[HN Gopher] Low-cost gel film can pluck drinking water from dese... ___________________________________________________________________ Low-cost gel film can pluck drinking water from desert air Author : NickRandom Score : 149 points Date : 2022-05-26 13:01 UTC (9 hours ago) (HTM) web link (news.utexas.edu) (TXT) w3m dump (news.utexas.edu) | paulsmith wrote: | Gel? What I really need is a droid that understands the binary | language of moisture vaporators. | aaron695 wrote: | fallat wrote: | Ok so it's a sponge soaked in konjac and then dried? Damn, that | _is_ simple. Could easily make this yourself. I don 't even see | how this is patentable... | | > renewable cellulose and a common kitchen ingredient, konjac | gum, as a main hydrophilic (attracted to water) skeleton | | (artificial sponges are made of cellulose - I learned this just | last year when washing my dishes and thinking... wtf is this made | of?) | | --- | | Seems then you can: | | 0. Go to the dollar store | | 1. Buy a thin sponge | | 2. Buy konjac gum | | 3. Buy a tray | | 4. Place the thin sponge in the tray, mix the konjac gum with | water, and pour it into the tray, and place it into your freezer, | waiting for the water to evaporate...? | | 5. Place it now somewhere in a humid place to pull the water out | of the air | | --- | | Industrial version of this is probably a ton of thin wafers side- | by-side in a cube-like fashion, so they can easily come off an | assembly line | bradrn wrote: | It doesn't look quite that simple. The paper describes the | procedure as follows: | | > In a typical fabrication, LiCl powder (0.32-0.82 g) is added | into 10 mL HPC solution (0-2.0 wt%) forming solution A. The pH | of solution A can be tuned by NaOH or HCl solution. 0.44 g KGM | powder is added into solution A and quickly cast into the petri | dish after vortex. The gelation takes place within 2 min, and | sit in room temperature for 15 min. Then, the film is placed in | the fridge (-4 degC) for 3 h followed by 15 min freeze in | liquid nitrogen. Last, the gel film is ready to use after 12 h | freeze-drying. | | [https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-30505-2] | natch wrote: | Dude you don't have liquid nitrogen in your fridge? Such | common kitchen ingredients. /s | spenrose wrote: | Source paper:https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-30505-2 | | Extracting ubiquitous atmospheric water is a sustainable strategy | to enable decentralized access to safely managed water but | remains challenging due to its limited daily water output at low | relative humidity (<=30% RH). Here, we report super hygroscopic | polymer films (SHPFs) composed of renewable biomasses and | hygroscopic salt, exhibiting high water uptake of 0.64-0.96 g g-1 | at 15-30% RH. Konjac glucomannan facilitates the highly porous | structures with enlarged air-polymer interfaces for active | moisture capture and water vapor transport. Thermoresponsive | hydroxypropyl cellulose enables phase transition at a low | temperature to assist the release of collected water via | hydrophobic interactions. With rapid sorption-desorption | kinetics, SHPFs operate 14-24 cycles per day in arid | environments, equivalent to a water yield of 5.8-13.3 L kg-1. | Synthesized via a simple casting method using sustainable raw | materials, SHPFs highlight the potential for low-cost and | scalable atmospheric water harvesting technology to mitigate the | global water crisis. | numtel wrote: | Seems even better than MOF-based approaches [0] | | The linked self-watering soil article [1] makes me wonder if the | material could be used to reverse desertification. | | [0] https://wahainc.com//smithsonian [1] | https://news.utexas.edu/2020/11/02/self-watering-soil-could-... | devit wrote: | Isn't this revolutionary for agricultural use? | | What's the catch? | qayxc wrote: | One catch might be that it hasn't been tested at scale. The | results are extrapolations from lab testing in a controlled | environment. | | There's quite a number of inventions and breakthroughs that | looked great in the lab but never made it to real world | applications. | | Remains to be seen if this approach can work in practice and | at scale and what the real-world implications would be. | UncleEntity wrote: | > What's the catch? | | Wide scale harvesting of water from the air will change the | local climate in unpredictable ways? | LNSY wrote: | TBF, that's basically how our entire economy runs, so | conductr wrote: | At scale, this seems awful for desert ecology. Plants and animals | have evolved to survive on bare minimum water. The tiny morning | dew may be all they get for days/weeks. Now we want to pluck it | out before they can get any. | | It's certainly an interesting technology and achievement but one | that could be easily misused with "unintended consequences"; or | so it seems. | klvino wrote: | That was my first thought as well, heavy use within an existing | desert environment would likely have negative ecological | impact. | | When reading through the article, it has potential application | in areas where a local