Air well... Water from air

[jos]

New drought busting technology promises to generate water out of thin air.Main MenuCBS SAC

CBS13 khtk-sports-1140_final gooddayheaderlogo (1)

Company Shows Off Technology To Pull Water From Air At California State Capitol

Share this:

SACRAMENTO (CBS13) — New drought busting technology promises to generate water out of thin air, and lawmakers got a chance to check it out on Monday.

Matt Gray is the pitchman for Pacific AirWell Incorporated. His company produces the massive machines call atmospheric water generators.

“We have a delivery system which allows for individual delivery systems to be full,” he said. “These units are ultra-efficient. They produce water from moisture in the air. So this units can produce up to 600 gallons of drinkable water per day.”

He says the drinking water coming from thin air is actually unseen humidity.

“Anywhere about 90 miles of the coastline we can easily run this. We only need about 30 percent humidity,” he said.

The Sacramento-area-based company says it’s capable of producing fresh drinking water for state buildings and homeowners by collecting humidity from the air and then purifying it. They want lawmakers to see their vision.

“Lawmakers are very excited about it. That’s why we’re showcasing it at the state Capitol today,” he said.

If approved by the legislature, the water generators would cost taxpayers about $70,000 per industrial unit and $1,200 for the consumer size.

Donate few of these to African countries ..

Source: http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2015/07/13/company-shows-off-technology-to-pull-water-from-air-at-california-state-capitol/

[Bob Jim]

Are you literally refreshing every news site known to man, looking for something to post?

[Guest]

Or uhm... I'd never drink this

 

[SirNumbers]

2015 Dust bowl 2.0

[terrytek]

Fuck yeah. Finally something in Cali. We need it since this drought is taking its toll

[HalGameGuru]

There have been quite a few TED Talks on much less industrial devices that do the same thing for africa and southern asia. I like the idea behind it, its a good thing, Dune got me thinking about it long ago. But, I just feel like this is a money grab. Any AC unit does this already, its just shite for drinking. If this could be adapted to existing AC systems in commercial buildings or home it would DEFINITELY be worth the effort.

[qwertywarrior]

this tech isnt really new but what caught my attention is "ultra efficient" how efficient are we talking here

these take in quite alot of power

 

edit from their site

 

 

The residential Model 2500, for use in the home and office, uses 550 watts of electricity.

The power source for the Water Pro 400 is three-phase electrical power; the unit can be easily integrated into the existing electrical utility system, using 25kW of energy.

The Water Pro 100 uses waste oil as its energy source to produce cooling, which is its largest demand for energy, but the unit still requires some electricity to run the pumps and controls. It also has the ability to run on natural gas and propane when oil or diesel is not available.

[zacRupnow]

Donate few of these to African countries ..

Source: http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2015/07/13/company-shows-off-technology-to-pull-water-from-air-at-california-state-capitol/

Just African countries in general haha more like India.

[MoonSpot]

Or uhm... I'd never drink this

 

 

If you say so, but I'm fairly certain you've drunken water that has already past through the urethra of dozens of people, animals and even dinosaurs before you've drank it.  Planet Earth is the biggest recycling hipster I know of.

[AlwaysFSX]

Oh look, a fucking swamp cooler.

[Trik'Stari]

.....do these morons not realize that they live next to THE LARGEST BODY OF WATER ON EARTH?

 

 

Seriously, de-salination plants.......ffs

[aom]

.....do these morons not realize that they live next to THE LARGEST BODY OF WATER ON EARTH?

Seriously, de-salination plants.......ffs

And how much power does that take? Certainly not power efficient enough to be worth it.

[Trik'Stari]

And how much power does that take? Certainly not power efficient enough to be worth it.

three words: Nuclear Power Plants

 

They create steam, steam that can be condensed back into usable water, which could be used for irrigation, and the power from those power plants could help power desalination plants used to create drinking water. (edit: not the steam used to turn the turbines, but the steam that's released from the cooling towers, which isn't radioactive)

 

there, now california has power (no more "flex your power" commercials) as well as irrigation and drinking water. Oh wait, I forgot about the hippies standing in the way.

