Slashdot Mirror


Creating Water from Thin Air

Iphtashu Fitz writes "In order to provide the U.S. Military with water in places like Iraq, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency gave millions of dollars in research funding to companies like LexCarb and Sciperio to try to extract water from the air. Amazingly, a company that DARPA didn't fund, Aqua Sciences, beat them all to the punch by developing a machine that can extract up to 600 gallons of water a day from thin air even in locations like arid deserts. The 20 foot machine does this without using or producing toxic materials or byproducts. The CEO of Aqua Sciences declined to elaborate on how the machine works, but said it is based on the natural process by which salt absorbs water."

348 comments

  1. They did this in ancient times in the middle east by spun · · Score: 5, Informative

    I recall reading an article about ancient rock mounds, where the rocks were loosely lumped with plenty of space in between. Air filtered through and encountered the cool rock faces of the interior of the mound. Water condensed on the interior rock faces and trickled out the bottom. I'll see if I can find a link.

    --
    - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
  2. We already have one of these... by phekno · · Score: 5, Funny

    at my seitch.

    Sincerely,
    Muad'Dib

  3. Did anyone else think of... by daveschroeder · · Score: 1

    ...this when they read this article? ;-)

    1. Re:Did anyone else think of... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm surprised no one refered to the ones used on Tatooine in Star Wars.

    2. Re:Did anyone else think of... by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      But... but... you just DID!

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    3. Re:Did anyone else think of... by bteeter · · Score: 1

      No sorry sure didn't.

      I did wonder though, if these were designed to look like the moisture farming gear Uncle Owen used in Star Wars. That would be pretty cool. But then again Lucasfilm would probably want royalties for the design...

      Take care,

      Brian
      --
      SiteChanged.com - Track your favorite web sites

  4. Someone contact the Fremen by Verteiron · · Score: 3, Funny

    I'm sure they'll be interested.

    --
    End of lesson. You may press the button.
    1. Re:Someone contact the Fremen by geekoid · · Score: 1

      to bad it makes a regular thumping noise...

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  5. Windtraps by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1
    Sounds like the Windtraps from Frank Herbert's Dune.

    However the article itself was about as descriptive of technology as Frank Herbert's novels. Here is a fun quote.


    "This is our secret sauce," Sher said. "Like Kentucky Fried Chicken, it tastes good, but we won't tell you what's in it."
    --
    I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    1. Re:Windtraps by Vengeance · · Score: 1

      Ah, the dessert planet...

      --
      It was a joke! When you give me that look it was a joke.
    2. Re:Windtraps by Amouth · · Score: 2, Funny

      who wants to bet it is a water tank? that has to be "serviced" to keep running :)

      --
      '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
    3. Re:Windtraps by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      Like Kentucky Fried Chicken, it tastes good, but we won't tell you what's in it.

      That part puzzled the hell out of me. Surely they have it patented? If so, the plans are on file and public.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    4. Re:Windtraps by couchslug · · Score: 1

      As if we won't find out if/when the units are fielded and serviced.
      The company site is short on content and as useless as the article. Blue ISO containers, meh.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    5. Re:Windtraps by jfengel · · Score: 1

      Recipes are usually treated as trade secrets rather than patents. If they'd patented it, everybody could do it by now, if they wanted.

      But the secret isn't a big deal. According to William Poundstone's analysis, their "seven secret herb and spices" are (1) salt (2) pepper. Which isn't entirely surprising: KFC chicken doesn't taste particularly spicy or herbaceous. You really don't need anything else for good fried chicken; it's more about technique than ingredients (a though buttermilk marinade doesn't hurt, done properly).

    6. Re:Windtraps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot 3) MSG.

    7. Re:Windtraps by evilviper · · Score: 1
      who wants to bet it is a water tank? that has to be "serviced" to keep running :)

      They dehydrated the water to save space...
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    8. Re:Windtraps by Albinoman · · Score: 1

      I seem to recall him actually explaining the windtraps. Basically it funnelled air deep underground so the planet would cool it causing some of the water vapor to codense. This is the basic way his dew collectors worked. An inverted cone acted as a heat sink. It would cool at night and stay cooler through part of the day making condensation.

    9. Re:Windtraps by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      I was referring to the water making machine, not the KFC recipe. Patenting the recipe would be stupid.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    10. Re:Windtraps by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      You can make breading with only salt and pepper?

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    11. Re:Windtraps by jfengel · · Score: 1

      Salt, pepper, and flour. Flour didn't count as a spice.

  6. Re:They did this in ancient times in the middle ea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A gallon of water every couple minutes? Sounds ridiculous! How big is this machine?

  7. instant H20... by tanverenzo · · Score: 1

    just add water! I keed, I keed.

  8. It should work... by ShadowBlasko · · Score: 4, Funny

    Just as long as the superconductors you use on your condensors are not vulnerable to a puppeteer plague.

    If that happens its going to take a long time before Louis shows up.

    --
    There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order- Ed Howdershelt Via Tass
    1. Re:It should work... by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1
      Just as long as the superconductors you use on your condensors are not vulnerable to a puppeteer plague.

      I would have to check to be sure but I don't recall the puppeteers being responsible for the fall of the cities. Wasn't it an unspecified ramscoop freighter which was assumed to have brought the infection from an old colony world?

    2. Re:It should work... by illegalcortex · · Score: 2, Informative

      That might have been the cover story, but I seem to remember at some point it being revealed to be a puppeteer machination.

    3. Re:It should work... by darthdavid · · Score: 1

      It was indeed revealed as a pupeteer plot. I think it was in the 2nd or 3rd book.

    4. Re:It should work... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't remember seeing Frank Oz's name during the Children of Dune credits.

      Too many desert planets to keep track of these days.

  9. I wonder... by 3seas · · Score: 1

    salt absorbtion of water and distillation of the salty water?

    I guess the telling would be to see how may gallons of water it can produce while floating on a fresh water lake, and on teh salty sea.

    1. Re:I wonder... by kfg · · Score: 1

      I guess the telling would be to see how may gallons of water it can produce while floating on a fresh water lake, and on teh salty sea.

      That's why this article caught my eye. I do bit of said floating myself and fresh uncontaminated water is a major problem.

      Water, water everywhere, nor any drop to drink.

      Give me a one foot cube that can suck 5 gallons a day out of 50% humidity air, without electricity, for a few cents a gallon and I'll be a happy floating camper.

      KFG

    2. Re:I wonder... by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      Well, I might be able to get close to that. Drop the one foot cube part. :)

      Start out with your choice of cooling mechanisms---Peltier junctions or compressors or whatever. Cool a large plate down to near freezing. To reduce the power consumption, place it at moderately high altitude so that air temperatures are naturally cooler. At the bottom of this device, place a pipe to catch the runoff. At the bottom of the pipe (several hundred feet below), place a turbine.

      This requires initial power to cool the plate. After that, gravity provides electricity to keep the plate cool, and the sun adds energy into the system to ensure a constant supply of evaporated water in the air to condense, fall, and generate that electricity. It's about as close to a perpetual motion machine as you can get without actually being one. :-D

      Of course, I'm not sure how far the water would have to fall for this to be practical; you might hit terminal velocity before it had enough energy to power the cooler. Not sure. Worth a try, anyway.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    3. Re:I wonder... by kfg · · Score: 1

      Drop the one foot cube part. :)

      Noooooooo, I'm afraid that's a pretty stable requirement for a 16 to 24 foot boat. I like to float small.

      After that, gravity provides electricity . . .

      I didn't say no mains or batteries. I said no electricity. I can already make electricity from gravity, wind (dragging a turbine is a form of wind generation if wind is what moves the boat), solar or just plain muscle (how I load my gravity machines with potential in the first place), but all electricity fails at sea in a small boat, almost always just when your life depends on it.

      Of course I can already convert fuel into fresh water, but the efficiency of it is lacking.

      KFG

    4. Re:I wonder... by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      Ever consider a large ice cube? :-D

      Or maybe a parabolic mirror, a flask, and a bowl. First, cool the bowl by putting it in a container of fresh seawater in such a way that only the outside of the bowl gets wet. You want it clean, but cool. Next, put seawater in a flask and suspend it at the focus of the parabolic mirror. It will boil. Hold or suspend the bowl above it. The bowl, being dramatically cooler than the steam, will cause it to condense. It will then run down the interior of the cool bowl and be collected on the surface of the parabolic mirror. Be VERY careful when drinking from the mirror. :-)

      Or you could just carry a water filtration pitcher and hope for the best.... I'm thinking that would be pretty horrible, though.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    5. Re:I wonder... by kfg · · Score: 1

      Ever consider a large ice cube? :-D

      Yes, but only as a luxury item. It rides in the icebox when I bother to have one. Trail mix doesn't need refrigeration.

      There's all sorts of ways to gather water, but a pint today and 100 gallons next week isn't at all the same thing as a reliable 5 gallons a day. That would be loverly.

      KFG

    6. Re:I wonder... by LurkerXXX · · Score: 1

      Since you are depending on moisture on the air, it's always going to be variable. Humitidy isn't constant. If you are only collecting the same 5 gallons a day when the air is 80% humid as you do on days with 40% humidity, you have some strange bottleneck in your system rate limiting it.

    7. Re:I wonder... by kfg · · Score: 1

      I do not have a bottleneck in my system. I have a need for five gallons a day. To fill a five gallon tank. I wouldn't mind having a box that could produce a couple pounds of trail mix and half a pound of cheese a day either, and some fresh bananas would be nice, and unlimited Jamaican Blue Mountain, but I don't figure I could actually distill those from the air, especially without using electricity.

      The less water I have to carry, the more trail mix I can. And really, I try to keep as much water outside of the boat as I can. It just seems like good practice. Getting it in the boat is far too easy.

      KFG

  10. Invented a long time ago, in a galaxy far away... by bbk · · Score: 4, Funny

    Anyone heard of Tatooine's moisture farmers?

    I thought so.

    (sorry, it was just too obivious)

  11. Why the surprise? by Syncerus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What, you're shocked that all the government funded plodders were out done by a Capitalist independent? Government is very poor at creation and is typically very poor at selecting future winners in the technology race. That's why government should be a consumer of technology rather than a producer of the same.

    --
    "Man is nothing without the works of man" -- Helvetius
    1. Re:Why the surprise? by geekoid · · Score: 2, Insightful

      thats simply not true.
      Historically the government has been a great catalyst of techology inovation and improvements.

      Considering that this company that has allegedly done this claims no byproducts and won't let anyone know how they did it.
      color me Sceptical.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:Why the surprise? by Tiger4 · · Score: 1

      Yep, all the private investment was doing fine on creating the computers we are banging on here today.

      Ooops, no, that was our clumsy monstrous government trying to win the Cold War against the clumsy slow government of the Soviets pumping all that money into electronics research in the 40s, 50s, and 60s. After 30+ plus years of government "waste" making missiles and radars, the consumer market decides it can use these "chip" things for something more than teenager's radios, and next thing you know some hobbyist makes a 4bit, 4K computer. The Libertarian free marketers, 30 years after THAT, put on their rose colored glasses, look back and decide it was all inevitable, if only government hadn't got in the way.

      Pretty much like the free market rushed out and adopted seat belts in automobiles as soon as they were proven effective, and like when the cigarette industry adopter filters right away when tar turned out to be a problem, and the way voting machine companies now all want fully audited code in fully auditable machines to suppress vote fraud. Yes, the free market is clearly always leding the way to a better tomorrow.

      --
      Behold, this dreamer cometh. Come now, and let us slay him... and we shall see what will become of his dreams.
    3. Re:Why the surprise? by Dausha · · Score: 1

      ". . . color me Sceptical."

      I'm sorry. I have the Crayola 2048 box of crayons. I don't see Sceptical. Is it more reddish or bluish?

      --
      What those who want activist courts fear is rule by the people.
    4. Re:Why the surprise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Oh yeah like customers were clamoring for seat belts but the evil automotive capitalists refused to include them as an option on cars. Keep dreaming hippie. I wouldn't wear a seat belt today if government thugs didn't threaten to ticket me for it.

      As if smokers wanted filters and county governments cared about "fully audited code in fully auditable machines". The free market satisfies needs. Seat belts and cig filters and audited code aren't needed by a mass of consumers. Only after a few loud, obnoxious do-gooders whined to the government were they invented.

  12. Good! by thefirelane · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So the government failed to fund a company who promised unbelievable results with no byproducts while not supplying any details? I must say, I'm actually proud of them. Glad to see tax dollars aren't being wasted on Vaporware

    1. Re:Good! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Glad to see tax dollars aren't being wasted on Vaporware

      Vaporware, ha!
    2. Re:Good! by Random+Utinni · · Score: 5, Funny
      Glad to see tax dollars aren't being wasted on Vaporware


      I thought Vaporware was the desired result here, no?
    3. Re:Good! by Kpt+Kill · · Score: 3, Informative

      Did you read the article at all? The company was awarded the contract. The machine works. DARPA just never funded their research.

    4. Re:Good! by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1
      Did you read the article at all?

      Why would anybody do that when you've already done it for them?

    5. Re:Good! by rolfwind · · Score: 1

      These devices are actually plausible.

      I think we should call them....... dehumidifiers? Maybe:)

    6. Re:Good! by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      getting water out of air thats damper than humans consider desirable is done all the time yes.

      getting water out of air thats already pretty dry AND doing it using sufficiantly little supplies of fuel/chemicals/whatever that its not less trouble just to ship the water in AND making it sufficiantly free of contamination that its suitable for giving to your troops on a long term basis is the challanging part.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    7. Re:Good! by Julz · · Score: 1

      Actually, even though I haven't seen the final product, I know the fellow who invented this device and he's one smart inventor. Looks at things a little differently than the average joe.

      --
      When shit hits the fan get some of these https://youtu.be/pY-GncsZ-UE
  13. I have one of these in my car... by Aqua_boy17 · · Score: 0, Troll

    It's called an 'air conditioner'. Seriously, taking humidity out of the air is news?

    --
    What if the Hokey Pokey really is what it's all about?
    1. Re:I have one of these in my car... by Verteiron · · Score: 2

      The difference is that this will operate down to 14% humidity. So in other words, you could stick it in the desert and keep the troops watered.

      You could distribute it to villages with bad water sources.

      In fact... this thing could be a pretty big deal if it's cheap enough to produce.