water supply may not be clean enough to | drink or lacks sufficient water treatment & filtration. | Robotbeat wrote: | Would it? The water will eventually evaporate again. It's not | like the water is burned up to nothing in a fusion reactor. | flockonus wrote: | Could be easily drained down a pipe, the evaporation then | is not as relevant even if some of it does, efficiency | would most likely be acceptable. | buu700 wrote: | On the flip side, could it potentially be a cost-efficient | method of dehumidifying cities/towns/villages for human | comfort? | conductr wrote: | Could even replace desalination since humidity has no salt | and it is generally occurring in a similar area/climate. | sandworm101 wrote: | Humidity theoretically doesn't contain salt, but air | does. Any technology that is harvesting moisture from air | will involve large amounts of air. That air contains dust | and sea salt which can contaminate the process. Setup a | moisture farm to harvest sea breezes and you will have to | address a salt problem. | | In many industries this airborne salt can cause | corrosion. Talk to anyone with a classic car in LA/SF, | both cities with sea breezes. They don't want to leave | them outside too much. That's why the aircraft | "boneyards" are all in the interior, across the mountains | from the sea. | bushbaba wrote: | And dryer air can absorb more water from the nearby | sea...so there might not be a huge impact if placed in | the right spot | colechristensen wrote: | It could also do the opposite, if used correctly. | | Strong Dune vibes. | | You could use these to water plants and set up a cycle where a | significant portion of the water lost through evaporation was | reclaimed and gradually accumulated locally. Dot a landscape | with solar powered stacks of these things feeding appropriately | selected plantations and you might make the desert bloom or | help prevent the spread of deserts. | conductr wrote: | That's an interesting concept I had not considered. I also am | not sure if "we" (collective) would roll it out that way. We | have a track record of consuming resources in the | easiest/cheapest way with minor consideration of the | environment. I don't think we'd even view this as a worthy | investment if all it did was help prevent the spread of | deserts. We still can't even agree if climate change is real | and what we should do about it. | colechristensen wrote: | To rekindle your hope, see | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Green_Wall_(Africa) | conductr wrote: | That's interesting. Reminds me of when I was a kid and | thought I had a completely unique idea to fill the Sahara | with water! It will quickly evaporate and turn to a | rainforest in no time!! | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahara_Sea | dylan604 wrote: | I have little trust in the "we" doing anything like this | correctly, at first. By that, I mean that it will be the | corps to do this as they are the ones with the money to do | it. Corps being corps, they will lean into being themselves | and extract all of the everything they can with little | respect for anything other than their bottom line. | | I don't have faith gov't will do it either. Those opposed | to climate change will argue it is money spent on fake | science. It'll die in congress (for US, | s/congress/localGovUselessBody/ for other places). | | Someone might get popular enough to crowd source fund it | with an NGO type thing, but I'm not holding my breath there | either. | yonaguska wrote: | I hope you'll be more optimistic about government | outcomes, at least as far as opposition is concerned. I | think I'd fall under your bucket of people that are | "opposed to climate change", and I put that in quotes, | because, it's not that I don't believe in climate change | or anything like that. I just don't believe that the | current "green" initiatives are the correct way to go | about solving climate issues. I do however consider | myself an environmentalist. I care more about the non C02 | pollution that we are causing than simply trying to | reduce C02 emissions. | | I think you'd be hard pressed to find organic opposition | to tackling environment issues that aren't related to the | relatively abstract C02 pollution issues. I say organic | because the corporations responsible for pollution will | always find ways to manufacture consent that protects | their own best interests. But, your stereotypical human- | caused climate change denier is likely someone that | hunts, fishes, or resides in a rural area, where | environmental and conservationist concerns are taken very | seriously, regardless of political affiliation. Your | opposition is only going to come from people whose | livelihood is affected by pollution controls. A broader | swathe of people will always oppose addressing C02 | related climate concerns because it affects literally | everyone's bottom line in the form of rising cost of | goods with energy prices going up, and it has abstract | consequences, rather than concrete ones like your local | streams being poisoned, or your well