6 ms·

An Australian startup is “growing” water for California

58 points by lxm 4y ago

tpmx 4y ago
We clearly need more journalists with at least some kind of basic education in natural science.
- MilnerRoute 4y ago
  Yeah, it'd be more accurate to say they're "reclaiming" water in tomatoes that would otherwise be lost during the production process. Basically, they're capturing and purifying that water. But to be fair the reporter is citing the company's CEO... "We like to say that, in simple terms, we grow water," said Terry Paule, co-founder and CEO of Australia-based Botanical Water Technologies.
  - cowpig 4y ago
    I don't think the fact that the CEO of a company made a claim is sufficient justification for putting that claim in the title of a news article, especially without a "CEO claims" qualification of some kind.
- rr888 4y ago
  I think the issue is we all need to pay for journalism via subscriptions rather than rely on ads that requires clickbait titles to attract views.
- japhib 4y ago
  Obviously they're not "growing" water. That's just the marketing spin that the company puts on it, which the journalists are using for the title. The author isn't stupid, like you seem to be assuming ... ? They're just using a name that is more likely to get attention. An article named "company reclaims water from turning tomatoes into ketchup" is a LOT less likely to get attention.
  - deathgripsss 4y ago
    I thought the criticism was that the amount of water generated using this is negligible for the current crisis.
- yawnxyz 4y ago
  Similarly, maybe the HN headline needs to be changed to "reclaims water from ketchup production"?
jefftk 4y ago
Summary: some produce contains a lot of water, and is normally processed into something with much less water. Like tomatoes into ketchup. This company captures and sells that water. Doesn't look like enough water to be relevant. It takes ~100x as much water to grow a tomato as ends up in the final tomato. [1] [1] https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/7d92/40efa5321ba0e2a85968940a872725a498c8.pdf https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/7d92/40efa5321ba0e2a8596894...
- Namari 4y ago
  they're talking about 250 million gallons over 90 days
- boredumb 4y ago
  Capturing inefficiencies in processes is a good thing and one of the biggest benefits of capitalism, unless you are proposing we stop growing tomatoes or making ketchup?
  - SQueeeeeL 4y ago
    A comment praising capitalism on a thread about the California water crisis (where multiple massive hedge funds have been investing heavily into incredibly water intensive crops like almonds because they earn the most immediate returns despite long-term ability to not die of thirst) is the most hacker news moment of the day, I swear
    - throwaway6734 4y ago
      Capitalism isn't the issue. Not properly costing water is. Its the same thing with carbon.
      - chowells 4y ago
        This analysis is so shallow it's practically Libertarian. It gets one surface level detail approximately correct: if water or carbon emissions cost more, businesses would work harder to reduce their use. Analysis depth level 1: Where are the prices coming from? What are the incentives for setting them the way they are currently set? What alteration of those incentives would politically-powerful capital holders accept? Analysis depth level 2: Is market allocation moral for resources that are needed both for everyone to survive and for a small group of people to become wealthier? How does that analysis change as survival for the non-wealthy becomes more difficult? You can go deeper, of course. Many have. But just thinking about a few of these questions leads to far more cogent commentary than "capitalism isn't the issue".
Gys 4y ago
Reminds me of a short comic in which the main character invents an instant water powder. He sees himself helping many people and becoming very successful. In the end it turns out the powder needs to be solved in water :-)
lazyeye 4y ago
Bill Maher on Californias water problem https://youtu.be/glz-Pm6HUG0 https://youtu.be/glz-Pm6HUG0
moviewise 4y ago
The country of Israel has desalination plants to help with its water needs. If California had a functional government, seasonal drought wouldn't be an issue. https://www.gov.il/en/departments/general/project-water-desalination-background https://www.gov.il/en/departments/general/project-water-desa... "In order to comply with the desalination plan set out by the cabinet, 5 desalination plants were constructed over the years, in Ashkelon (2005), Palmachim (2007), Hadera (2009), Sorek (2013) and Ashdod (2015), with total production capabilities of some 585 million m3."
- celestialcheese 4y ago
  California is building desal plants, Look at the one built in Carlsbad, CA that went online in 2015. The problem is price. From the wiki[1]: > "The cost of water from the plant will be $100 to $200 more per acre-foot than recycled water (approximately 0.045 cents per gallon), $1,000 to $1,100 more than reservoir water (approx. 0.32 cents per gallon), but $100 to $200 less than importing water from outside the county. As of April 2015, San Diego County imported 90% of its water." Considering SD imports so much water, this is a big win. But still, this one plant cost nearly $1b to complete, and only provides 7% of the potable water for San Diego County. It's a non-trivial cost to use Desal water vs recycling efforts and loss prevention from reservoirs. Edit: 1- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_%22Bud%22_Lewis_Carlsbad_Desalination_Plant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_%22Bud%22_Lewis_Carlsba... 2- https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/29/us/san-diego-drinking-water.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/29/us/san-diego-drinking-wat...
  - bombcar 4y ago
    So for about $10 billion dollars + operating costs (which would be less than importing) San Diego County would be free and clear. San Diego City budget is $5 billion: https://www.sandiego.gov/sites/default/files/fy23ab_v1executivesummary.pdf https://www.sandiego.gov/sites/default/files/fy23ab_v1execut... San Diego County budget is $7 billion: https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/sdc/openbudget/en/home.html https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/sdc/openbudget/en/hom... This seems that if they needed to they could do it.
boxmonster 4y ago
California either needs to grow less water intensive crops or build desalinization plants. Recovering water from tomatoes and grapes won't put a dent in the problem.

