3 ms·
if you read further down in the wikipedia article, it shows zibold's collector which produced about 0.9 liters/square-meter/day just pointing out that efficien
by novaleaf 14y ago
if you read further down in the wikipedia article, it shows zibold's collector which produced about 0.9 liters/square-meter/day
just pointing out that efficiency may be better than what you are estimating.
- Someone 14y agoIt may be, yes, but Wikipedia isn't convinced. Even further down, it states: "Zibold's condenser had apparently performed reasonably well, but in fact his exact results are not at all clear, and it is possible that the collector was intercepting fog, which added significantly to the yield.[10] If Zibold's condenser worked at all, this was probably due to fact that a few stones near the surface of the mound were able to lose heat at night while being thermally isolated from the ground; however, it could never have produced the yield that Zibold envisaged" That made me look for more recent data. That PDF from 2005 was the best I could find.