water going bad | because the aquifer has been contaminated. | konschubert wrote: | We could maybe do this with todays technology already - solar | powered desalination plants. | | There are plenty of desert coastlines. | | Not sure how much that would cost per square meter of | forest/agriculture, tbh. | dawsmik wrote: | https://wxguys.ssec.wisc.edu/2018/02/05/water-in- | atmosphere/.... | grishka wrote: | But the water someone plucked out of desert air and drank | doesn't poof out of existence. They'll eventually pee and sweat | it out. | blacksqr wrote: | The amount of water vapor in the air is functionally infinite | with respect to any practical means to extract it. | rtkwe wrote: | Only true on the large scale but locally you'll still create | a depleted zone near the ground down wind of a hypothetical | extraction plant. | jhgb wrote: | > Now we want to pluck it out before they can get any. | | I suspect that if you think that this is going to give us the | ability to suck out all the water out of thousands of cubic | kilometers of desert air any time soon, you're probably being a | little too optimistic. | throwaway894345 wrote: | Deserts are expanding; it seems fine to offset that expanse as | long as you're somewhat careful not to wipe out an entire | ecosystem. | tomcam wrote: | Sort of an interesting point. But don't forget, in the Sahara, | for example, there was less vegetation only 5000 or 6000 years | ago | AnimalMuppet wrote: | _Less_ vegetation 5000 years ago? Are you sure you don 't | mean _more_? | | Wikipedia speaks of an "abrupt desertification" 5400 years | ago. | ttul wrote: | At 20C, the maximum water content in air is 17.3 x 10^-3 | kg/m^3. | | At 15% relative humidity, then, you can extract a maximum of | 0.15 x 17.3g = 2.6g from every 1,000L of air. | | If a person needs 5L/day for survival (I am making this up), | then you'd need to dry out 5000 / 2.6 = 1,923L of air each day | -- that's just short of two cubic meters... | | If the density of people living in an area is 50 per square km, | drying the air out to extract water would deplete the first | meter of the atmosphere by 10%. | function_seven wrote: | 1,923,000L per day, right? So each person would need just | short of 2,000 m3 of air. | TwistedWave wrote: | 1,923m^3, not 1,923L | bufferoverflow wrote: | > If a person needs 5L/day for survival (I am making this | up), then you'd need to dry out 5000 / 2.6 = 1,923L of air | each day | | You made a unit conversion mistake there. It's 1923 cubic | meters, not liters. | npc12345 wrote: | Aren't they equivalent? | tomrod wrote: | liter = 0.001 Cubic meter | | I was curious so I looked it up because I also did not | know, ref: https://www.google.com/search?q=liters+in+cubi | c+meter&oq=lit... | martyvis wrote: | Or to better visualise it, it is a 10x10x10 centimetre | (cm) cube. (Or just a bit less than a 4x4x4 inch cube for | the unmetrical ) | ttul wrote: | Correct. 5,000g / 2.6 g per m^3 = 1,923 m^3 | | Okay let's say the bottom 10m of atmosphere is available | for water making. That means there are 10 million cubic | meters of air per square km, or per 50 people. We will need | to dry out 1,923 x 50 = 96,150 cubic meters of air. But | there is 10,000,000 available, meaning we are only drying | out just under 1% of the air. | conductr wrote: | If those people are living there 5L/day is nowhere near | enough water. They are doing more than just surviving. Using | Arizona as an example, Google tells me 550L/day/person is | actual usage. I know you just put an assumption in but this | is a big gap. | natch wrote: | > researchers used renewable cellulose and a common kitchen | ingredient, konjac gum | | "konjac gum" a common kitchen ingredient, eh? Let me just check | my pantry. Odd, seems I am fresh out. | TrueDuality wrote: | It is commonly used in Vietnamese cooking. The Konjac plant is | kind of like corn. Konjac gum is like corn starch. | burlesona wrote: | They say this material is cheap and can pull " 13 liters in areas | with up to 30% relative humidity" ... | | Now I'm wondering if you could use this stuff like crazy in hot, | humid places and whether (a) it could pull enough water to be | useful for drinking or irrigation, and (b) whether it's possible | to "locally" lower the ambient humidity (like the reverse of the | urban heat island effect). | qayxc wrote: | Getting the water out from the spongy material could pose a | challenge in hot environments. | | According to the paper, they use heating (60degC) to extract | the water. In hot environments, however, ambient temperatures | get quite close to that already (see India at the moment). | | The answer to b) would be a no. The technique doesn't work in | high humidity environments. | cookingrobot wrote: | Are you sure it's the absolute temperature of 60d that | matters, or is the requirement that the sponge is hotter than | the surrounding air? | qayxc wrote: | According to the paper, it's the absolute temperature that | matters. The desorption is optimal at about 60degC to | 70degC, meaning the absorption-desoprition cycle wouldn't | work