      --
      End of lesson. You may press the button.
    2. Re:I have one of these in my car... by Yartrebo · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's pretty much a reusable desiccant - and in the best case (probably using reverse osmosis) the energy cost will be about an order of magnitude worse than desalinization plants. It even says in the article that the cost is 30 cents a gallon (which is probably highly optimistic and certainly cannot be verified without full disclosure from the company). At 30 cents a gallon (or perhaps 3 dollars a gallon when you're operating it in field conditions) you could forget about serving any sort of civilian market, and even for military use it would be quite expensive.

    3. Re:I have one of these in my car... by DragonWriter · · Score: 1
      The difference is that this will operate down to 14% humidity. So in other words, you could stick it in the desert and keep the troops watered.

      You could distribute it to villages with bad water sources.


      I have to think at some point, dehydrating the air in an already arid region is going to have negative effects on the local climate. Maybe not so bad if you are temporarily supporting a mobile, transient military force, but if you start relying on them to support stationary civilian populations, it could be one of those things that's really great in the short-term, with a cost that comes in kicks you in the tail down the line.

    4. Re:I have one of these in my car... by lelitsch · · Score: 1

      I am too TGIF brain fried to run through Magnus-Tetens calculations today, but at 30cents/gallon--or $3 as you probably correctly guesstimate--this might be even less efficient than cooling a hunk of metal and blowing cool air over it.

    5. Re:I have one of these in my car... by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      The difference is that this will operate down to 14% humidity. So in other words, you could stick it in the desert and keep the troops watered.


      It sounds to me like a piece of technology with the capability of sucking the desert completely dry.

      1. Troops show up.
      2. Water extraction system installed.
      3. Almost ALL humidity sucked out of the air.
      4. Every living thing in the desert wilts and dies.

      Has there been an environmental impact assessment done on this yet?

    6. Re:I have one of these in my car... by j79zlr · · Score: 1

      That would have to be a massive evaporator to actually cause an effect on the local climate. In the desert regions of the US though like Phoenix, the urbanization of the desert has actually added to the relative humidity via increased plants and the watering of them. The AC units do not have a noticeable affect however.

      Remember most of that water is returned directly to the environment via sweating and urination.

      --
      I'm not not licking toads.
    7. Re:I have one of these in my car... by Tiger4 · · Score: 1

      A mechanical refrigeration cooik can extract moisture from the air down to less than 1% relative humidity. All you have to do is cool the air to below the local dewpoint, and water (or ice) will condense from the coil. Then you just capture it before a blast of warm air re-evaporates it.

      Really this is Thermo 1. It isn't a question of can it be done, it is a question of diminishing returns. It takes a lot of energy to wring a little moisture out of dry air. Similarly, it would take a lot of energy to wring the moisture out of any dessicants or salts that have absorbed any moisture.

      This thing looks a lot like some kind of Gas absorption cooler turned inside out somehow. They work, but dammed if I can follow the process. Chances are those same villages could have had one running on propane for years. Now they'll have a different version making water for them.

      --
      Behold, this dreamer cometh. Come now, and let us slay him... and we shall see what will become of his dreams.
    8. Re:I have one of these in my car... by Dun+Malg · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I have to think at some point, dehydrating the air in an already arid region is going to have negative effects on the local climate.
      Typical overestimation of man's power. You need to spend some time thinking (with apologies to Douglas Adams) about how phenomenally big the earth's atmosphere is. You might think that 300 gallons a day is a lot of water, but keep in mind that the atmosphere contains 1.12E17 gallons of it, and that only represents 0.0031% of the water on earth. Humanity does not have the wherewithal to affect the humidity such that it makes a fart in a thunderstorm's difference to the climate, even locally.
      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    9. Re:I have one of these in my car... by dryeo · · Score: 1

      Obviously you've never been by a fountain on a hot day.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    10. Re:I have one of these in my car... by focoma · · Score: 1

      I was actually planning to post a joke comment about the environmental dangers of "stealing" water from mother nature. Ah well, it wouldn't have been funny, anyway...

      --

      - Francis Ocoma

      Please wait while Sig Request is being processed...

    11. Re:I have one of these in my car... by unixfan · · Score: 1

      I guess you did not really read the article. It said that the cost will be reduced from $30 from flying it in, to 30 cents from their on location system. True, we could argue that neither one of us have seen that to be true, but I would not want to be that arse.

      They won the contracts after a demo and I'm sure they would not want their customer to read in the news how it could be lower than they are actually paying. It would look like they had just been had, and no doubt could put the whole contract at risk.

      If the military IS flying it in at $30, don't you think that shows that it's not too cost prohibitive? And that ANY cost below that is an improvement? Let's see $30 vs $0.30...

    12. Re:I have one of these in my car... by nuklearfusion · · Score: 1
      and even for military use it would be quite expensive.

      if you really RTFA, then you would have also noticed the figure about $30 a gallon to supply troops in Iraq and the middle east.
      --

      There's no such thing as a stupid question, but there sure are a lot of inquisitive idiots.

    13. Re:I have one of these in my car... by evilviper · · Score: 1
      You might think that 300 gallons a day is a lot of water, but keep in mind that the atmosphere contains 1.12E17 gallons of it, and that only represents 0.0031% of the water on earth.

      That is a ridiculously small number. For the US army in Iraq, you're probably talking about 10s of millions of gallons per day.

      but keep in mind that the atmosphere contains 1.12E17 gallons of it

      Most of which is in places with excess moisture (like over the oceans, lakes, tundra, etc), rather than evenly distributed around the globe. The deserts have far less than their fair share of this moisture.

      And removing perhaps just 5% of the moisture in an area could have a dramatic impact, as the higher pressure could cause stronger winds. Though, since much of this water will be sweated right back out to the atmosphere, I have no idea what kind of an impact to really expect.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    14. Re:I have one of these in my car... by evilviper · · Score: 1
      That would have to be a massive evaporator to actually cause an effect on the local climate.

      Evaporation is adding water to the atmosphere. Condensation is removing it.

      the urbanization of the desert has actually added to the relative humidity via increased plants and the watering of them.

      Because the water they are using was pumped up from underground...

      Remember most of that water is returned directly to the environment via sweating and urination.

      I don't know about you, but I don't generally go around urinating on the ground. Usually it's flushed and either put underground where it can't escape for hundreds of years, or travels off to some distance river, lake, or ocean.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    15. Re:I have one of these in my car... by QuickFox · · Score: 1

      ... the atmosphere contains 1.12E17 gallons ...

      That is a ridiculously small number ...


      1.12E17 means 1.12 * 10 ^ 17. That's 112,000,000,000,000,000 gallons. Roughly 10,000,000 gallons for every person on the planet.

      --
      Terrorists can't threaten a country's freedom and democracy. Only lawmakers and voters can do that.
    16. Re:I have one of these in my car... by Yartrebo · · Score: 1

      It's only $30/gal because the US military makes bad decision after bad decision. Overpaying for the transport planes is 1, flying in bulky supplies or staying in a base where you can't truck or ship in supplies is 2, and relying on contractors like Halliburton makes for 3 strikes.

      I wonder how much rich Iraqis pay for their clean water?

    17. Re:I have one of these in my car... by evilviper · · Score: 1

      Actually I was referring to the "300 gallons a day". I assumed that would be clear from the following sentence.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    18. Re:I have one of these in my car... by QuickFox · · Score: 1

      Oops! Indeed it is clear. I wasn't paying attention. Too little sleep lately.

      --
      Terrorists can't threaten a country's freedom and democracy. Only lawmakers and voters can do that.
    19. Re:I have one of these in my car... by j79zlr · · Score: 1

      There are two parts to an air conditioning system, the evaporator is where refrigerant is evaporated, removing heat (sensible energy) and CONDENSATION (latent energy) and the condenser where refrigerant is condensed back to liquid.

      I hate to break it to you, but when you flush, that waste water goes to a water treatment plant and is returned to the environment. Even if it is some distant lake, it is not hundreds of miles away. The atmosphere is an open system.

      --
      I'm not not licking toads.
    20. Re:I have one of these in my car... by evilviper · · Score: 1
      There are two parts to an air conditioning system

      The system in question certainly doesn't use cooling to extract moisture from the air, or anything of the sort.

      Even if it is some distant lake, it is not hundreds of miles away.

      It doesn't have to strictly be HUNDREDS of miles away to fit my post. "Dozens" of miles will still pose the same issues.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  14. Water is great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Is there a button to switch it from 'water' to 'beer?'

    1. Re:Water is great by Rik+Sweeney · · Score: 2, Funny

      Is there a button to switch it from 'water' to 'beer?'

      I called Jesus, he said that he can do water into wine... will that do?

    2. Re:Water is great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They haven't perfected that yet, but I'd gladly volunteer myself to help convert beer to water.

      In the interest of science, of course.

    3. Re:Water is great by kfg · · Score: 1

      Is there a button to switch it from 'water' to 'beer?'

      Yeah, it just takes a couple weeks to press it.

      KFG

    4. Re:Water is great by Gryle · · Score: 5, Funny

      If it's American beer, there's really not a difference.

      --
      Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
    5. Re:Water is great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Eye of rabbit, heartstring hum, turn this water into rum.
    6. Re:Water is great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong! There IS a difference... it's just not MUCH of a difference!

    7. Re:Water is great by scherbi · · Score: 1

      What? Bud and Coors aren't the only beers made in America.

      Some of the best beers in the world are made here.

      Pliny the Elder anybody???

      http://www.beertown.org/events/wbc/winners_list/wi nn

    8. Re:Water is great by scherbi · · Score: 1

      damned copy 'n' paste! here's the proper url:

      http://www.beertown.org/events/wbc/winners_list/wi nners_2006.html

    9. Re:Water is great by RockClimbingFool · · Score: 1

      Really? Last time I checked the USA had the most independent breweries of any country in the world. Probably combined.

    10. Re:Water is great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All other countries' breweries are less independent than the ones in the U.S.?

    11. Re:Water is great by evilviper · · Score: 1
      If it's American beer, there's really not a difference.

      That's right. In America we poor beer right into the water supply, and save a step...
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    12. Re:Water is great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's nothing. I can do wine into water.

    13. Re:Water is great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What? Bud and Coors aren't the only beers made in America.Some of the best beers in the world are made here.

      In America, the world series is played, yet no other country plays in it.

    14. Re:Water is great by Dr.+Cody · · Score: 1
      I have just returned from a tour of the Forsmark nuclear power plant. During the tour, the guide emphasized that the cooling water used in the plant's condensor exited the plant with the exact same composition as when it entered, but with an elevated temperature.

      ...a process not unlike Coors Light consumption.

    15. Re:Water is great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heh, I was going to ask if he meant the "world" as in planet Earth or as in "america". American beer is definately crap compared to most European beer. They even change/weaken many imports into the USA either due to stupid regulations or to make their own products look better.

    16. Re:Water is great by pipingguy · · Score: 1
  15. Dune comes to life... by DESADE · · Score: 1

    This sound like a Windtrap to anyone else. I love it when something I read about in a sci-fi book 20 years ago comes to life in a practical application.

    Fear is the mind killer...

    1. Re:Dune comes to life... by thefirelane · · Score: 1

      I love it when something I read about in a sci-fi book 20 years ago comes to life in a practical application.

      You won't be so chipper when you are drinking your recycled urine and feces through a straw in 2026.

    2. Re:Dune comes to life... by DESADE · · Score: 1

      Uh... tap water???

    3. Re:Dune comes to life... by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      Or bottled water. ALL water is recycled. Where does rain come from? Yep.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
  16. Now, will I need... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...a droid that understands the binary language of these "moisture vaporators"?

  17. Re:They did this in ancient times in the middle ea by kfg · · Score: 1

    Same thing happens on my windows in the winter.

    KFG

  18. Frank Herbert was prescient by CRCulver · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I was thinking of Dune myself. Frank Herbert's notion that man could survive with such limited water supplies apparently wasn't entirely fantastical. However, IIRC no such device was used in the series. Instead, the Fremen relied on farming the naturally forming dew of the planet. Personally, after reading Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars trilogy, I wonder why Herbert never thought of having some Fremen just crash a few comets into the planet to at least provide some selected portion of it with water. Of course, that would have killed off all the sandworms.

    1. Re:Frank Herbert was prescient by KokorHekkus · · Score: 1
      ...I wonder why Herbert never thought of having some Fremen just crash a few comets into the planet to at least provide some selected portion of it with water. Of course, that would have killed off all the sandworms.
      Because the Fremen had enough trouble just bribing the Spacing Guild to keep them from putting up weather/surveillance satellites that would expose their way of life and their actual numbers? And of course killing of the sandworms in a short time would have killed off most of the Fremen as well with their melange addiction.
    2. Re:Frank Herbert was prescient by pete-classic · · Score: 2, Informative

      You recall incorrectly. Windtraps.

      -Peter

    3. Re:Frank Herbert was prescient by KokorHekkus · · Score: 1

      Sorry to reply to my own post but I forgot the fact that the Spacing Guild obviously would be totally against any action endagering the spice supply.

    4. Re:Frank Herbert was prescient by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      That wouldn't work, sandtrout absorbs all water on the surface, that's why Fremen reservoirs were in rock caves, and why all their water came from the air. By the way, Arrakis wasn't all that dry, as Liet-Kynes remarks.
        Yeap, I love Dune. My dream is to get a stillsuit and move to the desert (ok, some huge worms roaming around would be cool, too).

    5. Re:Frank Herbert was prescient by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      I was thinking of Dune myself.

      Check the masthead - we were ALL thinking of Dune.

      I wonder why Herbert never thought of having some Fremen just crash a few comets into the planet

      Because the Guild Navigators wouldn't let them; they were powerful enough to keep the Emperor from having weather satellites.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    6. Re:Frank Herbert was prescient by CRCulver · · Score: 1

      The masthead references Star Wars, not Dune.

    7. Re:Frank Herbert was prescient by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      after reading Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars trilogy, I wonder why Herbert never thought of having some Fremen just crash a few comets into the planet to at least provide some selected portion of it with water


      It is probable that without the complicity of the Spacing Guild this would have been impossible, though the actual capabilities of the non-Guild ships are not necessarily known. Beyond the technical problems there would have been political implications among the Fremen themselves that would have made this solution difficult (as was seen in Dune Messiah and Children of Dune).
    8. Re:Frank Herbert was prescient by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      -Peter


      Are you sure you don't mean Piter?
    9. Re:Frank Herbert was prescient by AJWM · · Score: 1

      Yes, well where do you think Lucas stole the ide..er, got his inspiration?

      --
      -- Alastair
    10. Re:Frank Herbert was prescient by vistic · · Score: 3, Funny

      Please don't tell me you have a prototype stillsuit in the works, to recycle your urine and feces.