58 points by lxm 4y ago

tpmx 4y ago

We clearly need more journalists with at least some kind of basic education in natural science.

MilnerRoute 4y ago
Yeah, it'd be more accurate to say they're "reclaiming" water in tomatoes that would otherwise be lost during the production process. Basically, they're capturing and purifying that water. But to be fair the reporter is citing the company's CEO... "We like to say that, in simple terms, we grow water," said Terry Paule, co-founder and CEO of Australia-based Botanical Water Technologies.
- cowpig 4y ago
  I don't think the fact that the CEO of a company made a claim is sufficient justification for putting that claim in the title of a news article, especially without a "CEO claims" qualification of some kind.
rr888 4y ago
I think the issue is we all need to pay for journalism via subscriptions rather than rely on ads that requires clickbait titles to attract views.
japhib 4y ago
Obviously they're not "growing" water. That's just the marketing spin that the company puts on it, which the journalists are using for the title. The author isn't stupid, like you seem to be assuming ... ? They're just using a name that is more likely to get attention. An article named "company reclaims water from turning tomatoes into ketchup" is a LOT less likely to get attention.
- deathgripsss 4y ago
  I thought the criticism was that the amount of water generated using this is negligible for the current crisis.
yawnxyz 4y ago
Similarly, maybe the HN headline needs to be changed to "reclaims water from ketchup production"?

jefftk 4y ago

Summary: some produce contains a lot of water, and is normally processed into something with much less water. Like tomatoes into ketchup. This company captures and sells that water. Doesn't look like enough water to be relevant. It takes ~100x as much water to grow a tomato as ends up in the final tomato. [1] [1] https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/7d92/40efa5321ba0e2a85968940a872725a498c8.pdf https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/7d92/40efa5321ba0e2a8596894...

Namari 4y ago
they're talking about 250 million gallons over 90 days
boredumb 4y ago
Capturing inefficiencies in processes is a good thing and one of the biggest benefits of capitalism, unless you are proposing we stop growing tomatoes or making ketchup?
- SQueeeeeL 4y ago
  A comment praising capitalism on a thread about the California water crisis (where multiple massive hedge funds have been investing heavily into incredibly water intensive crops like almonds because they earn the most immediate returns despite long-term ability to not die of thirst) is the most hacker news moment of the day, I swear
  - throwaway6734 4y ago
    Capitalism isn't the issue. Not properly costing water is. Its the same thing with carbon.
    - chowells 4y ago
      This analysis is so shallow it's practically Libertarian. It gets one surface level detail approximately correct: if water or carbon emissions cost more, businesses would work harder to reduce their use. Analysis depth level 1: Where are the prices coming from? What are the incentives for setting them the way they are currently set? What alteration of those incentives would politically-powerful capital holders accept? Analysis depth level 2: Is market allocation moral for resources that are needed both for everyone to survive and for a small group of people to become wealthier? How does that analysis change as survival for the non-wealthy becomes more difficult? You can go deeper, of course. Many have. But just thinking about a few of these questions leads to far more cogent commentary than "capitalism isn't the issue".

Gys 4y ago

Reminds me of a short comic in which the main character invents an instant water powder. He sees himself helping many people and becoming very successful. In the end it turns out the powder needs to be solved in water :-)

lazyeye 4y ago

Bill Maher on Californias water problem https://youtu.be/glz-Pm6HUG0 https://youtu.be/glz-Pm6HUG0

moviewise 4y ago

The country of Israel has desalination plants to help with its water needs. If California had a functional government, seasonal drought wouldn't be an issue. https://www.gov.il/en/departments/general/project-water-desalination-background https://www.gov.il/en/departments/general/project-water-desa... "In order to comply with the desalination plan set out by the cabinet, 5 desalination plants were constructed over the years, in Ashkelon (2005), Palmachim (2007), Hadera (2009), Sorek (2013) and Ashdod (2015), with total production capabilities of some 585 million m3."

celestialcheese 4y ago
California is building desal plants, Look at the one built in Carlsbad, CA that went online in 2015. The problem is price. From the wiki[1]: > "The cost of water from the plant will be $100 to $200 more per acre-foot than recycled water (approximately 0.045 cents per gallon), $1,000 to $1,100 more than reservoir water (approx. 0.32 cents per gallon), but $100 to $200 less than importing water from outside the county. As of April 2015, San Diego County imported 90% of its water." Considering SD imports so much water, this is a big win. But still, this one plant cost nearly $1b to complete, and only provides 7% of the potable water for San Diego County. It's a non-trivial cost to use Desal water vs recycling efforts and loss prevention from reservoirs. Edit: 1- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_%22Bud%22_Lewis_Carlsbad_Desalination_Plant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_%22Bud%22_Lewis_Carlsba... 2- https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/29/us/san-diego-drinking-water.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/29/us/san-diego-drinking-wat...
- bombcar 4y ago
  So for about $10 billion dollars + operating costs (which would be less than importing) San Diego County would be free and clear. San Diego City budget is $5 billion: https://www.sandiego.gov/sites/default/files/fy23ab_v1executivesummary.pdf https://www.sandiego.gov/sites/default/files/fy23ab_v1execut... San Diego County budget is $7 billion: https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/sdc/openbudget/en/home.html https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/sdc/openbudget/en/hom... This seems that if they needed to they could do it.

boxmonster 4y ago

California either needs to grow less water intensive crops or build desalinization plants. Recovering water from tomatoes and grapes won't put a dent in the problem.