anymore if the ambient temperature is too high. The | absorption phase took place at 25degC ambient - the | provided data suggests that the desorption would dominate | over the absorption above about 50degC. | | In conclusion, if the environment is 50degC or hotter, the | sponge cannot absorb much water from the atmosphere, | because the kinetics imply that the water would evaporate | too quickly. | bell-cot wrote: | With a somewhat different material, optimized for that | situation, could this be made to work well in hot, humid | environments? | | _If_ so, then I 'm smelling a plausible solar-powered, | cheap, modular "emergency life support" system for people | threatened by extreme web bulb temperature conditions. | russellbeattie wrote: | California's coast is lined with mountains which capture huge | amounts of water from the air as it comes in from the Pacific, | usually as fog. This is why the redwoods are so massive. I have | no idea if this technology works at the scale of Cali's water | deficit, but I've wondered why we haven't lined the peaks of the | mountains with mesh screens already. Seems like free water we're | just ignoring. | Animats wrote: | It's from U. Texas. Texas has the climate in which that | technology should work, and a need for more water. This ought to | be fundable and buildable entirely within Texas. When will the | first plant be built? | silencedogood3 wrote: | silencedogood3 wrote: | ThinkBeat wrote: | In my experience, just in the US the desert air is really dry. | The expression "but it is dry heat", is true. I find hot desert | weather much better than hot weather in humid areas. | | I cant see this scaling. There is not much water to collect to | begin with. | | A person using it sure. A platoon sure. | | But if a city of 2000 people started using I cant see it working | well. | | Further the moisture extracted from the air in that city would | mean even drier air in other places? | mikepurvis wrote: | Agree, yeah. Despite the lead of "more than a third of the | world's population lives in drylands", I would see this as | being much more applicable to transient usage than long term. A | few litres of lukewarm water per day would be perfect for | backcountry camping, or topping up the reservoir in an RV, or | something. But for anywhere even remotely permanent it almost | certainly makes more sense to dig a well. | felipemnoa wrote: | >>Further the moisture extracted from the air in that city | would mean even drier air in other places? | | I imagine moisture from other places would simply travel to his | low humidity place to replace the one taken out. Should be | limitless. | 1minusp wrote: | any experts who can verify the validity of the claim of being low | cost? | jvanderbot wrote: | "In a typical fabrication, LiCl powder (0.32-0.82 g) is added | into 10 mL HPC solution (0-2.0 wt%) forming solution A. The pH of | solution A can be tuned by NaOH or HCl solution. 0.44 g KGM | powder is added into solution A and quickly cast into the petri | dish after vortex. The gelation takes place within 2 min, and sit | in room temperature for 15 min. Then, the film is placed in the | fridge (-4 degC) for 3 h followed by 15 min freeze in liquid | nitrogen. Last, the gel film is ready to use after 12 h freeze- | drying. The final LiCl concentration in SHPFs is characterized by | TGA." | | "Before the water vapor sorption measurement, all samples are | dried in a vacuum oven at 90 degC for at least 2 h. " | | - Fridge cooling | | - liquid nitrogen bath | | - 12h freeze drying | | That doesn't sound low-cost / easy to manufacture. | | https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-30505-2 | | Figure of test rig: | https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-30505-2/figures/4 | | That looks like you capture using a very cold, porus material | (cold, dry sponge that collects dew, essentially), then heat this | "sponge" so the water then travels up to a condenser which causes | it to "dew" and run into a collection chamber. | | It's not magic water-cloth, and I don't think it's a weekend | project, but it's pretty low tech. | | What did I get wrong? I'm sure there's something. | robonerd wrote: | FWIW real "magic water-cloth" actually exists, but only works | some places some of the time: | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fog_collection | | > _The mesh netting is where the condensation of water droplets | appear. It consists of filaments knitted together with small | openings, coated with a chemical to increase condensation. | Shade Cloth is used for mesh structure because it can be | locally sourced in underdeveloped countries. The filaments are | coated to be hydrophilic and hydrophobic, which attracts and | repels water to increase the condensation.[1] This can retrieve | 2% of moisture in the air. Efficiency increases as the size of | the filaments and the holes decrease. The most optimal mesh | netting is made from stainless steel filaments the size of | three to four human hairs and with holes that are twice as big | as the filament. The netting is coated in a chemical that | decreases water droplet 's contact angle hysteresis, which | allows for more small droplets to form. This type of netting | can capture 10% of the moisture in the air.