 

 

Not to mention:

More jobs because people will need to work at these power plants and de-salination plants

More power for electric vehicles, decreasing dependency on oil, decreasing pollution

[aom]

three words: Nuclear Power Plants

 

They create steam, steam that can be condensed back into usable water, which could be used for irrigation, and the power from those power plants could help power desalination plants used to create drinking water. (edit: not the steam used to turn the turbines, but the steam that's released from the cooling towers, which isn't radioactive)

 

there, now california has power (no more "flex your power" commercials) as well as irrigation and drinking water. Oh wait, I forgot about the hippies standing in the way.

 

 

Not to mention:

More jobs because people will need to work at these power plants and de-salination plants

More power for electric vehicles, decreasing dependency on oil, decreasing pollution

yep 1) hippies and those who freak out about Nuclear Power Plants

 

       2) kinda doubt California has enough right now to afford such a large scale plan

 

       3) and of course, safely disposing nuclear waste and stuff

 

       4) AND the largest aspect is that California might as well be called earthquake central. There is the potential that the nuclear power plants will be affected. It will be very hard to solve this problem as well as trying to get people to have confidence due to the Fukushima disaster that happened recently.

[Maxxtraxx]

three words: Nuclear Power Plants

 

They create steam, steam that can be condensed back into usable water, which could be used for irrigation, and the power from those power plants could help power desalination plants used to create drinking water. (edit: not the steam used to turn the turbines, but the steam that's released from the cooling towers, which isn't radioactive)

 

there, now california has power (no more "flex your power" commercials) as well as irrigation and drinking water. Oh wait, I forgot about the hippies standing in the way.

 

 

Not to mention:

More jobs because people will need to work at these power plants and de-salination plants

More power for electric vehicles, decreasing dependency on oil, decreasing pollution

I agree that nuclear power plants can be a great option with proper waste disposal methods.

 

however, the steam that they generate is not a result of the nuclear reaction, but a result of the gigantic cooling pools of water at the base of the towers, they must have water there already to produce the steam.

[PortentousLad]

the elephant in the room being, in countries with severe droughts there is no humidity... in order to collect something it has to be present.

[Trik'Stari]

yep 1) hippies and those who freak out about Nuclear Power Plants

 

       2) kinda doubt California has enough right now to afford such a large scale plan

 

       3) and of course, safely disposing nuclear waste and stuff

 

       4) AND the largest aspect is that California might as well be called earthquake central. There is the potential that the nuclear power plants will be affected. It will be very hard to solve this problem as well as trying to get people to have confidence due to the Fukushima disaster that happened recently.

All very good points. The economics I can't answer. BUT, what I can say is this. California already has a LOT of safety requirements for buildings to be earthquake resistant, and I live about 19 miles from the North Anna power plant in Central/northern Virginia. We had that big earthquake a few years ago (big as far as Virginia is concerned.), the reactor shutdown automatically, and nothing went wrong. Although one or two dry storage containers shifted a few inches. I'd feel fairly safe in saying that if an NPP in a state that gives zero thought to earthquakes survived an earthquake who's epicenter was less than 15 miles away, then an NPP built in a state that puts a hell of a lot of thought into earthquake protection would be fairly safe. (and it was a fairly big earthquake, knocked me out of my computer chair and scared the f**k out of me. Had never felt an earthquake before)

 

As for Fukushima, as far as I know, that was mainly human idiocy. If I remember correctly, the corporation in charge of that plant made a lot of serious errors and didn't prepare adequately for certain contingencies.

 

 

I agree that nuclear power plants can be a great option with proper waste disposal methods.

 

however, the steam that they generate is not a result of the nuclear reaction, but a result of the gigantic cooling pools of water at the base of the towers, they must have water there already to produce the steam.

Ocean water. The power plants might as well be giant stills waiting to be used (when you distill water....you de-salinate it do you not?)