      That's one thing I would not want to beta test.

      Just make sure that the processing parts of it still work when you're walking without rhythm.

    11. Re:Frank Herbert was prescient by Julian+Morrison · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why not? Well (1) they were hiding their numbers from the Padishah emperor and the Harkonnens (2) they needed all their money to bribe the spacing guild to hide their numbers (3) it was unthinkable to imperil spice production (4) waterbombing Arrakis would quickly kill off the spice and the worms (5) the guild navigators would see this quite clearly in advance, and turn against them (6) they'd lose the addictive spice, worms as transport, Shai-hulud, and the impenetrable defensive wall of the desert. Plus they were, when it came down to it, tribal semi-savages, and more used to persistence than immediacy.

    12. Re:Frank Herbert was prescient by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      Nonsense, nerds were reading Dune long before Star Wars was filmed. The copyright says 1965.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    13. Re:Frank Herbert was prescient by pete-classic · · Score: 1

      A mentat would never make such an obvious mistake.

      -Peter

  19. Re:Windtraps and KFC by Marko+DeBeeste · · Score: 1

    Tragically, according to http://amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw/002-1718624-80528 08?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=big+secre ts&Go.x=14&Go.y=9&Go=Go the KFC secret sauce is salt, pepper and MSG. Besides, who wants 600 gallons of salt water?

    --
    Faith: n. -- That human impulse that drives them to steal appliances when the power goes out
  20. Ahead of their time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now we need some protocol droids who can speak the binary language of these moisture vaporators.

    Or at least ones who can talk to binary load-lifters that are similar in most respects.

  21. hm by inKubus · · Score: 5, Informative

    Sounds like they probably use a hydroscopic compound such as calcium chloride and then you some type of ion replacement to recover the water (precipitate calcium metal and some other non-soluable salt, such as Fe(III)Cl.

    --
    Cool! Amazing Toys.
    1. Re:hm by hchaos · · Score: 3, Funny
      Sounds like they probably use a hydroscopic compound such as calcium chloride and then you some type of ion replacement to recover the water (precipitate calcium metal and some other non-soluable salt, such as Fe(III)Cl.
      Quick! To the Patent Office! That'll teach them to keep their methods secret.
    2. Re:hm by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      Ok, but then wouldn't they have to keep resupplying chemicals to the machine at 1/1200th the volume of the water extracted? Or am I reading those articles wrong?

      Seems to me, the key word would be SUSTAINABLE- a solar powered refridgeration radiator would be more sustainable.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    3. Re:hm by c4miles · · Score: 5, Informative
      The word you're looking for is Hygroscopic. From the article you linked to:

      The similar sounding but unrelated word hydroscopic is sometimes used in error for hygroscopic. A hydroscope is an optical device used for making observations deep under water.

      A related word, deliquescent, refers to substances so hygroscopic they will dissolve themselves using water absorbed from the air.
    4. Re:hm by Big+Bob+the+Finder · · Score: 5, Informative
      Calcium bromide (CaBr2) is slightly more hygroscopic, absorbing moisture down to 16% RH (Handbook of Chemistry and Physics); it's also a hexahydrate- it sponges up a lot of moisture. Right below that is lithium chloride, which continues to absorb down to 11% RH.

      Most likely it's a system where prilled or powdered salt is tumbled through dry air to absorb moisture; it's then roasted to release the moisture, captured under reduced pressure to reduce the amount of energy required, and returned to its anhydrous state. It'll be clumpy and chunky, so it'll have to be re-ground into a fine powder before reuse.

      The $.30 a gallon is probably largely from the amount required in the removal of the water from the hydrate; distillation of water runs ~$.25 a gallon (assuming no recycling of the waste heat from condensation to pre-heat water going into the boiler) at $.10/kwh. Using gasoline or diesel would be considerably more expensive- thus the reduced pressure.

      Distilled water from air- not too shabby. I've thought about trying the same here in the desert (where it's routinely ~10% RH in Phoenix), but it's just not worth it.

    5. Re:hm by merphant · · Score: 2, Informative

      I worked for a place that was working on this too. They used lithium bromide to suck the water out of the air, and then extracted the water by reverse osmosis. Presumably you could do power the RO unit with solar panels.

    6. Re:hm by davidsyes · · Score: 1

      I'm sure SOMEone will be unctuous and try to slap me down with "flamebait" or "off topic" or try to be erudite about the mission of DARPA....

      Whatever the hell it is, san fransideshow needs one of thes on every block in the Tendergroin to wash the place down. Hopefully, it'll be less expensive than pulling water from fire hidrants or apartment buildings.

      Maybe DARPA should attach filthy US streets instead of funding ass-kicking/supporting operations for a little while... the stench over here is so intense.

      --
      Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
    7. Re:hm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The other way is a huge surface area thingy like a chainwire fence covered with a fine plastic mesh, which will catch and drip water down.
      Now if you sprayed this mesh with a hygroscopic salt over this, more water would be held. To release the water, you could have vanes or a sliding sheath that slides back over in the day, so the sun could bake the fence collector surface, thus releasing water. The weight of the collected water could toggle vanes or draw the drapes as it were. As an advantage, the fence could be electrified, to keep unwelcome border crossers at bay.

      In Australia, this is old hat, failed field tests. Mice and insects got in the water collection channels and died. The fence collected sand sticks and leaves. Wind storms and kangaroos damaged the fence. Ferral cats urinated/marked the fence, even though they knew it was electrified - the bits that weren't driven over for fun. Can't beat a good ol windmill. Plus when it rained, damaged salt rusted/corroded what it could.

      Oh yeah, water in the dessert will attract all sorts of critters, including snakes, scorpians and birds. The jig is up when some human sets fire to the fence, plastic and salt burns good. Cant hide these structures - for maximum efficiency, mist run atop of ridge lines.

    8. Re:hm by thogard · · Score: 1

      The trick might be to bond the salt to the membrane so that as the salt absorbs more water, it pushes it through the membrane where its easy to collect.

  22. Uncle Owen! by norminator · · Score: 4, Funny

    What I really need is a droid that understands the binary language of moisture vaporators.

    1. Re:Uncle Owen! by HaloZero · · Score: 1

      Why sir! My very first job was programming binary load lifters - very similar to your vaporators in most respects...

      --
      Informatus Technologicus
    2. Re:Uncle Owen! by Das+Modell · · Score: 1

      You're not the droid we're looking for.

  23. Just add water! by quarrel · · Score: 5, Funny

    Asked to clarify how it worked, the CEO noted- "Just add water, and in a few minutes it'll be ready!".

    --Q

  24. Correction by norminator · · Score: 1

    Actually, what I really need is a quicker brain so I won't have to google for the quote, taking valuable time, allowing a dozen other slashdotters to post the same lame joke. Sorry everybody.

    1. Re:Correction by Chosen+Reject · · Score: 1

      I can't decide which is worse: That you were geeky enough to think of the joke, or that you weren't geeky enough to remember the quote.

      --
      Stop Global Warming!
      Just say no to irreversible processes!
    2. Re:Correction by pafrusurewa · · Score: 1
      I can't decide which is worse: That you were geeky enough to think of the joke, or that you weren't geeky enough to remember the quote.
      Or that he didn't notice that it's right there in this story's dept. line.
  25. And remember kids... by Kenja · · Score: 1

    sucking all the moisture out of the environment will have no impact on the eco system, right?

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    1. Re:And remember kids... by Max_Abernethy · · Score: 1

      Well, it's excreted back into the environment within a few hours, so...no, I don't think it will.

    2. Re:And remember kids... by kfg · · Score: 2, Insightful

      sucking all the moisture out of the environment will have no impact on the eco system, right?

      Pretty much, since you pretty much put it right back in. That's why you need so much of it in the desert. And why there's so little eco system there to damage.

      How much water gets used up when you flush a toilet? That's right. None. There's no water shortage, it's a question of purity and distribution, not quantity.

      KFG

    3. Re:And remember kids... by erice · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's only an issue if water is permanently removed from the environment, which it generally won't be. Water was in the air and in a few hours, it is back again.

      This is actually much better than trucking in water from afar or pulling it out of deep wells. In that case, you are altering the environment. Water not previously in the environment is being added.

    4. Re:And remember kids... by timeOday · · Score: 1
      How much water gets used up when you flush a toilet? That's right. None.
      The question is how much potable water gets used up when you flush. Nobody's claiming there's a shortage of hydrogen and oxygen in the universe. That doesn't mean there's not a very real problem.
    5. Re:And remember kids... by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      When you flush a toilet, 'clean' water is pumped into the sewer main, where it's mixed with industrial sewage and rendered toxic and sometimes irrecoverable in a medium-term sense.

      You're right that it's a question of purity and distribution, but also one of quantity.

    6. Re:And remember kids... by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Water was in the air and in a few hours, it is back again.

      No, it's in a holding tank, then it's piped into greenhouses, where it evaporates and is reabsorbed. It's much cheaper to reprocess it in a captive environment like that.

      A system where it is 'back in the air' is defined as 'economically unviable.' Nearly as irrelevant as desert tortoises and cactus plants.

    7. Re:And remember kids... by kfg · · Score: 1

      Your critcism addresses only issues of purity. You are thinking in terms of quantity of potable water, not water. OP addressed issues of total water in the environment, which is stable. You drink it, you immediately begin excreting it back into the atmosphere through your pores. Wash your car with it, a little while later it's back at the top of the mountain again.

      Yes, there are issues with our culture using potable water to flush toilets. You won't catch me doing it on my boat. I'm perfectly aware of the difference.

      Not everyone is. They actually think water gets "used up." OP seems to be one of them. It doesn't. It gets recycled more or less indefinately and water distilled from the air is; distilled water.

      KFG

    8. Re:And remember kids... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "And remeber Kids" ..
      Hey, 1993 called, they wan't their catchphrase back.

    9. Re:And remember kids... by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      Your critcism addresses only issues of purity. You are thinking in terms of quantity of potable water, not water. OP addressed issues of total water in the environment, which is stable
      if you take the planet as a whole as your environment then this is correct yes.

      in reality the way it works is that the bulk of the worlds water is locked up in forms from which it is difficult/expensive to extract water that is usable for drinking, washing stuff without heavy rust promotion etc. (chiefly the oceans, also the atnosphere).

      in most places there is either a finite anual (rain) or finite total (deep aquifers) ammount of water that is in a fit state for use with minimal processing. Go beyond that level of water use and your costs (in both financial and energy terms) skyrocket and if you are too poor to afford those costs then your water supply will be no more.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  26. Re:They did this in ancient times in the middle ea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So perhaps Moses hitting a rock and water coming out isn't so far-fetched?

  27. The world needs fresh water. by cowscows · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If this technology really works as well as is advertised, how bout the government does something with it a bit more productive than sending a bunch to the army? Like maybe buying thousands of these things and shipping them to many of the different places in the world where a lack access to fresh water is one of the most pressing health concerns of millions of people.

    It's good that our soldiers are out in the middle east doing their jobs, and they deserve fresh water too. But seeing the general anger towards the US that's prevelant in so much of the world right now, actually helping people with something like this would generate tremendous good will. It'd probably be a lot cheaper than our wars are as well.

    --

    One time I threw a brick at a duck.

    1. Re:The world needs fresh water. by synth7 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Who is going to provide the guards for these condensers, because you know that the local warlords and privileged will abscond with them as another source of wealth and power. There's more than just buying the equipment, there is maintenance and policing, just to name the obvious manpower needs.

    2. Re:The world needs fresh water. by couchslug · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Giving people free stuff does not address ideological conflict.
      If an ideological opponent gave ME free stuff in hope that I could be bribed, I'd thank the nice man and then use it against him.
      If someone to whom I was indifferent gave me free stuff, I would thank the nice man and then question their motive.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    3. Re:The world needs fresh water. by sm62704 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      It's good that our soldiers are out in the middle east doing their jobs

      I and millons of others do not agree with that statement. Our troops should not be in Iraq.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    4. Re:The world needs fresh water. by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 1

      I and millons of others do not agree with that statement.

      I and millions of others DO agree with the statement. What's your point?

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    5. Re:The world needs fresh water. by cowscows · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Meh, I also do not think we should have gone to war in Iraq. It is, however, not correct or productive to place the blame on the troops, and since they're over there following orders as best they can, they deserve our respect and the best logistics/support that we can manage to give them.

      --

      One time I threw a brick at a duck.

    6. Re:The world needs fresh water. by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      Because, if the last 50 years are any example to follow, simply doing things for backwards 3rd world countries results in two things:
      1) our efforts being turned against us, ie any aid sent gets monopolized by the warlords and used against the people they intend to help (ie watering an army)
      2) assisting people in such a manner merely embitters them against us. look at all the welfare-recipient government-haters (and haters of everyone "not like them" because - despite funding their welfare - they "don't understand")

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    7. Re:The world needs fresh water. by Blacklantern · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Who is going to provide the guards for these condensers....

      The equipment would not need any extra protection. They would most likely be kept along with the other supplies (chow, parts, and medical suppllies). The normal guard details should be able to handle protecting this equiment just by adding a few feet to their patrol routes (if the camp has to expand to encompass them).

      --


      "There is only a one in six billion chance that you actually exist"
    8. Re:The world needs fresh water. by hjf · · Score: 0

      As an american, you do NOT have the moral authority to call anyone a 'warlord'. You have started more wars around the world than any other country, and these wars were only to take over smaller governments and steal their goods (mostly their oil) and all in the name of "freedom" (in a country where news need to be approved by a government censor) or "god" (not respecting the right of other people to have different religions).

      I'm in favor of building the Mexico-US wall. Then you could also make a wall in the canada border, and then in the pacific and atlantic. Just do what you did in the first half of the century (until pearl harbor) and just keep everything inside your borders. Don't try to help us, we can do fine without you. Just don't mind us, the rest of the world. You are an autarky and don't need us either.

    9. Re:The world needs fresh water. by gnool · · Score: 0

      My bit of the world (South-East Queensland, Australia) is in a bit of a water crisis at the moment. We're in the middle of one of the worst droughts in recorded history, and consequently our dams are getting a bit empty. The government's response has been to introduce water restrictions, announce new dams, float (pun intended) the idea of desalination and pussyfoot around the idea of water recycling. I wonder if this technology could be put to good use - good as in generates a substantial amount of water for one of Australia's fastest growing regions at reasonable cost while being environmentally friendly?