[2]_ | etskinner wrote: | How can something be both hydrophilic and hydrophobic? | GauntletWizard wrote: | Different filaments. You form a mesh that creates | "hotspots" of attraction for water. | WhitneyLand wrote: | $2/kg of material to get 6 liters of water per day. | | But what's the total yield for the $2? In other words single or | multiple use? | | In some areas of the world there's a serious fresh water crises. | Very poor people are left buying expensive bottled water to avoid | disease. | rodolphoarruda wrote: | "Proudly made in Arrakis" | | Fremen Inc. | seanw444 wrote: | So is this essentially just a non-mechanical dehumidifier? How is | there enough water to pluck, when the point of an arid climate is | that it's... well, arid? The air is usually as dry as the ground | in those places. Or so I thought. | UncleEntity wrote: | > The air is usually as dry as the ground in those places. | | The ground isn't all that dry, you can dig a hole, cover it | with plastic and get enough water through evaporation/ | condensation to hopefully not die of dehydration if you get | stranded in the desert. | | Something like this would be very helpful for troops in the | desert since water is heavy and resupply is very critical to | keep up combat readiness. Back when I was a "speed bump in the | sand" they drove us out into choke points in the Saudi desert | to take out a few Iraqi tanks before they overran us in case of | invasion. Assuming we were able to somehow escape contact our | mission was to then try to make it to the coast and steal a | boat through we probably wouldn't have had enough water to | accomplish the second part. Not even exaggerating a little bit, | such is the life of a paratrooper. | NickRandom wrote: | TFA mentions some figures in paragraph 2 | | "The team developed a low-cost gel film made of abundant | materials that can pull water from the air in even the driest | climates. The materials that facilitate this reaction cost a | mere $2 per kilogram, and a single kilogram can produce more | than 6 liters of water per day in areas with less than 15% | relative humidity and 13 liters in areas with up to 30% | relative humidity." | onlyrealcuzzo wrote: | So for about $26 - you could extract enough water to water a | fruit tree indefinitely. | | Doesn't seem like this would be used for agriculture at scale | - but it sure could beat digging a well to get water for a | house. | astroid wrote: | I'm going to copy this comment I saw on slashdot re: this | yesterday that seemed to let some of the air out of the | whole press release: | | "The salt mentioned is not table salt, but lithium | chloride. Lithium chloride - which makes up a half by | weight of the film, and is also in obvious demand for | batteries, is $70/kg or so in bulk." | | I haven't really dug in deep myself, but this is the | comment that deflated me when reading about this yesterday, | so worth looking into at least imo | pengaru wrote: | There's never really 0% humidity in the air, I have a cabin | near Joshua Tree and it rarely goes below 10% there. It tends | to increase substantially at night too, which maybe something | like this can harness then retain through the daytime. | apienx wrote: | Thermal degradation plus oxidative processes make the claimed | "scalable" water-capturing application unfeasible IMHO. The | authors extract the water by heating to 60 degC. I'm surprised | neither the Nat. Comm. editor nor any of the reviewers asked for | a thermo-gravimetric analysis of the material. | lr wrote: | How about in wet, hot environments (or even cold ones), like on a | boat? Watermakers are very expensive and use a lot of | electricity. If one could do this on a boat to generate clean | drinking water, that would be pretty amazing. Especially if one | could use a tube solar oven to heat up the substance. | timerol wrote: | Third paragraph of TFA: | | > The research builds on previous breakthroughs from the team, | including the ability to pull water out of the atmosphere[1] | and the application of that technology to create self-watering | soil[2]. However, these technologies were designed for | relatively high-humidity environments. | | 1: https://news.utexas.edu/2019/03/13/solar-powered-moisture- | ha... | | 2: https://news.utexas.edu/2020/11/02/self-watering-soil- | could-... | jmyeet wrote: | With the very real risks of climate change and rising sea levels | I'm wondering how long it will take before someone decides to | flood the Sahara. | | It's worth noting that sea level rise is kinda complex. | | First, if an iceberg floating on the ocean melts it doesn't raise | sea levels. That's the buoyancy principle of displacing an | object's weight in water. | | Second, a lot of ice (eg Antarctica, Greenland) is on land so the | first point doesn't apply to all ice as some deniers have tried | to claim. | | Third, the sea level rise is partially from ice melt but also | from