Slashdot Mirror


Wave-Powered Desalination

dptalia writes, "Scientists think they've found a way to harness the energy of waves to desalinate salt water. Currently desalination is an energy-intensive process, but this new design harnesses the renewable energy of waves to produce fresh water. Many countries depend on desalinated water to support their populations, and this invention could lower the cost of water generation." Production versions of the "desalination ducks" would be about 10 meters in diameter and 20 meters long. Each would supply water for more than 20,000 people.

20 of 184 comments (clear)

  1. Wow. by NerveGas · · Score: 5, Insightful

    2,000 cubic meters per day of desalinated water from each unit. That's over 350 gallons per minute. Impressive!

    --
    Oh, you're not stuck, you're just unable to let go of the onion rings.
    1. Re:Wow. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Why do they always have to find some nay-sayer -- this Nidal dude, for instance -- who has an obvious axe to grind and is therefore completely blind to the possibilities?

      I couldn't agree with you more. They keep telling me that my perpetual motion machine will never work, but I know that I have the calculations correct! And after I patent my time travel machine and my warp engine designs I'll definitely win a Nobel prize!

      I hate those people with such small minds thinking only about facts and the truth. I know how things really work, I feel it in my gut.

    2. Re:Wow. by grozzie2 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It would be more impressive if it didn't require the water to be pre-heated to 100C. I think it's safe to say, pour boiling seawater into just about anything with some condenser tubes setup, and you'll get fresh water out of the condenser. It appears to be insulated with Impossiblium, you know, the stuff that'll allow it to maintain internal temperature for a month while it works, with no heat input. I'm willing to bet, read the fine print in the marketing manuals, and you will find the Mark II version will have double the production if you power it with snake oil too....

    3. Re:Wow. by pla · · Score: 4, Insightful

      hell all they need is a $2 magnifying glass lens

      A 20x10 meter lens for $2? Please sell me a dozen! ;-)


      Actually, though, they wouldn't need to focus the light... That serves to concentrate light into a very small area to raise the spot temperature, but doesn't actually raise the temperature if you add in the area shadowed by the lens.

      Just paint the tops of the ducks matte-black, and you'll get the desired solar heating effect.

    4. Re:Wow. by finity · · Score: 4, Informative

      The water that must be pre-heated is the "ballast" water. That water is already fresh water. The salt water doesn't have to be heated to 100 C, it's pulled to a low pressure with the ballast water, so it doesn't have to be heated as much.

  2. Oh the Irony by MarsBar · · Score: 5, Funny

    The inventor's name is Stephen Salter. Heh.

  3. Floating all your eggs in one basket? by Rogerborg · · Score: 3, Insightful

    All floating platforms are subject to damage or loss during storms. You don't want interruptions in your fresh water supply, ever, and you especially don't want to lose it after a big storm, exactly when you need it most. This looks like a good idea in theory, but you don't base risk management on best case scenarios.

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    1. Re:Floating all your eggs in one basket? by artecco · · Score: 3, Informative

      I do not know what kind of platforms you reffering to, but I at least don't see any technical problems with build such plant. Within my industry (Norwegian oil&gas) we build offshore equipment and platforms, and the dimensioning of equipment are all well within what's technical achievable. Even in worst case scenarios

      So since we already dimension Oil rigs and equipment for mammoth storms, freak waves and gas explosions (happening at the same time for your pleasure), I would guess it wouldn't be a problem to build one of these...technical at least. Economical I don't know^^

  4. Vitally Important by Surasanji · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This particular type of technology could be extremely important in countries with few water sources. Say such as much of the Middle East. Israel has a single fresh water source for the entire country, the Kinnert (Or Galilee) This same freshwater sea is the water source for a great part of Jordan. Both countries have coasts on the Red Sea- and already there are massive desalinization plants there, on the Israeli side. But, what about Egypt? All the African Countries on the coast that are still pretty dry. This particular technology could also be of great use in the first world, as someone else stated, in places like England. I'm sure they aren't the only country with a water problem.

    1. Re: Vitally Important by ajs318 · · Score: 4, Funny

      The problem is that you can't build anything anywhere in the UK without someone protesting. Ten years ago when they were trying to build the Newbury Bypass, the protestors (very, very few of whom actually came from Newbury, BTW) were chanting "Homes not roads". Today, the protestors are active whenever someone tries to build houses. When they tried to build factories in the past, at least the locals would generally support the effort on the basis that a new factory would bring jobs to the area. Now if you tried to build a factory, you'd get rent-a-mob outsiders protesting against it and the locals would also most probably be protesting that the factory would bring immigrants to the area.