    10. Re:The world needs fresh water. by evilviper · · Score: 1
      If this technology really works as well as is advertised, how bout the government does something with it a bit more productive than sending a bunch to the army?

      Saving lives (of those delivering the water) and many millions of dollars seems awfully productive to me...

      Like maybe buying thousands of these things and shipping them to many of the different places in the world where a lack access to fresh water is one of the most pressing health concerns of millions of people.

      Those places that lack fresh water aren't exactly swimming in gasoline to run these machines...

      Conventional ground-water pumping and filtration is much cheaper and easier than complex systems which pull it from the air.

      In fact, simple (home-made) sand filtration could eliminate most water-borne diseases at trivial expense.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    11. Re:The world needs fresh water. by msevior · · Score: 1

      Wow. You just beautifully made the parent posters point.

    12. Re:The world needs fresh water. by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      The troops deserve no blame whatever. The shame is on the heads of the Bush administration, the Senate, and the House of Representatives. My point is their jobs shouldn't be in Iraq, so neither should they.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    13. Re:The world needs fresh water. by hjf · · Score: 0

      Well, if you believed the parent poster, you certainly missed the whole point of my post. Honestly, do you believe that the US actually "helps" other countries? There's always an interest behind all the US actions in the world.

      Let me illustrate. Do you think corporations do charity because they are good guys? No. Here's a key phrase for you, kid: "Tax Deductible". And if they can't make it tax deductible, then they call the press and make a big show of it. Keyword: "Publicity".

      If you think the US went to war to Iraq just to help the poor people who were dying under Saddam Hussein's regime, then you really need to stop watching CNN. Keyword: Oil.

  28. IANAAS(Atmospheric Scientist) by AdamKG · · Score: 1

    600 gallons of water a day? Impressive.

    Absolute humidity is measured in kilograms per cubic meter. A number pulled equally out of my ass and google as a possible ballpark typical one is .050 kg/m^3. 600 gallons of water is (roughly) 2200 litres, or 2200 kilograms. That means it's using 44000 cubic meters of air.

    IANAAS, so I don't have any idea what that translates into real-world. Would this thing need a fan?

    --
    groupthink: It's good for self-esteem.
    1. Re:IANAAS(Atmospheric Scientist) by painandgreed · · Score: 1

      Not if there was wind. If the wind was 1 km/hr and the entrance to the machine was 1 meter by 44 meters, it should have 44,000 cubic meters of air cycle through in an hour. Of course, that's at 100% efficiency and if there is no back pressure caused by airflow through the device itself.

    2. Re:IANAAS(Atmospheric Scientist) by kbielefe · · Score: 1
      Of course, that's at 100% efficiency and if there is no back pressure caused by airflow through the device itself.
      There's also the problem of fitting a 44 meter entrance onto a 6 meter long machine. So, since the 1 kph wind speed was made up anyway, we simply increase it to 7.3 kph and we're good to go. Isn't slashdot math fun?
      --
      This space intentionally left blank.
  29. Wait... by Codename46 · · Score: 1

    Won't extracting water from the air decrease the humidity even further, producing an ever DRIER climate?

    1. Re:Wait... by clean_stoner · · Score: 1

      I'll tell you something my engineering profs are fond of telling me: the effect is negligible, so you can ignore it.

      --

      Sigs are for the weak.

    2. Re:Wait... by boarder · · Score: 2, Informative

      The water will be consumed by soldiers who will breathe it out, sweat it out and urinate it out. The breath, sweat and urine will all evaporate the water back into the air. This is essentially a closed system with some losses which are overcome by adding energy into they system.

      --
      IANAL, but I play one on /.
    3. Re:Wait... by evilviper · · Score: 1
      The breath, sweat and urine will all evaporate the water back into the air.

      Do soldiers go around urinating outdoors? I expect much of it will go into either:

      Septic tanks where it will take hundreds of years to sink into the water-table before eventually being pumped back up by humans.

      OR

      Sewers, where it will be wisked away to some distant river, lake, ocean, and still be removed from the LOCAL environment.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  30. Dehydrated water... by Akaihiryuu · · Score: 1

    ...just add water, and you've got water! That reminded me of the original Space Quest. The survival kit you get in that game has a can of dehydrated water. Although if you actually examine the can, it says it contains hydrogen, which becomes water when mixed with air. Since the game was intended more or less as comedy, they didn't take into account that hydrogen + oxygen = water is a rather exothermic reaction, it burns hot and releases a lot of heat, and the water that is produced is produced as steam. Producing water from "thin air" is just condensation. People have been condensing water vapor from the air (even in desert regions) for a very long time now, this is hardly anything new. At most, it's merely an increase in efficiency.

    1. Re:Dehydrated water... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Dehyrated Water" = hydrogen?

      Hy-larious.

      "De-oxygenated" water perhaps?

      Good post. I must find that game.

    2. Re:Dehydrated water... by Kesshi · · Score: 1

      Yes, but do you remember what you get to do with the dehydrated water? (And by get, I mean have to do with it to continue.) You toss the dehydrated water into the mouth of the first big scary alien monsters you meet up with. The dehydrated water gets into his/her/its stomach and expands, causing the beast to explode and die. (Because everybody knows that dehydrated water takes up much much less space than regular water!) Space Quest was one of my favourite games when I was a kid.

      --
      Press +++ for Sysop access
  31. Linky link by spun · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here we are, as promised. About a third of the way down the page. Ignore the Reichian weirdness, the wells were built near the ancient Byzantine city of Feodosiya. There were 13 large conical tumuli of stones, each about 10,000 feet square and 30-40 feet tall, on hilltops. Russian engineer Friedrich Zibold calculated they would each produce more than 500 gallons daily. These theories have been disputed by some archeologists (who don't seem to like it when engineers discover cool archeological stuff and make up theories about it) but the mounds do all have numerous terra-cotta pipes around the base, presumeably to collect the run off

    --
    - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    1. Re:Linky link by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 0, Troll

      Maybe if AquaSciences can sell this stuff to Israel, they won't try again to capture the Litani river in Lebanon...

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    2. Re:Linky link by kfg · · Score: 1

      These theories have been disputed by some archeologists (who don't seem to like it when engineers discover cool archeological stuff and make up theories about it)

      My experience is it's best to bet on the engineers, but the jury's still out on that Sphinx age thingy. Thanks for the link. Some interesting weirdness in there. :)

      KFG

    3. Re:Linky link by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 0

      W'll remind the Egyptians and Mesopotamians, who began Western civilization on river-based water management, all about your "fact".

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    4. Re:Linky link by asolipsist · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This sounds like a good mythbusters experiment. Do adam and jamie read slashdot?

    5. Re:Linky link by theshibboleth · · Score: 0

      Because, after all, Israel is a source of no scientific innovation whatsoever and has always been an aggressive force, never the victim of terrorist attacks perpetrated by those around them, right?

    6. Re:Linky link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do. Perhaps he does, too.

    7. Re:Linky link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do. Perhaps he does, too.

      You don't read.

    8. Re:Linky link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not everyone who lives in the Middle East is of Arabic ethnicity. Your examples fail it.

    9. Re:Linky link by Xzzy · · Score: 1

      No, but they have their fan forums and an email address. They constanly refer to fan submitted myths on the show.

    10. Re:Linky link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately, the link you have provided points to a page written by a crazy man, a conspiracy theorist who believes that "HAARP is a damnable weapon of mass destruction". Also, if you had read a tiny bit further, you'd have seen that all attempts at rebuilding similar structures have failed miserably, producing ridiculously low yields. Anyhow, it must be assumed that all "research" provided on rexresearch.com is fatally flawed.

      In fact, the author admits so, on the main page of his site: "The Entity behind this Website is inordinately Proud to be in full sniveling, snitching, simpering, groveling, cowering, whimpering, whining, wimpy, obsequious, obedient, knee-jerk, boot-licking, cross-bearing, flag-waving, butt-kissing, back-stabbing, choad-suqing, poopy-pants, whole-hearted, self-serving, morally bankrupt, willfully ignorant, dumbed-down, dim-witted, shameless, enslaved, impotent, craven, mindless, fawning, soulless, foolish, idiotic, stupidic, brainwashed, legal, psychopathic, nationally suicidal, corporate prostituting Compliance with the traitorious Imperial Fascist Patriot Acts I, II and III, the heinous Federal Quisling Act, &c... Heil Bush !"

    11. Re:Linky link by HeroreV · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I'm suprised those morons can read at all.

    12. Re:Linky link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those are filtration setups.
      You collect water in a conical depression filled with sand/gravel surrounding a fountain.
      the fountain itself rests on a clay tube, with performations at the bottom. Pressure from the
      conical shape pushes the water up to the fountain surface. Venetians used a similar design.

    13. Re:Linky link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm suprised those morons can read at all.

      I'm quite sure they can write better than you.

    14. Re:Linky link by name*censored* · · Score: 1

      Yeah, what a bunch of idiots! They're so stupid, they thought they could spend all day screwing around in front of a camera and get paid buttloads for it! oh wait.. [on topic] I vaguely remember someone doing something similar in the Gobi desert about 5 or 10 years ago? Although not 600 gallons in 20 feet...

      --
      Commodore64_love: I don't comprehend people who're so frightened of death that they'll bankrupt themselves to stay alive
    15. Re:Linky link by foobsr · · Score: 1

      In 1946, under his leadership, the Irgun blew up a wing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, where the British were headquartered. Some 90 people- Jews and Arabs, as well as British- were killed, despite warnings that there would be a bombing.

      Begin's picture, that of a wanted terrorist, was posted in all British prisons and offices in Palestine. The British conducted an extensive manhunt for Begin, who had a price on his head that began at $8,000 but was raised to $50,000. Begin escaped the British dragnet by disguising himself as a bearded Orthodox rabbi.

      Earlier, and more an act of terror.

      CC.

      --
      TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
  32. Finally... by Mantrid42 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Some good Vaporware!

  33. gallons... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    developing a machine that can extract up to 600 gallons of water a day from thin air even in locations like arid deserts.

    And it probably needs 600 gallons of diesel a day to do it.

    1. Re:gallons... by speculatrix · · Score: 1

      it probably runs on a fuel called hydrogen.

  34. Reusable Jokes by zulater · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Now I just need a droid that understands the binary language of moisture vaporators. Oh sorry, I thought every comment was supposed to have that joke in it.

  35. Re:They did this in ancient times in the middle ea by Meagermanx · · Score: 1

    Maybe it was a wet rock?

  36. errr you can buy them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  37. Stillsuit by Espectr0 · · Score: 1

    Everybody is thinking about Dune, so here's what a stillsuit does. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stillsuit

    By the way, download the full game with speech (legal abandonware) at http://www.the-underdogs.info/game.php?gameid=345

    1. Re:Stillsuit by ledow · · Score: 1

      I'm sure you'd like to clarify what legal abandonware is and of course, thanks for linking to the letter from the rightsholders of Dune, including the movie clips that are included in some versions of the game, giving the right to free redistribution.

    2. Re:Stillsuit by Espectr0 · · Score: 1

      Well, you are right. Abandonware is not a concept with legal meaning. But the underdogs site list games that are still being sold. They seem responsible enough.

      Should the distribution of software that can not be obtained anywhere else from the copyright holder be illegal? I dont think so, but then again IANAL. Feel free to discard my link.

      I actually played the game 2 days ago, having played it first in 1992 when i was a kid. The game scared the hell out of me, when the harkoneen captured my fremen troops.

  38. Re:They did this in ancient times in the middle ea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    apparently 10,000 sq ft, 30-40ft tall. So yeah, like, McMansion-sized.

  39. not surprising by z3d4r · · Score: 2, Informative

    this is coming from an australian company, seeing as australia is both the most arid continent and largest desert island in the world.

    --
    You shall know him by his Sig
    1. Re:not surprising by MostAwesomeDude · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, if we're going by humidity as an indicator of available water, Antartica's far more desert-like. It's also bigger.

      --
      ~ C.
    2. Re:not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      The company is based in Miami Beach, Florida, USA.

      http://www.aquasciences.com/

  40. Simple Government-Economics by finkployd · · Score: 1, Informative

    The DARPA funded companies did not have the same motivation as the other one. It is in their best interest to keep making slow progress and asking for more money everytime they have a little breakthrough. The successful company had no such money train. It was in their best interest to actually PRODUCE RESULTS in order to patent, market, and sell the technolohy. Funny how that works huh?

    Finkployd

  41. Shelf life? by dannycim · · Score: 1

    Quote from the article: "It seems like it's a cheaper alternative to trucking in bottled water, which has a shelf life," said Rowe, who described himself as a fiscal hawk.

    Wow, according to this guy, water can spoil. I'll be! >

    1. Re:Shelf life? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      it can, and does. Why do you think you need to add chemicals?

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:Shelf life? by CorSci81 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Of course it has a shelf life. Over time bacteria could potentially grow in your bottled water. Bottling methods aren't 100% sterile, nor do they maintain their seal until the end of the universe. Hence you assign everything meant for human consumption a shelf life based on some extremely conservative estimate of how long the product is likely to remain uncontaminated under "normal" storage conditions.

    3. Re:Shelf life? by TubeSteak · · Score: 1
      Hence you assign everything meant for human consumption a shelf life based on some extremely conservative estimate of how long the product is likely to remain uncontaminated under "normal" storage conditions.
      I don't know about that. Shelf life is basically a suggestion for anything that doesn't require refrigeration. Hence the popularity of canned food and water back in the WWI and WWII days.

      Like food, properly prepared water should have an almost indefinite shelf life, even if it is in plastic containers. The only difference is that food will lose taste & nutritional content over time.

      Of course, in the desert, none of the above applies.
      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
  42. I can't believe no one by geekoid · · Score: 1

    has posted anything about moisture vaporators.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  43. Re:They did this in ancient times in the middle ea by fyngyrz · · Score: 0, Troll

    ...maybe the liquid came after Moses was hit with the rock. Red water... imagine that. :)

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  44. these vaporators you speak of... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    only work with the aid of very special power converters, conveniently available at Toshi Station.

    1. Re:these vaporators you speak of... by sm62704 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Obi Wan: "These aren't the vaporators you're lookong for."

      Dumb soldier: "These aren't the vaporators we're lookong for. Move along."

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
  45. Water, water, in the air by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And all I want to drink.

