> m not sure it would be more of a capital expense per watt than a cloud sponge elevator. If I were going to take a wild guess, the dam is probably cheaper lol

> m not sure it would be more of a capital expense per watt than a cloud sponge elevator. If I were going to take a wild guess, the dam is probably cheaper lol. > One of the reasons why people are interested in evaporation engines is to try to tap into the energy in the water cycle, like dams do, without the high capital expense. Of course, dipping birds aren't efficient, but they also aren't the only possible design. You seem like you know more than me here, what's the theory behind capital costs being lower? Is it the lack of need to contain pressure?