      Building a reservoir essentially involves digging a very large hole and filling it with water, incidentally drowning any cute fluffy bunnies et anal. that can't be bothered to learn to swim. (Actually, you have to do more than that; for a start, you have to undercut the hole to avoid evaporation, but we'll simplify things a little here.) So you'll get various groups of protestors turning up with their own agendas. Maybe they will be too preoccupied with in-fighting amongst the various factions ("you aren't a True Believer, you're only concerned about the value of your house and you eat m**t!" "Well you aren't even local, you've nothing to be worried about, you can just sod off back to where you came from and live off my taxes" "Yeah? Well how many diggers have you sabotaged?") to do any serious protesting.

      But it's not just the protestors you have to worry about, it's the workers and working conditions. You can't dig big holes in the winter, because it rains and they just fill up with water. And you can't dig holes in the summer, because it's dusty, thirsty work; the workers need showers and drinks, but there's a water shortage on .....

      --
      Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
  5. Re:cool by lisaparratt · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Or you could just heavily fine the water companies 'til they fix their pipes, rather than letting such huge amounts of water leak away.

  6. Presumably... by turbosaab · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A sensible installation would accompany the floating platforms with a large reservoir to act as a buffer and prevent such interruptions.

    1. Re:Presumably... by Threni · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Perhaps you could pull them a few metres underwater during a storm?

  7. Engineer by Rostin · · Score: 4, Informative

    Stephen Salter is an engineer, not a "scientist." The distinction can be blurry, but I think this is pretty clearly an example of engineering rather than science.

    The only reason I point that out is that I'm an engineer, and I'd like credit to go where it's due. :)

  8. Re:cool by Fr.+Teddy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    While that is strictly speaking accurate, it is of course not the full story. The vast majority of that water is in parts of the country where it is not able to be used. Perhaps a huge canal down the middle of the country might solve it - but nothing short of that would.

  9. Or even... by stomv · · Score: 3, Insightful

    have a spare one or two on land, ready to deploy? This is a good idea anyway, since one of the ducks could fail for any other reason, leaving people thirsty. If you lose a duck to a storm, you replace it with one stored on land.

    It ain't perfect, but it ain't bad either. Combine that with reservoirs (either big lake, or lots of 1 gallon jugs of freshwater at homes), and it's much better than the status quo.

  10. The economics are hopeless. by Ancient_Hacker · · Score: 3, Insightful
    If you read The Fine Article, you might notice a certain shortage of facts. Like the costs. Economics are important. You don't want to waste money on schemes that are many many times more expensive than proven methods.

    In general, it's not feasible to capture wave power. The stuff is too diffuse-- it takes too much infrastructure to capture too little energy to even pay back the cost of building the contraption.

    It doesnt matter whether you use the mechanical energy to generate electricity, desalinate water, or make tea. You can't build a wave energy capture device that's rugged enough to survicve the storm, corrosion and other hazards at a reasonable cost.

    As a starting point, let's take their (unsubstantiated) estimate of 2,000 cubic meters per day. A quick google shows that's worth about $1,000 to $3,000. Assuming the waves are active 75% of the time we could expect maybe $2,000 a day from this device. That's about $700,000 a year. Kinda impressive at first glance. But will that be enough to even pay for the gadget over time? Let's estimate, generously, that the device will last ten years. And that we can borrow money to build it at 5% interest. If it and the pipeline to shore can be built for $10 million, we need to pay at least approx $1.5 mil a year to make headway on the principal and interest. Plus the cost of staff and maintenance. We're still a factor of more than two away from breaking-even. And that's assuming no risks due to weather or unanticipated problems with new technology.

    1. Re:The economics are hopeless. by Alcari · · Score: 3, Interesting

      10 years, Are you kidding? You can easily build it to last 75 or hundreds of years with proper maintenance. Take the word of a civil engineer. The moving parts may be more difficult, but I doubt it. We've got movable dams that are just about zero maintenance, that have been standing there for almost 40 years now. Of course, If you put multiple installations nearby, it saves the immense cost of laying another pipeline underwater (Probably costs more then the whole facility.) Also, funding for projects like this doesn't work like a bak loan. You simply take a percentage of the profit in eschange for providing funding.

  11. Renewable waves? by ScentCone · · Score: 3, Insightful

    the renewable energy of waves

    Come on, this is supposed to be a science/engineering summary of a science/engineering article. The term "renewable" should at least mean something. Bio-fuel crops are arguably "renewable." Waves simply are. Nobody needs to re-plant our gravitational interaction with the moon once we've harvested it. Swine waste methane is not the same as tidal activity. It's the article summary, for cryin' out loud. At least get the fundamental concepts behind the word choice straight. "Renewable" isn't the same as "something other than oil."

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  12. desalination ducks by The+evil+doctor+Matt · · Score: 3, Funny

    desalination ducks... Wonder if they'll use the salt to make saltine quackers...