[HN Gopher] Solar-powered desalination system requires no extra ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Solar-powered desalination system requires no extra batteries
        
       Author : bentocorp
       Score  : 109 points
       Date   : 2024-11-17 22:06 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (news.mit.edu)
 (TXT) w3m dump (news.mit.edu)
        
       | JCharante wrote:
       | This seems.. simple?
        
         | WJW wrote:
         | Many useful things are simple. Not all of them exist yet.
        
         | jvanderbot wrote:
         | Yeah if the main insight is "you can run electric dialysis
         | desalination on variable input power" they sure did a lot of
         | dressing it up.
        
           | devilbunny wrote:
           | Desalination that can start and stop, increase or decrease
           | activity, without messing anything up is the secret sauce
           | here.
           | 
           | Not going to do that with reverse osmosis systems.
           | 
           | That said, with merely brackish input water, I'm wondering
           | how many problems this really solves. Drinking water, sure,
           | but you have to get rid of the concentrated brine at the end
           | and it's still groundwater that can be overdrawn.
           | 
           | However, if v 2.0 can effectively desalinate ocean water, it
           | would be huge for islands and coastal areas.
        
           | marcosdumay wrote:
           | The main insight is "we've spent the last years tuning a
           | dialysis controller to work well on variable input power".
           | 
           | I imagine the paper has the actual parameters, so you can
           | build upon their work.
        
         | netbioserror wrote:
         | While it's an odd example for this place, I can bring up self-
         | loading firearms (semi-automatic or automatic in today's terms)
         | as a demonstration. Modern self-loading firearms are VASTLY
         | simpler than the early attempts a century ago. They're an
         | excellent example of engineering evolving under economic
         | pressures.
         | 
         | Late 19th and early 20th century attempts at self-loading
         | firearms were often ridiculous in their concepts; huge
         | component counts, lots of tiny mechanisms, strange attempts at
         | extracting recoil and gas energy, everything under the sun. The
         | mechanisms engineers were crafting in literal garage workshops
         | are stunning in their variety and staggering in their watch-
         | like complexity. Some were genuine works of art.
         | 
         | Then the M1 Garand, the SVT-40, and afterwards the AK (under
         | the economic pressures of WW2) demonstrated how much room there
         | was to simplify and give various components double duties. Now,
         | most modern automatic weapons derive from those designs, and
         | the improvements since have been in the materials engineering:
         | Stronger, lighter, thinner, and generally reducing the amount
         | of steel to the minimum necessary.
        
           | aidenn0 wrote:
           | Off topic, but it seems like self-loading pistols took a
           | weird detour; at least for cartridges too powerful for
           | blowback operation. There are all sorts of weird delayed-
           | blowback systems that were popular between WW2 and 1980-ish,
           | and now 9mm and larger seems to almost exclusively use a
           | 1911-style short-recoil system.
        
             | netbioserror wrote:
             | It's simple, reliable, and quite necessary. Pistol
             | chamberings feature heavy bullets in straight-walled, short
             | cases. Blowback bolts are always extremely heavy to
             | compensate for those attributes. Beretta and FN are famous
             | for resisting Browning short-recoil for alternatives like
             | rotating barrels and locking blocks. But they pay for those
             | tradeoffs: Heat buildup, wider slides/frames, extra
             | complexity, and more. Browning short recoil is the best of
             | all worlds. Replacing rotating links with simple cam cuts
             | sealed the deal.
        
               | aidenn0 wrote:
               | I actually think the gas-delayed blowback in the HK P7
               | hits "simple and reliable" as well, but it has the huge
               | downside of putting very hot gasses very close to where
               | you handle the gun.
        
           | MisterTea wrote:
           | The AK copied the STG-44 Sturmgewehr (literally "assault
           | rifle, this is where the design and name comes from) which
           | was revolutionary in design and abilities. Prior to the
           | assault rifle solders weapons were either accurate long range
           | rifles with high power cartridges or close range inaccurate
           | sub-machine guns firing low power pistol cartridges. Military
           | researchers realized that most solders were average people
           | and could not make full use of the high power and accuracy.
           | The solution was an intermediate cartridge that combines the
           | longer range and accuracy of the rifle cartridge with the
           | smaller profile and lower recoil of a sub machine gun. Now
           | you have a weapon that can hit at a distance or go auto and
           | fight close quarters. Huge advancement and advantage for the
           | solders wielding such weapons. Kalashnikov was directly
           | inspired by these abilities and developed the AK in response.
           | Just about every modern "Assault rifle" is descended from the
           | STG-44, not the AK.
        
