desalination which disrupts sea life in coastal waters.
- TimSchumann 6y agoThere's still externalities to be considered, even if the energy is renewable. But even accounting for that, I don't see why something like this would be preferable to just desalinating ocean water and transporting it via some method. Unless I'm missing something with the energy needed to pull the water out of the air, or they've made a huge leap in miniaturizing the tech... this whole idea is a non-starter IMO.
- ISL 6y agoIt is a question that can be addressed quantitatively with two thermodynamics questions. Size matters not. How many joules of energy are required to extract a liter of water from the air (average dewpoint, temperature) at the site in question compared with the number of joules of energy required to remove the salt from a liter of the available seawater?
- adrianN 6y agoDesalination has the additional problem that you need to dispose of all that salt somehow. You can't easily dump it back into the ocean without risking the local ecosystem. It needs to be diluted over a fairly large area. That adds some cost. But it seems like this is more of a novelty and targets rich people, like bottled glacier water.
- pankajdoharey 6y agoSo here is my doubt if there is a Air polluting source nearby how does it affect the quality of water? What happens to the pollutants like carbon monoxide , nitrates present in air. They might get dissolved in water at the time of condensation?
- Arn_Thor 6y agoI assume the water will be filtered. There's a reason air conditioner drippings are not recommended sustenance.
- pankajdoharey 6y agoEfficiency is the only thing I can think of as explained in the video by thunderf000t here https://youtu.be/aPvXnmBIO7o https://youtu.be/aPvXnmBIO7o
- sudosysgen 6y agoThere's still a downside, in that it takes more resources and more energy to get that water than just shipping it. Pipes are very, very efficient.
- Arn_Thor 6y agoSure, but pumping still takes energy. Not to mention the cost, monetary and environmental, of building pipes from the nearest (very ample) fresh water source in.. the mountains of Georgia?
- sudosysgen 6y agoYes. But pipes are very, very, very efficient, and cheap, high-throughput, and has very low environmental cost.
- dehrmann 6y ago> I guess there's no downside Just opportunity cost.
- Johnythree 6y agoNot necessarily inefficient. If you use transverse flow heat exchangers the "cold" is not lost but maintained in the condensing area, so that little thermal energy escapes.