thermic expansion. | | Fourth, even if you flooded all the below sea level parts of the | world, it would only account for a fraction of the sea level rise | so it's not a permanent solution. | | But several thousand eyars ago the Sahara was arable land. Some | parts of the Sahara were >400 feet below sea level so this would | be a significant body of water. Even as seawater this would | inject a lot of water into the environment through evaporation | and normal water cycles. | | Obviously this would have an impact on the ecosystem and displace | some people but we've displaced far more people for less (eg the | Three Gorges Dam). | | This seems like something we should do, no? | jfoutz wrote: | there's another fun aspect that I think is neat. water is free | to move around a little more than ice (especially ice on land). | The earth is spinning, so the inertia of the water will sort of | fatten the equator and thin the poles. Sea level might go down | a little bit at the poles and go up around the equator. | quaintdev wrote: | That did notmcross my mind. But this depends on whether there | is enough water to cause this phenomenon or it might simply | have no effect. | lainga wrote: | > But several thousand eyars ago the Sahara was arable land. | | I think the desert status of the Sahara has more to do with a | combination of oceanic gyre patterns and the structure of the | Hadley circulation. The Sahara and other latitudes around 30N | are constantly under a high-pressure zone of descending hot dry | air which is part of the northern Hadley cell. The exception is | over India where the Eurasian landmass pulls the ITCZ | (ascending side of the Hadley cell) way far North and causses | the monsoons. | | I don't think flooding the Sahara would change its aridity any | more than the Arabian peninsula, despite being surrounded by | water, is still a desert away from the immediate coastline. | It's a matter of air moisture, not sea or ground moisture. You | could try irrigation, though. The Libyans abortively tried that | under Gaddhafi. | lordofgibbons wrote: | I'm not an expert in any of this but from what I know, | portions of the Arabian peninsula sure do get plenty of rain | for agriculture from the red sea in the western part. | | >don't think flooding the Sahara would change its aridity any | more than the Arabian peninsula | | There's something to be said about the lake effect. It | certainly happens in U.S and Canada where areas just east of | the Great Lakes get much more precipitation than other parts | sumtechguy wrote: | You may want to look into what the permaculture people are | doing. That is something that can be done today and has worked | many times. Many are seeing really good results. The issue for | that area is most of the vegetation was clearcut for firewood. | Basically with permaculture they try to put the system back to | the way it was before it was clearcut. | wklauss wrote: | > Obviously this would have an impact on the ecosystem | | Anticipating the impact is probably a fool's errand, since | climate is extremely complex and changes on one part of the | world affect others. It's not just about displacing people in | the area, you risk altering the patterns that bring rain to | places as far as Germany or help grow crops in Brazil. Sahara | sand plumes play a role in replenishing phosphates in the | Amazon, for example. Even blanketing some parts with solar | panels will probably alter global weather patterns | significantly. | bushbaba wrote: | We'd need to flood it with salt water. Best example as to why | this shouldn't be done is the California Salton Sea ecological | disaster. | henearkr wrote: | What if we do not flood it, but instead make circulate a lot | of salt water in open-roofed canals (but with leak-proof | floor and walls) crisscrossing the desert? | | Then the humidity would trigger rains and help grow a | vegetation, and the salt residues would remain inside the | canals. | | Then at some point the vegetation would self-maintain the | necessary humidity level. | PeterisP wrote: | > Then the humidity would trigger rains | | Not necessarily, given the weather conditions there it's | quite plausible that all the evaporation would form clouds | which would only rain _elsewhere_ and not in that desert. | filoeleven wrote: | There are lots of ideas around for desert greening; see the | linked article for a list. Canals are unlikely to work | well, but seawater farming is kind of close to your | proposal. It requires greenhouses to be built though, so I | don't know how well it scales. | | Years ago I read about a system that seemed successful. | Ridges were built up at the desert's edge, and salt- | tolerant trees and shrubs were planted on hem to keep the | ground stable. This change in microclimate promoted more | greening in the valleys between, which increased overall | moisture levels. Once this is established, more ridges can | be constructed further out to repeat the process. It's not | an easy thing to search the web for, and I don't recall how | long it takes for one ridge to be productive, but