       | bastloing wrote:
       | That's great news! Now if they can solve the same problem with
       | sea water, California, Arizona and Nevada can reduce their
       | reliance on the Colorado river and grow more crops. It is only a
       | matter of time before it's solved. Great work, MIT!
        
         | ttyprintk wrote:
         | It's a great application, but electrodialysis on seawater takes
         | more power---so much that distillation is competitive. The use-
         | case chosen is remote freshwater wells which suffer from
         | naturally-occurring arsenic. I can only think of a few others
         | which can't have heavy batteries.
        
           | ttyprintk wrote:
           | Here's a state-of-the-art portable prototype with
           | pretreatment: 0.3 l/h at 20W:
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31243621
        
           | terramars wrote:
           | This isn't really accurate, they're targeting industrial
           | wastewater yes but they are working with and have tested
           | brackish water up to several thousand TDS. They had a working
           | EDR system for drinking water installed in Gaza until
           | relatively recently and several in India as well. I'm also
           | skeptical they can make it work with seawater, but it
           | absolutely works with undrinkable brackish water in many
           | other cases too.
        
         | fred_is_fred wrote:
         | Even if you could do this you'd have to pump the water back
         | uphill to NV and AZ.
        
           | dylan604 wrote:
           | Just install some additional solar powered pumps along the
           | way
        
             | fred_is_fred wrote:
             | The amount of energy needed to pump enough water for ag
             | uphill is insane. Well beyond "just" throwing some solar
             | panels out there. If it was that easy we'd pump Mississippi
             | water into west Texas (which there was a plan to do in the
             | 60s with nuke plants, but I cannot find the name right
             | now).
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | i left off the /s as to me anytime someone starts a
               | comment off with "just ____" is usually a farcical idea.
               | like just remove the salt from water and boom, done.
        
               | fred_is_fred wrote:
               | Hah! It can be a very HN comment to "just" something
               | especially around physical engineering.
        
           | aidenn0 wrote:
           | Could you save on pumping energy by sending the water to
           | underground aquifers rather than the surface?
        
           | bastloing wrote:
           | Ok, so it's two problems to solve. Get on it MIT!
        
           | itscrush wrote:
           | No, start with modifying the Colorado River Compact and other
           | underlying agreements to allow more upstream retention than
           | is currently allotted.
        
         | dylan604 wrote:
         | Getting water to heat/boil is much less impressive than coming
         | up with a solve for the left over salt/minerals. Solve that,
         | then I'll join in the "Great work"
        
           | SoftTalker wrote:
           | > the left over salt/minerals
           | 
           | There is a commercial market for salt -- and for stuff like
           | treating roads in the winter it doesn't have to be very
           | clean.
           | 
           | Otherwise, disolve it into the local waste water stream and
           | discharge it back into the ocean.
        
             | dylan604 wrote:
             | If this was the case, then why is the briny residue left
             | after desalination always the thing that gets pointed back
             | to being a big negative of desalination?
             | 
             | Either it's not as big of deal as people suggest, you are
             | wildly underplaying it, or somewhere in between. I've never
             | felt that the argument against being the cost to heat the
             | water was a strong one since salt water pretty much means a
             | coastline which tends to have steady wind and sun. The
             | biggest hang up has typically been putting that brine back
             | into the ocean.
        
       | surajrmal wrote:
       | Reminds me of cloud based batch jobs. We must have many more
       | opportunistic workloads similar to this one.
        
       | black_puppydog wrote:
       | https://www.nature.com/articles/s44221-024-00314-6
        
       | voidUpdate wrote:
       | This sounds a lot like the concept of a solar powered
       | distiller... As in, heating a container of water with the sun,
       | evaporating the water and then cooling it down to convert it into
       | fresh water...
        
         | black6 wrote:
         | But with extra steps and points of failure.
        
           | EricE wrote:
           | I think you are missing the key point: it takes a fraction of
           | the energy vs. the solar desalinization you are referring to.
        
         | marcosdumay wrote:
         | It's not. It's an electrodialysis desalinator. I have no idea
         | what in the article gave you the idea it was thermal.
        
           | yogurtboy wrote:
           | I think their thought process was "It uses the sun to
           | desalinate water, so it must be the same"
        
       | elzbardico wrote:
       | Unlke some comments are implying, this is not a solar distiller
       | with "additional steps". It still uses far less energy than
       | distillation as it doesn't involve phase changes.
       | 
       | It uses Electrodialysis, which is a mass separation process in
       | which electrically charged membranes and an electrical potential
       | difference are used to separate ionic species from an aqueous
       | solution and other uncharged components.
        
