Submit your comments on this article |
Science & Technology |
Getting Water From Thin Air |
2006-11-01 |
![]() |
Posted by:GolfBravoUSMC |
#16 Fuckin' Duh, Mr Dire. Sheesh. |
Posted by: .com 2006-11-01 20:10 |
#15 Musing aloud... if the output from a hydrogen engine is water vapor, is there any way to modify a stone burner to leave behind a lake? A lake of molten glass? Yes. |
Posted by: Zenster 2006-11-01 19:51 |
#14 Well, if we need self-contained units cuz the Soddi desalinations plants don't have power, prolly due to some phreak thingy, you understand, then... :-) |
Posted by: .com 2006-11-01 19:28 |
#13 Pretty enery intensive. Just uses a lot less fuel than the equiv water volume. Yes. This isn't a civilian general use thing, it's solving a specific military need. In places like Anbar province. Or maybe the carcass of the Magic Kingdom one of these days, to .com's delight LOL. |
Posted by: lotp 2006-11-01 19:25 |
#12 Musing aloud... if the output from a hydrogen engine is water vapor, is there any way to modify a stone burner to leave behind a lake? All of the places that just scream out for the "treatment" need water... I'm just sayin... |
Posted by: .com 2006-11-01 19:16 |
#11 LR = Stilgar? Ever seen them together in the same room? Have ya? Huh? Lol - good 'un, LR... |
Posted by: .com 2006-11-01 19:13 |
#10 Personlly, I sort of like the "Dune" approach - in an arid environment, you "take their water" when you defeat an enemy - literally, suck it out of their body. So - Muzzies are good for something - they can contribute body water. |
Posted by: Lone Ranger 2006-11-01 18:38 |
#9 Sounds like they blow air to saturate salts, then heat the salt to release water vapor and then condense the vapor. Pretty enery intensive. Just uses a lot less fuel than the equiv water volume. |
Posted by: ed 2006-11-01 18:33 |
#8 Troops in hot climates require over 20 gallons a day per person (for all uses.) In most cases it will still be cheaper to move water by truck, or purify local sources. But in very dry areas, without wells or rivers, the new water extraction gear will solve a major logistics problem Sounds ideal for a longterm troop presence in, say, Anbar province. |
Posted by: lotp 2006-11-01 18:28 |
#7 One of the more interesting ways of transporting water, is to transport kerosene, burn it and capture the water vapour. From memory, a gallon/liter of kerosene will produce eight gallons/liters of water. The energy produced could be used to power this condensation process resulting more water. |
Posted by: phil_b 2006-11-01 18:06 |
#6 com beat me to it: the cost to transport the salts and all the security associated with THAT. kind of like the environuts driving their Prius's: "i get a bizillion miles to the gallon because i have batteries." no mention made of the replacement cost of the battery pack; look for a flood of 80K mile hybrids on the used car market. (Sorry, topic was water, got distracted by these perpetual motion machine theories) |
Posted by: USN, ret. 2006-11-01 14:38 |
#5 Does the cost estimate cover everyone in the vicinity having to eat a tube of chapstick every fifteen minutes? |
Posted by: Zenster 2006-11-01 14:28 |
#4 This is great for global warming folks, water is a very good greenhouse agent. The answer obviously is to deplete the atomosphere of water. |
Posted by: bombay 2006-11-01 13:30 |
#3 Lol, GolfBravoUSMC. A big-assed funnel woulda worked better 4 months out of the year, lol. Ahem, no, seriously, this be purdy cool. Does the cost / gallon cover everything? Cost of the "salts", gas or whatever to generate the electricity to run the thing, etc? If so, rock on. |
Posted by: .com 2006-11-01 10:56 |
#2 What I really need is a droid that understands the primary language of moisture vaporators! |
Posted by: DarthVader 2006-11-01 10:55 |
#1 Paging Luke Skywalker... |
Posted by: Rob Crawford 2006-11-01 10:45 |