I recall | thinking it was shorter than I expected (still on the order | of years, of course). | | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desert_greening | 3-cheese-sundae wrote: | Canals would silt up very fast. Also, I don't know about | leak-proof water canals when humanity can't seem to make | leak-proof sealed oil pipelines, and that's with | significant financial incentive to do so. | tharkun__ wrote: | Interesting, I had to read up on that. Could you elaborate | how that is related to that though and what makes it a bad | idea in particular? | | From what I just read up on, the Salton Sea over the | millennia would periodically flood, become a small lake or | dry out to desert levels. The change that occurred was that | humanity changed the rhythm of this artificially to a 'flood | it' state for a prolonged period of time. | | They are now complaining that when they changed it to the | 'small lake' state again, well, shrinking lakes create a | certain situation. | | The _problem_ I do see is really the way the 'flood' state | was created and other usages of the lake. Runoff from | agriculture with way too much fertilizer, waste dumping etc. | and now they wonder why the dust is toxic and stinks. | | How would that apply to flooding the Sahara w/ sea water | perpetually? | lizknope wrote: | Some people had ideas to flood the Qattara Depression in | northwest Egypt. | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qattara_Depression_Project | | It would have provided hydroelectric power and as the water | evaporated and formed clouds it may have increased rainfall. | | The United States wanted to use nuclear bombs to excavate the | channel to the Mediterranean Sea. | | Consequently, use of nuclear explosives to excavate the canal | was another proposal by Bassler. This plan called for the | detonation in boreholes of 213 nuclear devices, each yielding | 1.5 megatons (i.e. 100 times that of the atomic bomb used | against Hiroshima). This fit within the Atoms for Peace program | proposed by President Dwight Eisenhower in 1953. Evacuation | plans cited numbers of at least 25,000 evacuees. | | Project Plowshare was pretty crazy. Use nuclear bombs for | excavation. There were ideas to create artificial harbors by | using a bombs. | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Plowshare | sandworm101 wrote: | >> Second, a lot of ice (eg Antarctica, Greenland) is on land | so the first point doesn't apply to all ice as some deniers | have tried to claim. | | But what about ice that is 'on land' but also below sea level? | Iirc roughly half of Antarctica's glacier ice is sitting dry | ground that is below sea level. Whether melting that ice will | raise or lower sea levels is more complicated, with variables | for amounts above/below various points. | tomrod wrote: | After deglaciation, land will also rebound over the long | term, further displacing volume the water/ice occupies. | sandworm101 wrote: | Earth is a finite volume. So if the land rebounds in one | area, does it not have to subside elsewhere? | tomrod wrote: | It's more decompression, to my understanding | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-glacial_rebound | CapricornNoble wrote: | How do I use this to make Dune-style stillsuits? Maybe the gel is | attached to a flagpole on your back (large surface area with | airflow is what I'm thinking here), like medieval samurai, and | your body's movement generates the heat that activates the | thermo-responsive cellulose? The water needs to then collect in a | built-in hydration bladder (aka Camelbak). | dwighttk wrote: | Need something to cool off the human inside the stillsuit | dubswithus wrote: | After the water is in the gel, how does one get it out? | | Edit: | | > Another designed component, thermo-responsive cellulose with | hydrophobic (resistant to water) interaction when heated, helps | release the collected water immediately so that overall energy | input to produce water is minimized. | robinsoh wrote: | "The captured water in the SHPF can be released by >70% within | 10 min through mild heating at 60 degC under a wide range of RH | (Fig. 3b and Supplementary Fig. 15). This mild heating | temperature is realized by introducing the hydrophilic | thermoresponsive HPC with optimized molecular weight, | concentration, and pH of the initial precursor (Supplementary | Figs. 9-14 and Supplementary Table 2)42" | samstave wrote: | SHPF == Shit Hits the Proverbial FAN. | | Would this be viable in a Window Casing/Screen? system where-by | you have, instead of a "screen" you have this mesh - then with a | window moulding application that funnels the water to either an | "ITS ALL PIPES" type of reclaimation..... | | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s09pfBEJYHc | mise_en_place wrote: | I've been hearing about so-called hydropanels too. Maybe they | work similarly? It looked like junk science when I initially saw | one producer of these, called Source Global. It seems to be a | real thing, however. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2022-05-26 23:00 UTC)