[Ohlyver]

This technology is far from being new ... Just 5 years ago it started to be used in Peru as a billboard

[MoonSpot]

For the cost of building a single nuclear power plant, a state could just implement a massive number of fog catchers dozens of times over.

If the goal here is water for irrigation for the state of California, I don't see why fog catchers couldn't be used to supplement their water sources.

It's low tech, low cost, deploy-able, easy for anyone to maintain/repair and install.  Only concern I would have is how it effects wild life (wild life that survives a big drought anyways)

 

http://www.fogquest.org/

[Yog]

For the cost of building a single nuclear power plant, a state could just implement a massive number of fog catchers dozens of times over.

If the goal here is water for irrigation for the state of California, I don't see why fog catchers couldn't be used to supplement their water sources.

It's low tech, low cost, deploy-able, easy for anyone to maintain/repair and install.  Only concern I would have is how it effects wild life (wild life that survives a big drought anyways)

 

http://www.fogquest.org/

From the fogquest website:

 

Can a fog collection project be done for a city?

We wouldn’t build fog collectors for a large city because the water demands are too high. Cities require huge amounts of water for infrastructure and industries.

[MoonSpot]

From the fogquest website:

 

Yea.  Note key words irrigation and supplement in my previous post.

[Yog]

Yea.  Note key words irrigation and supplement in my previous post.

Agriculture in California 80% of the water use in California, in other words our farms use 4 times more water than all of the people of the most populace state in the nation. How do you suppose these fog collectors can help with that? Maybe an individual farmer will able to take use of this a little bit but beyond that it's a waste of land. Not even the people who invented this are bothering to try and sell the idea of using it here...shouldn't that tell you something?

 

What this does work well for is a small farm in the Chilean coastal desert...I'm sure it works perfectly in that situation.

[Trik'Stari]

Agriculture in California 80% of the water use in California, in other words our farms use 4 times more water than all of the people of the most populace state in the nation. How do you suppose these fog collectors can help with that? Maybe an individual farmer will able to take use of this a little bit but beyond that it's a waste of land. Not even the people who invented this are bothering to try and sell the idea of using it here...shouldn't that tell you something?

 

What this does work well for is a small farm in the Chilean coastal desert...I'm sure it works perfectly in that situation.

That statistic always seems unbelievable to me. Especially when you consider just how many farms there are across this nation. Ever driven through Ohio? It's almost ALL farmland, at least from what I saw lol

[cesrai]

All very good points. The economics I can't answer. BUT, what I can say is this. California already has a LOT of safety requirements for buildings to be earthquake resistant, and I live about 19 miles from the North Anna power plant in Central/northern Virginia. We had that big earthquake a few years ago (big as far as Virginia is concerned.), the reactor shutdown automatically, and nothing went wrong. Although one or two dry storage containers shifted a few inches. I'd feel fairly safe in saying that if an NPP in a state that gives zero thought to earthquakes survived an earthquake who's epicenter was less than 15 miles away, then an NPP built in a state that puts a hell of a lot of thought into earthquake protection would be fairly safe. (and it was a fairly big earthquake, knocked me out of my computer chair and scared the f**k out of me. Had never felt an earthquake before)

As for Fukushima, as far as I know, that was mainly human idiocy. If I remember correctly, the corporation in charge of that plant made a lot of serious errors and didn't prepare adequately for certain contingencies.

Ocean water. The power plants might as well be giant stills waiting to be used (when you distill water....you de-salinate it do you not?)

Japan had earthquake resistant buildings too and there nuclear power plant blew up in Herosihma ( spelling is bad ).

[Trik'Stari]

Japan had earthquake resistant buildings too and there nuclear power plant blew up in Herosihma ( spelling is bad ).

Hiroshima^

 

When did this happen? Or are you thinking of Fukushima, which was damaged by a tsunami, which was created by an earthquake? I find no record of a NPP incident in Hiroshima

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_nuclear_incidents

 

The earthquake itself was "well below the design basis", and the reactors shutdown automatically as a result of the earthquake, which is what they are supposed to do.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daini_Nuclear_Power_Plant#2011_earthquake_and_tsunami