SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the like-load-lifters-but-different dept.
A scientist named Dr. Shing-Chung (Josh) Wong has developed "a bio-inspired approach for a novel bead-on-string nanofiber with hydrophobicity/ hydrophilicity simultaneously by electrospinning-enabled technique, that can be used as a high-performance water harvester" to collect potable water from the air, even in desert environments:
To miniaturize water generation and improve the efficiency, Wong and his students at the University of Akron turned to electrospun polymers, a material they had already worked with for more than a decade. Electrospinning uses electrical forces to produce polymer fibers ranging from tens of nanometers up to 1 micrometer—an ideal size to condense and squeeze water droplets out of the air. These nanoscale fiber polymers offer an incredibly high surface-area-to-volume ratio, much larger than that provided by the typical structures and membranes used in water distillers.
By experimenting with different combinations of polymers that were hydrophilic—which attracts water—and hydrophobic—which discharges water, the group concluded that a water harvesting system could indeed be fabricated using nanofiber technology. Wong's group determined that their polymer membrane could harvest 744 mg/cm2/h, which is 91 percent higher than similarly designed membranes without these nanofibers.
Unlike existing methods, Wong's harvester could work in arid desert environments because of the membrane's high surface-area-to-volume ratio. It also would have a minimal energy requirement.
Wong says that the device should be inexpensive to construct, and he's looking for funding to build a prototype.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 22 2018, @09:27AM (4 children)
that's no vaporator, it's the opposite: a harvester.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Wednesday August 22 2018, @02:00PM
Vaporator is what atmospheric moisture harvesters are called in the Star Wars universe. Perhaps you're thinking of vaporizers, which exist in our reality?
Or, with your "That's no X, it's..." phrasing, perhaps you're just making a bad joke?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 23 2018, @04:49AM
No, it's a moisture vaporator all right. I've worked with them a lot, when I'm not busy bullseyeing womp-rats in my T-16.
(Score: 2) by Rivenaleem on Thursday August 23 2018, @08:07AM
Missed opportunity in subject line.
(Score: 2) by driverless on Thursday August 23 2018, @12:02PM
No, it's a moisture vaporator all right. I've worked with them a lot, when I'm not busy bullseyeing womp-rats in my T-16.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by MostCynical on Wednesday August 22 2018, @09:32AM (3 children)
everything is inexpensive when someone else is paying.
If it is cheap enough, he should have had no trouble finding investors.
Conclusions: the university is no good at raising money and/or the prototype isn't *that* inexpensive.
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 22 2018, @09:47AM (1 child)
Yeah, this guy has been Wong his entire life.
(Score: 2) by stormreaver on Wednesday August 22 2018, @11:13AM
That reminds me of the Grand Theft Auto: Vice City ad for Mr. Wong's Laundromat: "If it ain't Wong, it ain't white".
(Score: 2) by RS3 on Wednesday August 22 2018, @05:20PM
Or he knows how to get free advertising.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 22 2018, @10:39AM (1 child)
Excluding the dust in such environments may increase the energy requirements.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Wednesday August 22 2018, @02:03PM
Why exclude the dust, unless it's clogging your collection membrane of course. Just don't disturb the silt on the bottom of the tank while scooping out your water.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by suburbanitemediocrity on Wednesday August 22 2018, @10:42AM (3 children)
Buy this for $240, https://www.amazon.com/Frigidaire-70-Pint-Dehumidifier-Effortless-Humidity/dp/B00UWP07LK/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1534934252&sr=8-3&keywords=dehumidifier+70+pint&dpID=316rM8FWZvL&preST=_SY300_QL70_&dpSrc=srch [amazon.com]
Paint pins with nanofiber technology
Profit
Or run a indegogo and collect 2 million dollars. Retire to Belize.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Wednesday August 22 2018, @11:17AM (1 child)
Ask McAfee if it's a good idea to be a rich foreigner in Belize.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by MostCynical on Wednesday August 22 2018, @12:14PM
Its fine if you stick to the water and beer.
In fact, if you had one of these [soylentnews.org], water should be plentiful.
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 1) by Sabriel on Sunday August 26 2018, @08:46AM
The device you linked to is for reducing air humidity, not for producing clean water: "Discard water from bucket. Water is not potable and cannot be used for drinking."