  46. This just in.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's called a humidifier - and just the thought gets me all giddy inside (excited, even) with the sheer amount of H20 it produces. It's almost (as if, if only, perhaps, well ok) magic-like! Whence there was no water - suddenly there is - (you guessed it) clear, refreshing, natural, soothing water! It -is- awesome in the truest sense of the word! So much in fact, that I must utter it yet again - "Truly Awesome" ;-)

    Who needs the 10th dimension when you've got a humidifier! The universe knows no bounds.

    1. Re:This just in.. by chmod+a+x+mojo · · Score: 0

      I beleive you meant DEhumdifier. A humidifier "magically" put water back into the air, thus making it dissapear. A dehumidifier actually pulls the water from the air so it "magically appears.

      I see why you posted AC ... it seema slashdot is not for you, please move along.

      --
      To err is human; effective mayhem requires the root password!
  47. Some points to consider... by Rockinsockindune · · Score: 2, Interesting
    To make this work and be cost effective in reality these things have to continue to be cheap to run. A few things the article doesn't mention are:
    1. Does it require electricity, if so how much?
    2. Do the chemicals used in the condensation need to be replenished? If so, how often, how much potable water can be generated per load of chemicals, what is the cost of the chemicals?
    --
    I abuse commas, I cannot help myself.
  48. thin air? by rvaniwaa · · Score: 0, Redundant

    So, they tested this at altitude? Like Mount Everest

    --
    main(i){(10-putchar(((25208>>3*(i+=3))&7)+(i ?i-4?100:65:10)))?main(i-4):i;}
    1. Re:thin air? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      like go down a bit and get some ice

  49. Serious questions ... by Shadowlore · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Question1 L How inept are the congressional people in Washington DC?

    "I was pretty blown away by the things it's able to do," Rowe said. "The fact that this technology is not tied to humidity like others are makes it an attractive alternative for military bases in the Mideast where humidity is not really an option.


    Yet further down ...
    Aqua Sciences' machines only require 14 percent humidity,


    Anybody with half a brain knows that there has to be some humidity in the air in order to extract water. Wait, that explains it. ;) Moving on.

    While it is an accomplishment to reduce the humidity requirement, it doe not eliminate it. Indeed given their claim of up to 600 gal/day I'd say that at the minimum required humidity of 14%, it is possible that they may require far more of them than is talked about. A key factor is how rapidly that output drops when the humidity levels drop. if it porduces 600 gal/day at optimum humidity levels, it may only put out say 10 gal/day. If that were the case you could not rely on this for troop support in such areas. A supplemental, sure.

    Depending on the size and maintenance requirements, as well as the phsyical inputs other than air, it may not be cost effective to use these in more arid regions. Now, places like the southern US they would be quite useful.

    What I'd like to know is the size and power requirements. Something like this could be quite useful in high-rise buildings. Pumping water to the upper levels requires a significant amount of power. If instead we could put a few of these on tops of buildings and use them to bring water down, we might see a net win in terms of supply and energy usage. Imagine places like Phoenix or Las Vegas.

    Pheonix has an average daily humidity of about 55% IIRC. Thus it would stand to reason that these units could pump out their maximum output. Depending on their size and power requirements, several of these atop an office building in Phoenix could produce several thousand gallons per building. As office buildings their water requirements might be low enough to satisfy with these units. They would have the further advantage of dehumidifying the hot air of Phoenix, thus possibly resulting in a slight cooling load reduction.

    Even small residential units could be tremendously benefited. The average person requires 125 gal/day. Thus one of these could supply the water needs (not counting grass lawns) of a family of four in Phoenix. If the house is designed with greywater and systems for landscaping purposes it is possible that one of these could fully supply the average water requirement of a family of four in Phoenix. Which leads to the question .. how much are they to acquire and operate?

    Anyone from Phoneix care to share how much you pay for water? If you've got a spouse and a pair of kids, and this unit eliminated your water usage bill (there would still be sewage), how much would it save you per year?

    40,000 of these units in Phoenix would drop the summer daily demand for water by 24Mgal/day, or 5-12% depending on the season (Summer to Winter).

    Essentially, if this proved cost effective then the more arid parts of the country might be able to make large savings on their infrastructure and supply costs. Which would be yet another miltary requested technology applied to positive civilian use.

    The next question is: does it scale up and down? Can it be scaled down to be an effective one-person supply? Do larger units demonstrate a better-than-linear increase in water production?

    Combine this with greywater systems, solar thermal heating (water and home), and appropriate landscaping and we would be a long ways toward a more sustainable system - without major changes and reductions to our standard of living.

    --
    My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
    1. Re:Serious questions ... by Random+Utinni · · Score: 1
      What I'd like to know is the size and power requirements. Something like this could be quite useful in high-rise buildings. Pumping water to the upper levels requires a significant amount of power. If instead we could put a few of these on tops of buildings and use them to bring water down, we might see a net win in terms of supply and energy usage.


      Note that, in addition to having a relatively free supply of water, spontaneously generating several thousand gallons of water several hundred feet up in the air creates some additional issues/benefits. First, the weight of that much water at the top of the building might be sufficient to throw off the center of gravity for the building, and cause some rather unexpected problems. However, consider the amount of potential energy to be captured by generating that much water and letting it run downhill for usage.
    2. Re:Serious questions ... by Mendy · · Score: 1
      What I'd like to know is the size and power requirements. Something like this could be quite useful in high-rise buildings. Pumping water to the upper levels requires a significant amount of power. If instead we could put a few of these on tops of buildings and use them to bring water down, we might see a net win in terms of supply and energy usage.


      Or, if it did turn out to take less energy to obtain water from the air at heights than to bring it up there then if we had a very efficient hydro power system in the building we could just drop the water down, get back the potential energy... and voila - cheap power :)

    3. Re:Serious questions ... by geekoid · · Score: 1

      "The fact that this technology is not tied to humidity like others..."

      like not as much humidity, not like no humidity.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    4. Re:Serious questions ... by kfg · · Score: 1

      . . .spontaneously generating several thousand gallons of water . . .

      This device doesn't do that. It generates water progressively.

      First, the weight of that much water at the top of the building might be sufficient to throw off the center of gravity for the building. . .

      Look at the roof of half the apartment buildings in NYC. You'll find a big ole water tank. The cistern is pretty old technology.

      KFG

    5. Re:Serious questions ... by sm62704 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Pheonix has an average daily humidity of about 55% IIRC

      You don't RC, it's more like 3%. Its 20% right now and they're predicting rain, which they usually don't get a whole lot of.

      The humidity is so low they don't use standard air conditioners there; they have "swamp coolers" which work by evaporating a stream of water. Very cheap and efficient where there's practically no humidity at all. At 50% humidity one wouldn't work.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    6. Re:Serious questions ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fortunately hot air is able to hold more water than cool air, and it's often in deserts (which are hot and have plenty of capacity to hold water in the air) that water is needed. The desert feels very dry because the air would easily hold much more water than is there, but that doesn't change the likelihood that there's quite a bit there.

      This device might not work so well in the center of Antarctica.

    7. Re:Serious questions ... by Shadowlore · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In an attemot to answer some of my questions ...here is the company's site and product listing.

      http://www.aquasciences.com/

      Apparently they have container models that can produce 1200 gal/day. 20'x8'x8'. So a couple of these on office buildings would do niceley.

      They seem a bit on the large side for single-family home use. Bummer. Perhaps that would improve. These seem to have a built-in generator. If attached to grid I wonder how much smaller these would be. Perhaps multi-family structures could work out well with these, depending on electrical needs. At a target price of 25 cents per gallon, I suspect many places would, for now, be cheaper to use "city water". The question however then becomes: for how long?

      Even Phoenix has cheaper water than this. Much cheaper.

      However, for "off the grid" types, this is the last piece of the puzzle.

      --
      My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
    8. Re:Serious questions ... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Anyone from Phoneix care to share how much you pay for water? If you've got a spouse and a pair of kids, and this unit eliminated your water usage bill (there would still be sewage), how much would it save you per year?

      From what other people are saying about this thing's power requirements, it would probably greatly increase our water bills.

      I pay less here in Phoenix for water than I did when I lived in rainy southwest Virginia. There is talk of a shortage in coming decades, but right now it's pretty cheap as long as you don't go nuts watering your lawn. People with "desert landscaping" don't have anything to worry about.

      As for humidity, according to this, our average relative humidity is about 50% in the morning and 23% in the evening. Unfortunately, TFA didn't specify whether the 14% humidity required by this company's machine was absolute or relative, and I'm not sure how to derive absolute from relative.

    9. Re:Serious questions ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wouldn't everyone taking water out of the humidity in the air just reduce rainfall ... the water is coming from somewhere? And this would lead to the loss of existing supplies of water, like rivers and lakes?

    10. Re:Serious questions ... by khallow · · Score: 1

      The irony is that that would be an improvement in Phoenix which currently is far more humid than it should be due to human activity. In an urbanized place with more rainfall, my take is that extraction of moisture from the atmosphere (especially if it goes to watering plants) has less of an impact than paved surfaces. The latter significantly reduces water absorbed into the ground and increases runoff. As I understand it, a lot of rainfall actually comes from local water absorbed into the ground and released later by trees.

    11. Re:Serious questions ... by RobertLTux · · Score: 1

      didn't you see that episode of CSI: NY? a bunch of the buildings (pretty much all of them above a certain height (20-30+ floors?)) have a water tower on top of them.
      (it solves the problem of getting Zippo pressure on the top floor)

      --
      Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
    12. Re:Serious questions ... by Plutonite · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I have to ask (almost on-topic): how can your Suburban burn less gasoline than my Prius?

    13. Re:Serious questions ... by wagnerer · · Score: 1

      Looks like he does RC. From http://www.blueflame.org/datasheets/humidity.html the average humidity for Phoenix, AZ is 44%.

    14. Re:Serious questions ... by rebelcool · · Score: 1

      Unless your water is over $.30 / gallon, this system isn't more cost effective.

      Many (most?) tall buildings have water storage systems on their upper floors or roof. They are filled by pumping up from municipal at night, when energy rates are lowest. This doesn't result in a $.30 / gallon cost.

      --

      -

    15. Re:Serious questions ... by Dorceon · · Score: 1

      An absolute humidity number would be expressed in terms of mass of water per volume of air. If it's percent then it must be relative.

      --
      What sound do people on rollercoasters make? Hint: it's not Xbox 360.
    16. Re:Serious questions ... by The+Cisco+Kid · · Score: 1

      You know how a turbo on a car works? Takes the power from the exhaust, and uses it to force air in the intake?

      Why not apply the same logic to your high rise? Consider all the drains going down - sinks&toilet, heck the roof must have drains for rain. Just install appropriately-sized turbines on everything going down, and use the energy to help pump clean water up. If the rainwater is clean enough, just store it at the top to use. Either way may not complement eliminate the energy cost to pump water up, but surely it could lower it signifigantly.

    17. Re:Serious questions ... by The+Cisco+Kid · · Score: 1

      I beleive the problem is the cost of *transporting* the (bottled) water in, which the article suggests in $30/gal.

    18. Re:Serious questions ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have no idea what you're talking about, but one guess is by being driven once a month or so.

    19. Re:Serious questions ... by evilviper · · Score: 1
      However, for "off the grid" types, this is the last piece of the puzzle.

      Umm, no.

      Water for "off-grid types" was solved about 200 years ago, with cheap water pumps for wells. Pumping the water up 30 feet is surely a lot less power-intensive than trying to extract it from the air.

      The only benefit this has is being completely portable.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    20. Re:Serious questions ... by evilviper · · Score: 1

      That link doesn't say anything about anything. It's a Minnesota company talking about humidity in general.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    21. Re:Serious questions ... by hankwang · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Even small residential units could be tremendously benefited. The average person requires 125 gal/day.

      What?? Here in the Netherlands, which does not exactly have a water shortage, the water consumption for residential use is about 125 liters per day per person.[1] That is about 4 times less! What do you do with all that water?

    22. Re:Serious questions ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The water pressure simply isn't sufficient to lift water beyond four floors. By law, any building taller must pump (and if you pump, you should tank).

    23. Re:Serious questions ... by kbielefe · · Score: 1
      The humidity is so low they don't use standard air conditioners there; they have "swamp coolers" which work by evaporating a stream of water.

      Almost everyone here has a standard air conditioner, or (like my house) both a standard ac and an evaporative cooler, for two reasons:

      • Under the best of conditions, a typical household evap cooler can only cool the air about 15-20 degrees. The physics of the cooling process prevents recycling the already cooled indoor air to make it even cooler, like regular ac does. Going from 110 to the low 90's doesn't help that much, although from about October to April they work pretty good and are a lot cheaper to run.
      • The grandparent poster was right. Our humidity does average 50% or so, but it only feels humid during what we call the monsoon season in July and August. Usually it's hot enough for your most of your perspiration to evaporate before you can see it, so even though there is some humidity in the air, you don't get that sticky sweaty feeling most people associate with humidity. That being said, 50% is still pretty dry compared to the rest of the country.
      --
      This space intentionally left blank.
  50. Diesel? by davidc · · Score: 1

    From Aqua Sciences's website:-

    Machines may be powered by electricity or a self-contained diesel generator and are environmentally friendly due to lower energy requirements and no harmful or toxic by-products.

    So it's not, in fact, "no by products", it's "low by products". Although how Diesel emissions can be considered non-toxic is beyond me.

    1. Re:Diesel? by The+Cisco+Kid · · Score: 1

      A properly tuned diesel emits only water and carbon particles, niether of which is toxic.

    2. Re:Diesel? by davidc · · Score: 1

      Sadly, it appears that properly tuned Diesels are as rare as hen's teeth :-( (just sit behind almost any Diesel powered vehicle on the highway and breathe in the lovely fresh unburned hydrocarbons adsorbed to microfine carbon particles which lodge deep into one's lungs)

  51. Iraq needs water? by wsanders · · Score: 1

    1/4 the country was swampland before Saddam screwed that up, another quarter is snowy mountains, and two of the mideast's biggest rivers flow right through the place, although Turkey's in the process of gobbling those up.

    If the damn fools would stop blowing up their own water and power plants, they'd have plenty of water.

    --
    Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
  52. Gov't contributions by Harmonious+Botch · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Historically the government has been a great catalyst of techology inovation and improvements."

    True. They make great contributions, using other people's money, aquired by force or the threat of force, and spent very wastefully. But when you can tax who cares about efficiency?

    1. Re:Gov't contributions by geekoid · · Score: 1

      the governemtn is FAR mor effiecent with it's money the almost all private corporations. Look at the books.

      Hey, don't like contributing to society? then leave.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:Gov't contributions by It'sYerMam · · Score: 1

      If you'd just said `I disagree because I'm a Capitalist,` I think everything would be much clearer.

