4 ms·

What's interesting about this is the desalination costs... The Sorek plant mentioned (largest of it's kind, 40 billion gallons/year) cost just $500 million to b

What's interesting about this is the desalination costs... The Sorek plant mentioned (largest of it's kind, 40 billion gallons/year) cost just $500 million to build. [1] They sell it back to Israel for $0.58/m^3 or $0.0022/gallon profitably. That's way cheaper than, for example, Glendale, California, whose residential rates run anywhere between $0.0030 and $0.0052/gallon depending on consumption levels. [2] What will it take to bring this kind of technology to Southern California? [1] http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/534996/megascale-desalination/ http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/534996/megasca... [2] http://www.glendaleca.gov/water-rates http://www.glendaleca.gov/water-rates

jallmann 11y ago
>What will it take to bring this kind of technology to Southern California? San Diego county is already getting a desalination plant in Carlsbad, although it's projected to cost more, for much less water: $530 million for ~18 billion gallons a year. No idea why it's so expensive. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlsbad_desalination_plant http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlsbad_desalination_plant
- woah 11y ago
  Why did the bay bridge cost such an exorbitant amount, for a very simple structure that is now falling apart? Same reason probably.
- OrwellianChild 11y ago
  Great benchmark for California... Actually, it looks like the project is closer to $780 million for the plant (not sure why the Wikipedia summary is off). [1] Central question is, can the Sorek method/scale be implemented in SoCal to get better results? Can it be run on integrated solar or other renewables? [1] http://carlsbaddesal.com/carlsbad-final-schedule-taking-shape http://carlsbaddesal.com/carlsbad-final-schedule-taking-shap...
GauntletWizard 11y ago
These plants are running on cheap natural gas; Israeli price controls are looking at about $6 per million BTU [1] whereas US prices are around $8-10 [2]. The US could have cheap natural gas, too; Even cheaper than Israel could get it. But we can't move it around without pipelines, which is limiting both our production and consumption. What's blocking the pipelines? Nimbyism, to be short. [1]http://www.platts.com/latest-news/natural-gas/jerusalem/israel-mulls-maximum-natural-gas-price-instead-26006790 http://www.platts.com/latest-news/natural-gas/jerusalem/isra... [2]http://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/ng_pri_sum_dcu_nus_m.htm http://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/ng_pri_sum_dcu_nus_m.htm (I'm fudging the BTU->Cubic Foot conversion here, but it's darn close to 1000:1)
- yazaddaruvala 11y ago
  Everyone seems to want chemical storage of Solar Energy. Everyone keeps looking into batteries and they are not yet sufficient. Why not store the massive amounts of Solar that Southern California receives during the day as clean drinking water?
  - ars 11y ago
    I like this idea very much. Make water only during the day. Water consumption is highest during the day anyway, and water can be stored much easier than electricity.
  - chadzawistowski 11y ago
    I wonder what the amortized cost of solar energy is? It's probably still more expensive than Israel's $6 per million BTU.
    - rwallace 11y ago
      In a desert with plentiful sunshine for an application where you don't need to worry about distribution and storage, I would expect solar to be quite competitive with even the notional price of fossil fuel. When you compare it with the real price of fossil fuel (i.e. add the negative externality of carbon dioxide emission to the notional price), solar wins by a country mile.
bjourne 11y ago
Another data point: In Sweden water costs 15-25 kr/m^3 or 1.5-3 dollars/m^3 and we get it untreated directly from lakes. So $0.58 is very cheap even if it is the bulk price and it quadruples before it arrives at the end customer.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

jallmann 11y ago

>What will it take to bring this kind of technology to Southern California? San Diego county is already getting a desalination plant in Carlsbad, although it's projected to cost more, for much less water: $530 million for ~18 billion gallons a year. No idea why it's so expensive. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlsbad_desalination_plant http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlsbad_desalination_plant

woah 11y ago
Why did the bay bridge cost such an exorbitant amount, for a very simple structure that is now falling apart? Same reason probably.
OrwellianChild 11y ago
Great benchmark for California... Actually, it looks like the project is closer to $780 million for the plant (not sure why the Wikipedia summary is off). [1] Central question is, can the Sorek method/scale be implemented in SoCal to get better results? Can it be run on integrated solar or other renewables? [1] http://carlsbaddesal.com/carlsbad-final-schedule-taking-shape http://carlsbaddesal.com/carlsbad-final-schedule-taking-shap...

GauntletWizard 11y ago

These plants are running on cheap natural gas; Israeli price controls are looking at about $6 per million BTU [1] whereas US prices are around $8-10 [2]. The US could have cheap natural gas, too; Even cheaper than Israel could get it. But we can't move it around without pipelines, which is limiting both our production and consumption. What's blocking the pipelines? Nimbyism, to be short. [1]http://www.platts.com/latest-news/natural-gas/jerusalem/israel-mulls-maximum-natural-gas-price-instead-26006790 http://www.platts.com/latest-news/natural-gas/jerusalem/isra... [2]http://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/ng_pri_sum_dcu_nus_m.htm http://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/ng_pri_sum_dcu_nus_m.htm (I'm fudging the BTU->Cubic Foot conversion here, but it's darn close to 1000:1)

yazaddaruvala 11y ago
Everyone seems to want chemical storage of Solar Energy. Everyone keeps looking into batteries and they are not yet sufficient. Why not store the massive amounts of Solar that Southern California receives during the day as clean drinking water?
- ars 11y ago
  I like this idea very much. Make water only during the day. Water consumption is highest during the day anyway, and water can be stored much easier than electricity.
- chadzawistowski 11y ago
  I wonder what the amortized cost of solar energy is? It's probably still more expensive than Israel's $6 per million BTU.
  - rwallace 11y ago
    In a desert with plentiful sunshine for an application where you don't need to worry about distribution and storage, I would expect solar to be quite competitive with even the notional price of fossil fuel. When you compare it with the real price of fossil fuel (i.e. add the negative externality of carbon dioxide emission to the notional price), solar wins by a country mile.

bjourne 11y ago

Another data point: In Sweden water costs 15-25 kr/m^3 or 1.5-3 dollars/m^3 and we get it untreated directly from lakes. So $0.58 is very cheap even if it is the bulk price and it quadruples before it arrives at the end customer.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]