(Score: 4, Insightful) by FatPhil on Wednesday August 22 2018, @11:22AM (6 children)
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLQJW3WMsx1q0js6FvjO89H62m60SoHdE6
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYFH_bXM5gU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SczCwChCz8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVsqIjAeeXw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pen6dBszLgA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDHdIH13FRU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNHcIYyYDhU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVoJACT4-xQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYFH_bXM5gU
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by requerdanos on Wednesday August 22 2018, @12:52PM (5 children)
Apparently, while not solved, the freshwater shortage is significantly ameliorated if Dr. Wong's device is produced. Think about it!
Judging from the claims, I bet that if you are running them in deserts, you could use solar and/or wind to supply that minimal energy requirement. Since they're so inexpensive, you can use as many as you need to provide your city/town/community with drinking water. (If it has dust in it, simply rename it "mineral water".)
At least that's the claim, though I haven't dug through the paper to see what "minimal" and "inexpensive" mean to Dr. Wong. Ten gallons (38 liters) per hour pouring out of a portable device in an arid desert with "minimal" energy input, I frankly would have to see for myself.
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Wednesday August 22 2018, @04:28PM (3 children)
Air already dry in the desert. What kind of ecological impact would using something like this have, if used extensively? Or is it really, a drop in the bucket so to speak, and not something to worry about?
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 2) by requerdanos on Wednesday August 22 2018, @05:07PM (2 children)
There's a comment or two like that under TFA itself, and a couple more in this discussion. Let's look at it; anyone more knowledgeable please correct me where I'm wrong.
Extensive use would lower the humidity locally, meaning that the nearest ocean or sea that previously couldn't evaporate any more water into the air, would then be able to, re-establishing equilibrium. The impact: Now you have 10 more gallons of fresh water in the desert/village/base camp/etc. which will re-enter the water cycle from there instead of from the ocean, from which it was displaced. Not much, in other words.
If it's not 10, but 100, or 1000, or 10000, or 1000000 or a billion or ten billion gallons, it's the exact same situation. The U.S. Geological survey estimates that there are 352,670,000,000,000,000,000 [noaa.gov] gallons of water in the oceans. Ten billion gallons is 0.00% of that, even if the water were being removed from the system*, which it isn't; it's being borrowed, and the water cycle will immediately seek the equilibrium that replaces it.
Assuming wind or solar power (no emissions), bottom line, no measurable impact on the water cycle; tiny but unpredictable weather/climate changes due to ever so slightly different circulation of air (evaporation spread over larger area).
-----
* If we took the water and sent in on spaceships to Moon and extra-planetary colonies, then it would be removed from the system. We could keep even that up for a very, very long time.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 22 2018, @06:43PM (1 child)
If the water were used to grow plants/forests, the effect on the local environment could be quite dramatic.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 23 2018, @09:45AM
You mean, like, good? Provided you have enough water for irrigation, as otherwise you can destroy the soil (well know, btw).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 23 2018, @01:39AM
50 pints PER day. I picked this one at random.
https://www.amazon.com/hOmeLabs-Dehumidifier-Dehumidifiers-Basements-Allergens/dp/B06X9MFTZZ [amazon.com]
I would not drink it though. It also picks up other things in the air. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legionella [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 2) by Snotnose on Wednesday August 22 2018, @01:20PM (4 children)
Got just enough water? Got a good rainforest going? Kiss all that goodbye, now you've got those bozos in the desert stealing all your rain.
I came. I saw. I forgot why I came.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 22 2018, @02:14PM
that's ok, there's a tiny violin for everyone downstream of those dams that keep getting built, too.
(Score: 2) by Fluffeh on Wednesday August 22 2018, @10:35PM
It is normally the forest that actually attracts the water.
Following paper was written in 2009
https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/article/59/4/341/346941 [oup.com]
Abstract
A new hypothesis suggests that forest cover plays a much greater role in determining rainfall than previously recognized. It explains how forested regions generate large-scale flows in atmospheric water vapor. Under this hypothesis, high rainfall occurs in continental interiors such as the Amazon and Congo river basins only because of near-continuous forest cover from interior to coast. The underlying mechanism emphasizes the role of evaporation and condensation in generating atmospheric pressure differences, and accounts for several phenomena neglected by existing models. It suggests that even localized forest loss can sometimes flip a wet continent to arid conditions. If it survives scrutiny, this hypothesis will transform how we view forest loss, climate change, hydrology, and environmental services. It offers new lines of investigation in macroecology and landscape ecology, hydrology, forest restoration, and paleoclimates. It also provides a compelling new motivation for forest conservation.