      --
      im in ur .sig, writin ur memes.
    3. Re:Gov't contributions by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Hey, don't like contributing to society? then leave.

      That's an interesting twist on the 'Love it or leave it' motto from the past.

      So were you the guy with the baton beating the 'hippies' at the demo in the 60's, or just his ideologic descendent?

    4. Re:Gov't contributions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok, I better never hear you raise another objection to anything in society. Because if you dont like it, you should just leave.

  53. Air conditioners? by sm62704 · · Score: 1

    The 20 foot machine does this without using or producing toxic materials or byproducts.

    So does my AC. Not 300 gallons though, but if it were 20 feet long and used a few hundred lilowatts it might.

    Several systems on the market can create water through condensation, but the process requires a high level of humidity.

    Or a high level of wattage? TFA is completely absent on details about how it works.

    --
    mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
  54. Lithium [Chloride|Bromide], probably by comingstorm · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It sucks the moisture out of the air, then you heat it up and evaporate the water, leaving the salts behind to be reused.

    The great thing about is, all you need is a heat source. You can either burn fuel, or use waste heat coming off a turbine, or even use solar energy -- you need temperatures above boiling, but not too much higher.

    This is the same stuff they use for solar-powered heat pumps, except there they use a closed loop system, and evaporate the water at low pressure to get air conditioning.

  55. Today's Irony Moment by sterno · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Government is very poor at creation and is typically very poor at selecting future winners in the technology race.

    See also the Internet you're using to post your comment. Oh wait, DARPA created that, nevermind.

    --
    This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
    1. Re:Today's Irony Moment by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      OP was mostly correct, but his definition was too broad.

      See, "government" in a socialistic scheme does (or rather, doesn't) do as he said.

      DARPA, if you recall, was a military initiative. Militaries have created some of the most fantastic technologies throughout history, and are the exception.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    2. Re:Today's Irony Moment by hey! · · Score: 1

      Militaries have created some of the most fantastic technologies throughout history, and are the exception.

      Yeah, like the Salk vaccine for polio, which by your logic must have been funded with military dollars. Oh -- wait.

      The reason that the military has been such an important developer of technology is not that it is efficient, it's that it is inefficent. It's the one thing that money can be thrown at without any expectation of near term returns.

      Suppose you are considering creating a fundamentally new technology, say an automated computing engine that will replace those armies of green-shaded clerks every company needs. Sure, it's clear that it would be valuable to have. But an efficient organization would never fund the creation of that technology. There are easier, quicker and surer ways to make a buck. Furthermore you are shouldering the risk of proving that this thing can be done, and is of commercial value. It's often not the first movers that win, it's the second movers with a better business plan.

      If you look at applied research along a dimension which stretches from product development on one hand, to nearly pure research on the other, either end offers practical short or mid term returns. The nearly pure research often results in new techniques that can be used to make incremental improvements in products.

      But there's a gap in the middle of this spectrum, in which non-incremental changes in technology can be made. In this gap there are many things that represent new ways of meeting society's needs, but that are not ready to be turned into products. This calls for an inefficient organization, willing to back something whose private economic returns couldn't possibly justify the investment. To some degree this gap is filled in by boutique technology ventures like Scaled Composites. But it is most often the military that plays this role.

      Inefficiency plays a critical role in creativity. People who do always do things in the way demonstrably the most certain to yield immediate and cost effective results are unlikely to create anything new.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  56. I know a SERE instructor... by rampant+mac · · Score: 5, Informative
    I hang out with a SERE instructor and do a lot of camping / hiking / ORV riding where I'm sometimes far away from reliable potable water. He gave me some pretty cool information about how to obtain water from your surroundings:

    1) Water from plants is always drinkable. I'm talking about water from the root system, not some stagnant water you could slurp out of a recess between branches. The easiest way is to take a large trash bag, grab a cluster of branches and put the bag around them (make sure the open end of the trash bag is tightly sealed to prevent air from going into the enclosed bunch). It forces the tree to "sweat" water from its root system. After about 24 hours you can slit the bottom of the bag and drain it into a nalgene bottle. You can only do one group of branches per 24 hour period, so you need to use different trees to gather water. I tried it out when I was in Eastern Oregon (which, for all intents and purposes, is an inland desert) and averaged about 1 liter of water per 24 hours. I had 6 trash bags that I normally have in my hiking ruck, so I could feasibly harvest 6 liters per day if I was SOL somewhere.

    2) A cluster of birch trees usually means there's water underground.

    3) Any multi-celled berry (ie: raspberry) is edible.

    Anyway, I thought it was pretty cool shit, and informative. :)

    --
    I like big butts and I cannot lie.
    1. Re:I know a SERE instructor... by undii · · Score: 1

      luckily for us Aussies, all this is common knowledge. At least to the 30+ years people who used to watch shows like The Leyland Brothers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leyland_Brothers as they always showed this kind of stuff on their shows. I didn't realise it was relatively unknown elsewhere?

    2. Re:I know a SERE instructor... by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 2, Funny
      Maybe you're also unaware that in the rest of the world we don't eat wichetty grubs, we have no idea how to wrestle with crocodiles and we don't drink Fosters.

      A little while back I asked an Australian friend of mine about the 'Crocodile Hunter'. He told me that he was unheard of in Australia and he was just some Australian stereotype promulgated by American TV. But when Irwin died I read comments like that of the Australian Prime Minister saying that he represented the real Australia. So now I assume that all Australian stereotypes are accurate :-)

      --
      Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
  57. Re:They did this in ancient times in the middle ea by sm62704 · · Score: 1

    A lot of "far fetched" things in the bible are now explained; even the parting of the red sea (tsunami caused by the volcano that wiped out the Minoans, according to an art history class I took).

    Of course, having physical explanations kinda takes some of the magic out.

    --
    mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
  58. thin air? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OMG.....that means..... There is such a thing as fat air!?!?!

  59. ARPA involvement by zitintheass · · Score: 1

    Now hope they will not lock-down the technology for them exclusively.

  60. Re:Invented a long time ago, in a galaxy far away. by sydsavage · · Score: 1

    I think you can see some in the background of this picture.

    http://www.pilvikaupunki.net/galleria/albums/userp ics/normal_Luke_tatooine.jpg

  61. don't even think about using this crap in africa! by urbieta · · Score: 0, Troll

    There are millions of people dying because of contaminated water or no water at all, and the first to get this new SO CALLED "machine that get water from air" (I must see before I believe) are for WAR? the gates foundation should check first if this exists, and then spend a couple billions arround the world :)

  62. A version that runs on terrorists? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Any chance the inlet is large enough?

    I hear they're making Soylent Green at Gitmo..

  63. Re:Windtraps and KFC by sm62704 · · Score: 1
    By law, they have to disclose the ingrediants... just not how much of each.

    From KFC.com:
    Note: Nutrient contributions from individual components may not equal the total due to federal rounding regulations.
    Substitution of ingredients may alter nutritional values. Menu items and hours of availability may vary at participating locations. Although this data is based on standard portion product guidelines, variation can be expected due to seasonal influences, minor differences in product assembly per restaurant and other factors. Except for limited time offerings or test market items, menu products as of this posting are included on this site. Product data is based on current formulations as of date of posting.
    Product data is based on current formulation as of date of publication. If you have any questions about KFC® and nutrition or are particularly sensitive to specific ingredients or foods, please contact us at 1-800-CALL-KFC.

    --
    mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
  64. Solar Still by David+Off · · Score: 4, Informative

    A solar still produces water in the desert and uses no external energy source other than sunlight (there is plent of that in the desert)

    1. Re:Solar Still by jamesh · · Score: 2, Informative

      In central Victoria (South Eastern Australia), we're having a bit of a drought at the moment. I was listening to talkback radio show where a woman was talking about a fairly simple device to collect dew (basically just some fine mesh with a collector down the bottom) and how it could be used to keep a few plants alive without actively watering them.

      This got me thinking though, what is the effect going to be if this sort of thing is deployed in a really large scale? Does it reduce the moisture content of the air by any measurable amount? I guess in suburban areas if you just used the collected water to run evaporative air conditioning then it might even things out...

      On the other hand, one of the feared run-away effects of global warming is that higher temperatures will speed up evaporation, and the increased moisture content acts as a greenhouse gas. Maybe we should be sucking the moisture out of the air a bit more :)

  65. What you should think about this... by Ice+Wewe · · Score: 1

    Ahhhhh! Refreshing...

  66. Private contributions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "True. They make great contributions, using other people's money, aquired by force or the threat of force, and spent very wastefully. But when you can tax who cares about efficiency?"

    As opposed to what? Private industry? When you can just raise prices.* Who cares about efficiency?

    *Especially when you're a monopoly.

    1. Re:Private contributions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The amount of ignorance you just displayed is truely breathtaking.

      Grats.

    2. Re:Private contributions by Sqwubbsy · · Score: 1

      'truely' is spelled 'truly', champ.

  67. Re:They did this in ancient times in the middle ea by N1ck0 · · Score: 2, Informative

    It sounds more like they created a substance that uses intermolecular forces to have a high attraction to water (like salt or any other desiccant). The secret is making it so that under a specific condition these water molecules can be released again (heat, pressure, etc). Then possibly combined it with standard evaporation methods through compression and cooling (standard dehumidifier).

    So in all they probably just found, or dynamically adjust, the 'sweet spot' between the two methods to produce the most amount of water with the least power.

  68. Re:They did this in ancient times in the middle ea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Except it was from water rich, and therefore "thick" air. Thin air is simply a lie!

  69. Unlimited fuel (read hydrodgen conversion) by Delusionist · · Score: 1

    This would be quite sweet to setup an arrangement of this machine, fed to a water to hydrogen gas converter, fed to an intake and into a combustion chamber... voila... instant fuel while driving ;)

    It's unfortunate that this will not happen because fag oil companies and big money car companys would lose out in the long run...

    Great idea, another strike against the bullcrap politics and another strike against mankind... I guess the "communist" manifesto saying man is "innately good" just got slapped in the face and proven wrong.... again :P

    1. Re:Unlimited fuel (read hydrodgen conversion) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you are an rambling and incoherent idiot.

  70. Re:don't even think about using this crap in afric by geekoid · · Score: 1

    of course for war. The government id interested, will provide the most profit. Then the device will gte known talked about and spread.
    It's a good stratagy.
    Assuming this magic device works.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  71. Not having read the article... by attemptedgoalie · · Score: 3, Informative

    Two things.

    1: Water does have a shelf life, which is why if you're storing it for long periods you have to add stabilizers.

    2: The bottles can leach into the water over time, and some plastic bottles are set up so that they will begin to bio-degrade in a couple years, hence the date stamped on each bottle when you buy them.

    --
    My mom says I'm cool.
  72. Where's my Peltier Air Conditioner???!!!??? by JoshDM · · Score: 1

    Where is this thing??? Did they shoot these kids and hide their bodies like they did with the guy what invented the car that runs on water?

  73. I've got a machine that does this too! by dahinds · · Score: 1

    It's called an air conditioner. The problem is that it takes quite a bit of energy to run.

    There's no way of avoiding that without violating the second law of thermodynamics.

    1. Re:I've got a machine that does this too! by Stonent1 · · Score: 1

      There's no way of avoiding that without violating the second law of thermodynamics.
      I hear Iraq is fairly sunny.

  74. Re:They did this in ancient times in the middle ea by spun · · Score: 1

    Yeah, they use a different technique, but it's kinda the same thing. I just thought it was interesting that people thousands of years ago had techniques for getting water out of air. And I knew everyone else was going to be yelling "Arakis!" and "Tatooine!" so I thought I would put out an example from the real world.

    --
    - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
  75. Re:They did this in ancient times in the middle ea by Threni · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    > A lot of "far fetched" things in the bible are now explained

    No, they're not.

    >; even the parting of the red sea (tsunami caused by the volcano that
    > wiped out the Minoans, according to an art history class I took).

    Especially not that one. A tsunami wouldn't part the sea.

    > Of course, having physical explanations kinda takes some of the magic out.

    You mean `utterly disproves the medieval nonsense`? I guess it does.

  76. The goverment is paying $30 bucks a gallon by bxbaser · · Score: 1

    WTF what a bunch of assholes
    I want my damn tax money back.
    30 bucks a gallon is bullshit.
    If it really cost that much then a freakin pepsi would be $75 in bagdad.

  77. Dupe! by wwiiol_toofless · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Luke was doing this a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away, on a Tatooine moisture farm run by his "uncle" Owen. I'm sure it's been /.'d

    --
    the mods may say you posted flamebait, but to me it's a flame that warms my heart. rock on, brother! --chebucto
  78. Re:Windtraps and KFC by timeOday · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Besides, a recipe isn't just ingredients, but also the process, which can be equally important. Think about wine: "Ingredients: grapes."

  79. OH BOY! by Broken+scope · · Score: 1

    Now i can set up that moisture farm on ta.............. These aren't the droids your looking for. OH SNAP My life just flashed before my eyes in a 6 part trilogy. (Yes a trilogy)

    --
    You mad
  80. Re:They did this in ancient times in the middle ea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It might do, in shallow water the existing water is sucked out to where the wave is, which is what increases the height of the wave. The result would be the sea bed being exposed. The waves do come crashing back very quickly according to the bible, drowning those chasing them, which would fit.
    The event might have been chasing them along the beach around the sea, rather than going across the middle and that fact lost in translation over the years.

  81. Re:They did this in ancient times in the middle ea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Let me get this quick first post in, then I'll come up with something substantive and post it as a reply." Do your research first next time, you karma-whoring douche.

  82. Squirt guns? by msimm · · Score: 1

    Now thats Slashdot paranoia. :p

    --
    Quack, quack.
  83. Well, that's nice, but... by SirBruce · · Score: 1

    What I really need is a droid that understands the binary language of moisture vaporators.

    Bruce

  84. Incredible! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...can extract up to 600 gallons of water a day from thin air...

    Wow. Imagine how much more they could get from fat air!

  85. Uncle Lars is gonna be pretty pissed by fussili · · Score: 1

    The Moisture Farms of Tatooine totally won't be able to handle the increased competition.

  86. It's simple really... by AttilaB · · Score: 0


      Use two parts hydrogen and one part oxygen, mix, and viola ... water!

  87. Moisture Vaporators by Captian+Obias · · Score: 1

    But, does it understand the binary language of other moisture vaporators. This will be crucial when we need to place them in critical locations. Also will these operate similar to binary load lifters which from what I hear are easy to program.