         | SoftTalker wrote:
         | Can't a lot of the phase change energy in distillation be
         | recovered by using incoming water to cool/condense the
         | distilled water vapor?
        
           | elzbardico wrote:
           | It would improve it a bit, but not enought to compete in
           | terms of energy usage with dialysis or reverse-osmosis.
           | 
           | Reverse-osmosis is absurdly efficient compared to
           | distillation: a single 1X1 meter square solar panel can
           | potentially generate 200 liters of fresh water per day.
        
       | terramars wrote:
       | This is a questionable way to present what's an excellent project
       | and hopefully soon to be commercialized technology. The big deal
       | here is it's a presumably installation ready application of EDR
       | for desalination instead of RO which most systems use. This is a
       | big deal because the membranes use electricity instead of
       | pressure as the filter, which means everything can run at low,
       | normal plumbing, pressures instead of the crazy high pressure RO
       | stuff. For seawater it's borderline whether or not it will match
       | RO for performance, but for lower salinity groundwater and
       | industrial wastewater, it should be significantly higher
       | performance for the same power as well as lower maintenance and
       | capex.
       | 
       | The no batteries thing is basically irrelevant to the innovation,
       | and in fact Genius Water already offers no battery RO systems,
       | also with questionable benefit (as well as being difficult to
       | work with).
       | 
       | I run a solar and water focused EPC in East Africa and will
       | hopefully be working with these guys in the future when they're
       | off the ground with a commercial system. The potential is
       | extremely high, particularly if the maintenance overhead and
       | operational complexity can come down in practice.
        
         | hedora wrote:
         | Yeah; the solar part is really questionable. In an installation
         | without batteries, they'd need an additional large tank to
         | store excess daytime output.
         | 
         | Without such a tank, they'd need to somehow power the thing at
         | night, which means a big battery, just like RO.
         | 
         | Also, the article suggests the power input needs to be steady
         | and they use a computer to run it at higher rates when the
         | battery would be charging.
         | 
         | Assuming there is a small battery or power grid (as both
         | systems require), you could oversize an RO system and then
         | change its duty cycle to keep the batteries at (say) 80% to
         | prevent the solar production from curtailing. Round-tripping
         | electricity through our home battery loses about 20%.
         | 
         | So, the "advantage" boils down to two questions that the
         | article doesn't answer: (1) what are the relative energy
         | efficiencies of this system (in theory) vs RO? If the new
         | system is 20% worse, RO wins, regardless of this optimization
         | (2) what is the relative equipment cost vs. max throughput?
         | (Since both setups assume oversizing to get better solar
         | utilization).
         | 
         | I'd also like to know if the new system requires plastic, since
         | the RO membrane probably leaches all sorts of nasties into its
         | output.
         | 
         | I do like the fact that they are focusing on brackish water. We
         | have this problem even in the coastal US (in the form of water
         | softener output), and I'm sure they could sell a premium
         | alternative to RO as a way to get scaling advantages on the
         | manufacturing of the equipment.
        
           | cryptonector wrote:
           | Tanks are fairly cheap, and you'll need one anyways. But
           | yeah, the solar angle is not what's interesting here. It's
           | the electrodialysis.
        
         | ricksunny wrote:
         | It sounds lime an MPPT on the supply side, with an ideal load-
         | point tracking on the demand side. My understanding is that
         | there are controllers (including for solar water pumping in the
         | East Africa market) that pursue this. The concept applies more
         | generally to systems where the load presented is configurable
         | by system plant parameters, such as flow-rate & height.
        
       | computergert wrote:
       | I wonder what this means for the calculations outlined here:
       | https://www.sustainabilitybynumbers.com/p/how-much-energy-do...
        
         | asah wrote:
         | great article but it tries to (ahem) separate drinking water
         | from other uses, which doesn't seem practical:
         | 
         | - in the poorest places, they can't afford desal. - in non-
         | poorest places, most water is delivered by unified piping
         | systems due to cost and labor efficiency. Schlepping water in
         | bottles and buckets is nuts, though I can see it turning into
         | the next weird fad in exercise or robotics.
        
       | cryptonector wrote:
       | > "The majority of the population actually lives far enough from
       | the coast, that seawater desalination could never reach them.
       | They consequently rely heavily on groundwater, especially in
       | remote, low-income regions. And unfortunately, this groundwater
       | is becoming more and more saline due to climate change," says
       | Jonathan Bessette, MIT PhD student in mechanical engineering.
       | "This technology could bring sustainable, affordable clean water
       | to underreached places around the world."
       | 
       | Uh, that's just going to increase the rate of acquifer depletion.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-11-18 23:02 UTC)