(Score: 2) by Snotnose on Wednesday August 22 2018, @11:06PM
Sigh. Sober me, well rested, right out of bed, screws up "pity da fool". Takes tired me, half drunk, looking forward to bed, to see the problem.
I came. I saw. I forgot why I came.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 23 2018, @02:57AM
Probably not, normally the desert is after the forest. First the water carrying air comes over the forest then after the air has lost most of the moisture it will blow over the desert leaving somewhere between little and none of the moisture there.
It's unlikely that you're going to be able to use something like this to kill a rainforest as you'd be only marginally better off than stealing the water from the ocean and piping it inland.
(Score: 3, Informative) by unauthorized on Wednesday August 22 2018, @02:54PM (4 children)
At 0.75g/cm^2 this device will need a collection surface of 600m^2 in order to collect 10gal/h. Even if we ignore the engineering challenges and take Wong's numbers at face value, there is no way such a device could be made portable.
And that's assuming that Wong can somehow squeeze 0.75g/cm^2 out of air with average water content of 16g/m^3 under ideal circumstances (20% humidity, 50C air temperature), which is highly dubious.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by nitehawk214 on Wednesday August 22 2018, @03:10PM (1 child)
Just the energy to power the fans to pump enough air through the thing would be better spent on trucks filled with water.
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
(Score: 4, Funny) by Fluffeh on Wednesday August 22 2018, @10:37PM
Forget the trucks... I say Monorail! Say it with me! Monorail! Monorail! Monorail!
(Score: 2) by requerdanos on Wednesday August 22 2018, @05:09PM (1 child)
A fan or spiral shape could easily contain such two-dimensional area in a small, three-dimensional portable unit.
Some photos of common off-the-shelf devices that already do this: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=fanfold+filter&iax=images&ia=images [duckduckgo.com]
The invention may well be bunk, but that isn't why.
(Score: 2) by unauthorized on Wednesday August 22 2018, @06:25PM
Oh there are many designs which allow you to fold a large area in a smaller size, it's just that your collection efficiency will drop dramatically if you do. An important tidbit about passive moisture collectors is that they are very much like solar panels in that the most efficient design is a large flat thing facing the flux. The design you propose will optimistically have 25% the condensation efficiency of a large flat sheet, but realistically I'd be surprised if it managed half that.
Room dehumidifiers are a different story because they are meant to work in enclosed spaces.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by nitehawk214 on Wednesday August 22 2018, @03:04PM (2 children)
Stuff like Waterseer pull in millions for a scam that was going to magically pull water from air in arid climates... where there is almost no water vapor.
Or Fontus, the self filling waterbottle, which was so obviously impossible that anyone with a basic understanding of physics could debunk.
Just gotta get a good kickstarter video and some celebrity shills.
Sounds like scam to me.
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
(Score: 2) by requerdanos on Wednesday August 22 2018, @05:20PM
Perhaps, instead of bilking a large number of not-very-knowledgeable people out of a smaller amount that they can ill afford to lose, they want to seek larger amounts from fewer people who are better informed about the risk? That honestly sounds more ethical (or at least less unethical) to me.
You would think the multiple campaigns under which "I am raising a million dollars for a <cool video game|cool device|amazing invention>!!!" convinces a thousand people to each give a thousand dollars, ending with "Dude, making a <game|device|invention> is totally harder than we thought!!!" would have taught people in general about the risk of funding a black box, but it honestly doesn't appear to be the case. So if you are suggesting crowdfunding because it's a proven way to separate people from their money without regard to how valid your claims, I guess I have to agree with you.
(Score: 2) by unauthorized on Wednesday August 22 2018, @06:38PM
Curiously, I thought that as well, but doing the math proved otherwise, as long as you rely on the wind that is. At air water content of 8g/m^3 (typical for deserts), even a moderate breeze of 5km/h will shift impressive amounts of air for you. The amount of air that a wind trap can capture is roughly equal to CollectionArea*AirVelocity, so a good radial design siphoning the wind into a moisture collector might possibly be able to work, provided it's large enough and it has decent efficiency.