  88. George.. by msimm · · Score: 2, Funny

    what did we tell you about trolling the forums?

    --
    Quack, quack.
    1. Re:George.. by Sqwubbsy · · Score: 1

      I'm a Republican and I thought this was funny.
      Wish I had mod points. Well played, sir.

  89. Unintended consequences by BearRanger · · Score: 1

    This probably will never be a large scale product, but consider what would happen if large amounts of water vapor are extracted from the air.

    Of course, if the hydrogen economy ever comes to pass these things might become a necessity.

  90. Unfortunately.. by msimm · · Score: 1

    We are all bad Countries. This could be said of any of us. Isreal certainly has science, unfortunately a lot of is being used for defence contracts.

    --
    Quack, quack.
    1. Re:Unfortunately.. by GnarlyNome · · Score: 1

      Isreal certainly has science, unfortunately a lot of is being used for defence contracts............ History says that those who beat their swords into plowshares...get plowed under

      --
      Diplomacy is the art of saying "Nice doggie" until you can find a rock. Will Rogers
    2. Re:Unfortunately.. by msimm · · Score: 1

      You can quote all sorts of crap. We've been doing terrible things for, well, recorded history. Israel is no more guilty then the US certainly, but they have blood on their hands. Every day we seem to have more. So keep making swords.

      --
      Quack, quack.
  91. WRONG! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Al Gore Created the Internet! Everybody knows that.

    1. Re:WRONG! by GIL_Dude · · Score: 1

      Yes, he did - but why did he have to use TUBES?

    2. Re:WRONG! by amliebsch · · Score: 1

      Al Gore Created the Internet! Everybody knows that.

      And of course, "Al Gore" is really a prototype DARPA-funded killbot that was repurposed for peaceful use. Thus, DARPA created the internet. QED.

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
  92. Sad in a way by castanza · · Score: 1

    To think what these could do for people in third world countries.

  93. I voted for Nader... by msimm · · Score: 1

    So I guess I'm with you then.

    --
    Quack, quack.
  94. Water is great-Urea is better. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Is there a button to switch it from 'water' to 'beer?'"

    No, but there is one that does beer to water. But I don't think you want to drink from that tap.

  95. Can I get a shoutout from all the foodies? by jjohn · · Score: 4, Interesting
    From the article:
    "We figured out how to tap it in a very unique and proprietary way," Sher said. "We figured out how to mimic nature, using natural salt to extract water and act as a natural decontamination.

    "Think of the Dead Sea, where nothing grows around it because the salt dehydrates everything. It's kind of like that."

    All the Alton Brown geeks in the house should have perked up their ears when they read that. Salt is hydroscopic; it attracts water. Sugar is also hydroscopic, but salt is much cheaper (especially if you don't need food-grade salt).

    There are two ways salt is harvested by humans: evaporation and mining.

    I can see using salt to grab the moisture in the air present in the pre-dawn skies, but I don't rightly know how to make the salt give it back up. I assume they just cook the rocks and capture the steam. Salt, being a rock, can be heated lots of times before degrading.

    I imagine a process like this would produce fairly clean water.

    Give up for Food Science! Hell ya!

    1. Re:Can I get a shoutout from all the foodies? by X-rated+Ouroboros · · Score: 1

      Hygroscopic.... unless you actually mean salt and sugar allow us to see underwater?

      --
      Simple Machines in Higher Dimensions
  96. Lucas - king of the rip-offs by tygt · · Score: 0, Troll

    It's always grated on me just how much Lucas ripped off so many different excellent works to piece together "his" universe - Dune, Foundation, etc...

    1. Re:Lucas - king of the rip-offs by AJWM · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yep. Star Wars, the story of a poor kid on Arakkis who grew up and went to Trantor. But movies and TV series routinely rip off whatever they can, tweaking it just enough to (usually) avoid lawsuits.

      Not to say that science fiction (and other) writers don't rip off too, but they're usually much better at filing off the serial numbers, and taking from totally different genres (as well as being long since in the public domain). Asimov's inspiration for the Foundation Trilogy (back when it was a trilogy) was, loosely speaking, "The Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire". Forbidden Planet was loosely based on Shakespeare's "The Tempest" (and of course Star Trek ripped off a lot from Forbidden Planet). And so on.

      (In fact Hollywood is often closer to the original when they rip something off than they are when they buy the property and make a movie from it. Joke. Joke.)

      --
      -- Alastair
    2. Re:Lucas - king of the rip-offs by tygt · · Score: 2, Informative
      No doubt; Asimov even had the Empire's last great general be named "Bel Riose", who worked tirelessly to win back as much of the old empire for his strong emperor, just as the Eastern Roman General Belisarius did for the emperor Justinian (who is echoed as "Cleon II" by Asimov).

      All roads, of course, led to Trantor (Rome). I don't think that Asimov hid his borrowing from history - note that any author generally freely borrows from history, past or present (reality). Borrowing so heavily from another author's works, on the other hand, is another matter IMHO.

    3. Re:Lucas - king of the rip-offs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Star Wars, the story of a poor kid on Arakkis who grew up and went to Trantor.

      I'm getting slow in my old age. I had to read that 3 times to get all of it. Too funny.

  97. Re:They did this in ancient times in the middle ea by Xzzy · · Score: 1

    Having some old dude and a bunch of his fleeing kin at the exact right spot just as tsunami drains enough water to create a land bridge would be plenty magical I think.

    Of course, there's always the chance as the verbal history was passed down, tellers embellished a bit to impress the kids better.

  98. Re:They did this in ancient times in the middle ea by GIL_Dude · · Score: 2, Funny

    Maybe it was only red spray paint from PETA after they got mad at Moses for breaking the pet rock.

  99. He's a monster! by Xiroth · · Score: 1

    From the article:
    "It was very interesting to see the technology in action and learn about its possible implementation in natural disasters," said Rep. E. Clay Shaw Jr., a Republican from Florida whose hurricane-prone district includes Fort Lauderdale.

    "It was delicious," Shaw said.


    ...

    I'm sorry, but when did politicians start eating machines, and why didn't I get the memo?

  100. Quisatz Haderach by caller9 · · Score: 1

    This is awesome. When will they come out with 'still suits?

  101. Old technology by tsotha · · Score: 3, Funny
    This technology is actually pretty old.

    One of the problems which has dogged airships from day 1 is the inability to replace the weight of burned fuel. There's a couple ways you can deal with this problem, but none of them are ideal. Modern blimps and airships are actually heavier than air, relying on lift from engine pods to get the airship in the air. As they burn fuel they get lighter, but they're never actually "lighter than air". Early airships were much too large for this strategy especially since engine technology was far less advanced.

    The most successful airship in history, the Graf Zeppelin, used a gas called Blau Gas to power its engines. Blau Gas is just a mixture of propane and hydrogen that weighs the same as air, so when you burn it and the gas volume is replaced by air of the same weight you don't have any buoyancy problems. Graf Zeppelin used hydrogen, which is relatively cheap, for its lifting gas. If it became too light they could vent enough hydrogen to restore neutral buoyancy.

    But this scheme wasn't very efficient, from an engineering perspective. Every cubic meter of fuel was a cubic meter that couldn't be used for lift. Also, as they designed the Hindenburg they were concerned about safety, so they decided the Hindenburg would be filled with helium instead of hydrogen. Since heliem is about 10% less efficient as a lifting gas, Zeppelin engineers decided they just couldn't live with Blau Gas. Also, Blau Gas has the same safety drawbacks as hydrogen. Helium is much more expensive than hydrogen, so if the company was to be profitable there was no way they could just vent helium when the ship was too light. So if they were to use diesel fuel exclusively in the Hindenburg, they needed a way to add weight to the airship in flight.

    The solution was to remove water from the air and use it as ballast to replace the now-missing diesel fuel. The system they designed used a silica gel, the same stuff that comes in a little packet labeled "DO NOT EAT" when you buy a pair of shoes. Ambient air was blown over the gel, which is highly water absorbent. The gel was then heated using waste engine heat to produce water vapor, which was collected in a condenser. Eventually they decided to use the diesel exhaust (which is apparently very humid) instead of ambient air. This was 70 years ago.

  102. Re:They did this in ancient times in the middle ea by Chabil+Ha' · · Score: 1

    Those in the ancient Middle East did something similar with animal skins. They would simply set them out at night, and in the morning wring out the vast amount of dew that had collected.

    --
    We're all hypocrites. We all have hidden parts, it's the contrast between them that make us more a hypocrite than others
  103. Re:They did this in ancient times in the middle ea by AJWM · · Score: 2, Funny

    Of course, there's always the chance as the verbal history was passed down, tellers embellished a bit to impress the kids better.

    "In my day, we not only had to walk uphill both ways to school, we had to part the seas to do it!"

    "You parted the seas?! Lucky bastard! We had to hold breath and walk along the bottom..."

    "Oh yes. Well, at least you were walking. We had to outrun the whole Egyptian army.. And wander in the desert for forty days."

    "Days? We had to wander for forty weeks!"

    "Well I say days, it was really forty years. But we were tough, it just seemed like days to us..."

    --
    -- Alastair
  104. Moisture farming by niola · · Score: 1

    Woot my dreams of being a moisture farmer in the desert finally being realized lol

  105. I have one of these in my basement... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    its called a dehumidifier.

  106. A former employee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I worked at Sciperio until last February, although not on this project. The mismanagement was incredible, and the attitudes were worse. The prevailing attitude with management at Sciperio was that once you have the government's money, you're done. All you have to do is show DCAA that you've spent the money on the project. The government accountants are too dumb to know if its a worthwhile expenditure or not. So inevitably you blow millions on a big plastic box which doesn't work. And management doesn't care, because they've taken their "overhead" money to buy yet another Lexus. In my experience, private money is spent more frugally than government money. The greed that comes from living on the government teat kills innovation.

  107. Re:They did this in ancient times in the middle ea by ozmanjusri · · Score: 2, Informative
    Having some old dude and a bunch of his fleeing kin at the exact right spot just as tsunami drains enough water to create a land bridge would be plenty magical I think.

    Yeah, that's why it's more likely to be the result of "wind setdown" and the resulting bore when the wind failed. The water being pushed back to expose a path would have been a reasonably common event. If you were a local, you'd know it would be a dangerous path to use, but if you were desperate to escape it might have seemed worth the risk.

    There's some interesting theories, including this one, here. http://www.europhysicsnews.com/full/33/article6.pd f#search=%22part%20the%20seas%20moses%20science%22

    --
    "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
  108. That's a dessicant dehumidifier by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mitsubishi have a patent on one like this that fits into a shipping container and produces a lot of water - but requires a lot of fuel. To operate in the desert with low relative humidity this machine must also be using a dessicant to absorb the water (creating cold surfaces uses too much power) and then "cooking" it out either with chemicals or heat. Natural clays like bentonite are a possibility I've researched in the past, but they are bulky(but cheap and...realtively safe) What I'd be really interested in is how often the dessicant filters reqire changing and how much energy the machine uses - are the end users going to be trading a convoy of water tankers for a convoy of supply trucks carrying fuel and replacement parts?

    Hopefully one day we'll get a solar thermal powered version of this running. The dessicant part is actually the easiest bit (dessicant inside a double glazed solar oven) the hardest bit is getting enough air to go through the filter assembly without an electric fan. Any ideas folks?

  109. Not so impressive by pauljuno · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Water out of thin air? I'm not impressed. Every morning when I leave for work I need to wipe off the windshields of my car as there is so much water on it without any rain happening. Bought the dang thing to get from point A to point B and it's always producing water. I'll bet if we parked it into a desert an oasis would form!

  110. Re:They did this in ancient times in the middle ea by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

    It's a fucking miracle! The laws of science aren't supposed to allow it!

  111. Re:don't even think about using this crap in afric by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not magic, it's a fancy dehumidifier.

  112. Aw, man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But I was going to Tashi Station to pick up some power converters! :(

  113. Re:They did this in ancient times in the middle ea by philwx · · Score: 1

    > A lot of "far fetched" things in the bible are now explained

    No, they're not.

    >; even the parting of the red sea (tsunami caused by the volcano that
    > wiped out the Minoans, according to an art history class I took).

    Especially not that one. A tsunami wouldn't part the sea.

    > Of course, having physical explanations kinda takes some of the magic out.

    You mean `utterly disproves the medieval nonsense`? I guess it does.


    You seem a bit touchy. I don't think he's pushing intelligent design. And the Bible was written well before medieval times.

  114. Another case of... by noigmn · · Score: 1

    I'm guessing one of these things would be invaluable in many of the African countries. But as mentioned by the article they are unlikely to ever get there because the US government wants to use them for war purposes and won't disclose the methods or technology involved. Once again bringing democracy(anarchy) to Iraq on TV will come before stopping millions from dying of thirst and contaminated drinking water.

    --
    Slashdot is powered by your submission.
  115. Re:They did this in ancient times in the middle ea by Forge · · Score: 1

    Either the story is made up, or it's not.

    If it's one of the 1st 2 then OK. Maybe they crossed the Red Sea in boats and told it different. There is independent (I.e. None biblical) evidence of a Jewish slave nation in Egypt.

    As for the crossing story. It has 2 parts. Not only did the Red sea open up so the Jews could walk through, it also closed behind them and drowned the Egyptian army. Now follow me....

    To let through whole families with luggage and Livestock and infants and old people the see would have had to part pretty wide and stay open for a long time. How fast can you Cary grandma?

    To drown an army, the watter would have had to come in real hard or cover them deep.

    That combination rules out all the common natural explanations. Tsunamis are too fast, and if Wind moves enough watter those families couldn't walk through that Hurricane, Take it from a guy who has been outside in a storm far too puny to do that (Hurricane Gilbert at Category 3 in Jamaica 1988)

    The possibilities:
    1. This was some still unknown phenomenon,
    2. This was straight Devinne intervention
    3. This was Alien Intervention (The old God is ET concept)
    4. Moses and his palls cooked up a really cool story.

    Not to worry. When we die, some of us will get to ask people who were there at the time how it actually happened.

    --
    --= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
  116. Re:They did this in ancient times in the middle ea by HeroreV · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Now you Christians are trying to pretend that the whole Bible is scientific, removing the aspects of magic? First intelligent design and now this. What a pain.

    I prefer the practice of claiming more and more is figurative. It seemed like eventually the whole thing would be almost completely empty of anything literal.

    Christians: The world and all the lifeforms were created in 6 days.
    science: No. Here's the proof.
    Christians: OMG We were just kidding. Duh! LOLOLOLOLERZ

  117. Maybe bucket still? by Kadin2048 · · Score: 1

    Easier than this would just be to make a bucket still. (Second item down on the page.)

    No idea how many times you'd need to run seawater through it in order to produce something potable, but it's dead simple to set up. It requires two buckets, one which will fit inside the other, a piece of clear plastic sheeting, a bungee cord or duct tape, and two clean rocks or other heavy objects. Basically you put the small bucket inside the large bucket, and put the clean rock in the bottom of the small bucket to keep it from floating. Then put seawater into the large bucket (around the outside of the small bucket). Then put the clear plastic sheeting over the top, and secure it tightly with the bungee cord. Place the small rock in the center, to create a dimple. Place the whole apparatus in the sun. In theory, the sun causes the water in the seawater to boil/evaporate, which then condenses against the top, runs towards the center, and drips down into the small bucket.

    You can do similar things if you are in an area that gets warm during the day and cool at night. It's really just developing any sort of temperature differential that's key.

    I've never tried making a bucket still, but I've seen the diagram in various survival manuals; I think the idea is that you can adapt it to use basically any moist plant product instead of seawater (e.g., in the desert you could use cactus chunks or something).

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
  118. Damp Rid? by fozzy1015 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The quote reminds me of my younger years when I had to... um... quickly dry things I grew before they rotted.

    Take a tupperware container. Wedge two layers of chicken wire, with a few inches between the bottom, middle, and top. On the bottom layer of wire
    put a cotton cloth with Damp Rid(Potassium Chloride). Put the items you want to dehydrate on the top layer. Seal up. The salt will leech the water out and
    when it saturates, dump it at the bottom of the container.

    So given a big enough contraption to hold enough salt with a large enough surface area, a way to move enough air over it(fan), and a way to get the water out and stored(pump), could you
    collect 600 gallons of a water a day in a desert?

    1. Re:Damp Rid? by kbielefe · · Score: 1
      So given a big enough contraption to hold enough salt with a large enough surface area, a way to move enough air over it(fan), and a way to get the water out and stored(pump), could you collect 600 gallons of a water a day in a desert?
      Sure, and give me a lever long enough and a fulcrum on which to place it, and I shall move the world (Archimedes). The question is whether the size is manageable.
      --
      This space intentionally left blank.
  119. Daedalus of New Scientist got there first. by Nate+Eldredge · · Score: 2, Informative

    I have here a copy of a book entitled "The Inventions of Daedalus", which reprints the column of the same name by David E. H. Jones from New Scientist magazine. This column would propose unusual inventions, generally based upon sound scientific principles and seeming entirely reasonable except for their total absurdity. Previous proposals include a scheme for slaughter-free meat production by harvesting reptile tails which then regenerate; a weapon called "Shattergas" causing sudden and catastrophic corrosion of militarily important metals and plastics; and an addictive birth control pill which the user would never forget to take.

    Anyway, it includes a column dated May 25, 1978 entitled "The Desert Waterer" in which "Daedalus" proposes just such a device, whereby moisture is collected from the air by means of a hygroscopic liquid. The water can then be extruded through a semi-permeable membrane if the liquid is under sufficient pressure. This can be accomplished simply by placing the liquid in a tall column; moisture enters at the top and the hydrostatic pressure at the bottom allows recovery. Daedalus then considers some convenient liquids for the purpose. Sulfuric acid is readily available in industrial quantities but would need a column 2400 meters high, which is somewhat awkward. Invert sugar syrup has a higher molecular weight and would require a column merely 720 meters high, as well as being nontoxic, and even edible in case of an emergency. Best of all, he says, is a product called "Carbowax", for which a column of only 50 meters would suffice.

    The firm in charge of this present project has a suspiciously similar name, so perhaps they have just created a better Carbowax.

    Daedalus, in the book, cites a number of cases where an invention from the column has become the subject of serious research. So this is just one more example...

  120. Re:They did this in ancient times in the middle ea by berzerke · · Score: 1

    "Oh yes. Well, at least you were walking. We had to outrun the whole Egyptian army.. And wander in the desert for forty days."

    When I was a kid, we didn't have feet!

  121. Re:They did this in ancient times in the middle ea by Threni · · Score: 1

    > You seem a bit touchy.

    When someone points out my mistakes they're doing me a favour - I never accuse them of being touchy.

    No-one mentioned `intelligent design`, so I'm not sure where that came from.

  122. Re:Invented a long time ago, in a galaxy far away. by hey! · · Score: 2, Funny

    Why do you think the DoD funded this? They want to keep those Arab wannabe jedis down on the farm.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  123. Mod parent up to conter bad modders by Eivind+Eklund · · Score: 1

    He's getting karma-wacked for a reasonable comment because of Star Wars fanboys.

    --
    Doubting the existence of evolution is like doubting the existence of China: It just shows that you're uninformed.
  124. Before you drink it watch Beyond Treason!! by gd23ka · · Score: 1

    on Arrakis I guess not wanting to contaminate the spice worms.

    No such considerations were afforded to Iraq which at most has to offer oil thought
    safe from contamination. Most of the aftermath to the effects of exposure to the
    radioactive metal dust from depleted uranium shells becoming obvious now, such as
    cancers in adults, malformed children missing limbs and in some cases babies born
    without brains... and on top of that thousands of gallons of chemical warfare
    agents and a couple of million tons of fallout from major oil wells that burned for
    weeks to months.

    Right now it would probably be healthier to drink out of a puddle in downwind Nevada
    than whatever water they could extract in Iraq.

    Here's a movie you might want to watch that shows you just what a contaminated mess
    our Beloved Leader left in Iraq:

    http://www.beyondtreason.com/

    It has a nice interview in there with Dr. Doug Rokke the former director of the Army
    Depleted Uranium Project. Watch him cry in shame in front of the camera.

    At the end be sure to watch the interview with Sgt Bob Jones, who came down with the
    Gulf War syndrome and listen to how he describes the ultimate treatment they came up with:

    A field trip to Arlington cemetary and telling him and his family to "learn to cope".

  125. actually, passive condensors for extracting water by alizard · · Score: 1

    from the atmosphere were used all the way through the series, that's what the windtraps were.

  126. Re:They did this in ancient times in the middle ea by marafa · · Score: 1

    no no .. it was a book called "Dune'

    --
    _ In Egypt Networks: Network Solutions with a Twist
  127. I wish there were more details.. by msevior · · Score: 1

    2220 litres a day at 8 cents a litre is very interesting already to many drought striken towns in Australia.

    I wish there were more details. How much energy does it use? Is there scope for price reductions? What would the water cost be be if the energy were supplied from the Grid?

    1. Re:I wish there were more details.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually I'm kind of skeptical since he doesn't provide any details.
      A lot of government agencies jump on something because of management
      claims (hearing what they want to hear) without any real proof.

  128. Re:They did this in ancient times in the middle ea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "When I was a kid, we didn't have feet!"

    That's ok, your embellishment didn't have a leg to stand on either. Having feet would only make the whole thing more disjointed.

  129. KitH by Dr.+Cody · · Score: 1

    If Christ turn straw into pot, instead of water into wine, we'd all be smoking up a communion! -Bauer

  130. Don't compare Dune to Mark Trilogy crap by bananaendian · · Score: 1
    I wonder why Herbert never thought of having some Fremen just crash a few comets into the planet to at least provide some selected portion of it with water.

    Because he didn't want for it to be boring like the Mars trilogy crap. He was a very intellegent author who wanted to create a realistic alternate universe to the extent very much like Tolkien did. Above all he was an ecologist who respected the wonders of nature and reality over the humanistic technobabble you get in most so-called 'scifi'. Human kind isn't destined for the starts - its still just a bunch of monkeys with or without the fancy toys. The Bene Gesserit saw this and seeked to direct it. They were horrified when they discoved how far the Fremen had taken the development from the Zensunni Wanderers...

    (ie. you better read the series again...)

    "Beyond a critical point within a finite space, freedom diminishes as numbers increase. This is as true of humans in the finite space of a planetary ecosystem as it is of gas molecules in a sealed flask. The human question is not how many can possibly survive within the system, but what kind of existence is possible for those who do survive."
    - Frank Herbert, Dune

    --
    www.tribalnetworks.org - helping tribal people around the world to own their own means of high-tech communications
    1. Re:Don't compare Dune to Mark Trilogy crap by nu1x · · Score: 1

      >"Beyond a critical point within a finite space, freedom diminishes as numbers increase. This is as >true of humans in the finite space of a planetary ecosystem as it is of gas molecules in a sealed >flask. The human question is not how many can possibly survive within the system, but what kind of >existence is possible for those who do survive."
      >- Frank Herbert, Dune

      Have you read "The Dosadi Experiment" by Frank Herbert?

      In that book he focuses entirely on this question, in a way.

      Easily one of the most complex-written books I've read. Recommended :P

      --
      I have nothing to lose but my bindings.
  131. Re:radioactive poo by dragonbutt · · Score: 1

    The waste water isn't stored underground for "hundreds of years".

    In a septic system, the solids fall to the bottem of the vessel and the liquids travel through poris underground pipes and "water the lawn"

    In A sewer system, the wast water is filtered and the solids are trucked to a landfill, or dumped in the ocean and the liquids are returned to the nearest river.

    Both systems return the waste water localy. sewer systems are not much bigger than the city they service.

    --
    it was like that when I got here.. I wasen't here when that happened... second shift musta done that....
  132. Ringworld by Agripa · · Score: 1
    I would have to check to be sure but I don't recall the puppeteers being responsible for the fall of the cities. Wasn't it an unspecified ramscoop freighter which was assumed to have brought the infection from an old colony world?
    How fortuitous that I am currently rereading the Ringworld books although I would have remembered this even without doing so. In the first book it is speculated that a City Builder ship carried the superconductor plague from one of their abandoned worlds. In the second book, Louis becomes suspicious after being told by the Hindmost that the plague will not affect the superconductor wire or cloth that he brought. How could the Hindmost know? Later it is reveled that the Puppeteer experimentalist faction had deliberately created the plague and seeded the Ringworld with it about 1000 years earlier. No definitive reason for this action is given but speculation in the books is that the Puppeteers may have been looking into the possibility of colonization. The original expedition (Ringworld) was sent to discover how the structure had survived the fall of the civilization that kept it in repair. The second expedition (Ringworld Engineers) goes so that the deposed Hindmost can recover his position by stealing technology.

    From The Ringworld Throne:

    1733 AD - Puppeteer Experimentalist regime introduces superconductor plague to Ringworld
                    - Fall of the Cities
    2851 AD - Ringworld
                    - Lying Bastard shot down and impacts Ringworld
    2878 AD - Ringworld Engineers
                    - Hot Needle of Inquiry reaches Ringworld

  133. Sucking by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    Condensation catchments were developed over many generations in arid climates. I bet none of these industrial capacity systems have any projection what sucking the scarce moisture from the air for troops will do to the rest of the extremely fragile desert ecosystem that also depends on it. Maybe that's why so many of the places humans have lived longest are now deserts.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  134. Re:radioactive poo by evilviper · · Score: 1
    The waste water isn't stored underground for "hundreds of years".

    If you've got any evidence of that, please quote it. If so, I've been misinformed by expert reports on the subject.

    In a septic system, the solids fall to the bottem of the vessel and the liquids travel through poris underground pipes and "water the lawn"

    Septic tanks are specifically built deep enough that tree roots can't reach them, and clog them up. While I suppose there may be tiny ammounts of water somehow getting back up to the surface, most of it slowly decends down torwards the water table.
    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  135. Re:They did this in future times on Arakis by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

    I also seem to recall such a scene in the movie "Dune".

  136. Les Hiddins is my hero! by bonezed · · Score: 1

    He was originally sent by the Aussie Army to learn about bush tucker. After leaving the Army he made a few shows for the ABC.

    ooh, looks like the ABC still sells the DVD's

    --
    ---- Put Sig here:
  137. Re:They did this in ancient times in the middle ea by philwx · · Score: 1

    When someone points out my mistakes they're doing me a favour - I never accuse them of being touchy.

    No-one mentioned `intelligent design`, so I'm not sure where that came from.


    You didn't correct one of my mistakes, I was responding to your response. I guess my point was you seem to indicate intolerance at the mere suggestion that something in the Bible could be historically accurate. Even if you think the Bible is a myth (and it's obvious you do), you might have shown a more level response than you did. A myth is what? A natural phenomenom deitized by people who could not scientifically explain it at the time. What he was suggesting was that the Bible described natural phenonem that could have scientifically happened but been unexplainable at the time.

    Rather than take it at face value you became caustic, asserting that nothing in the Bible could be true (saying its all a bunch of bullcrap). Just because you don't believe in the Christian God (or any, I don't care) does not mean you have to discount everything in the Bible. I don't "believe" in Greek mythology, but I think it is wonderful literature, and (gasp) has some overlap with reality. I don't feel the need to call it crap. This is the type of vibe I got from your post. I'd apologize but I don't think I'm far off.

    As far as Intelligent design, your response was a knee-jerk reaction to a man's post, as if he was proselytizing. Hence I mentioned Intelligent design as an example of what he was not doing. You seem to have taken a quite literal reading of both his post and mine. GG

  138. Re:They did this in ancient times in the middle ea by Threni · · Score: 1

    > A myth is what? A natural phenomenom deitized by people who could not scientifically explain it at the time. What he was suggesting
    > was that the Bible described natural phenonem that could have scientifically happened but been unexplainable at the time.

    But people believe it now, even in the absense of proof? Why the emotional attachment to it? Why the vested interest? Give it up! There are loads of things in the bible (and other religious documents) that read like badly imagined childrens stories. Jews in Egypt? No proof at all - not a scrap of evidence. Parting of the sea, the ark... I mean, if you want to pretend it's true then go for it, but call it fiction, not `not disproved`. These people aren't describing `natural phenomenom` - they didn't even happen! Someone made it up, and other people who don't know those people are trying to back up it. That's not myth, that's just making shit up!

    > Just because you don't believe in the Christian God (or any, I don't care) does not mean you have to discount everything in the
    > Bible.

    Some of it's true, I'm sure.

    > I don't "believe" in Greek mythology, but I think it is wonderful literature, and (gasp) has some overlap with reality. I don't feel
    > the need to call it crap

    That's not what we're comparing, though. People don't say the bible is "wonderful literature" (for obvious reasons) - they said it's an accurate historical record. But it's not, is it.