Mega Scale Desalination

[aa2]

One thing I would like to see is the aquifers in the world refilled. Modern desalination technology has come an amazingly far way. So far, that many countries are constructing big new desalination plants right now. Mainly in the middle east, but also starting in China and elsewhere.

With the new reverse osmosis technology it only takes 4kwh to create 1 cubic meter of water. The main energy actually seems to be pumping the water to where you want it. So you can put the plants near the ocean, then have pipelines going to the big aquifers. Those aquifers are getting drained, or are already drained in a lot of the world. Same story with lakes that are shrinking in size from over use of the water.

Then of course clean pure water for people to use in cities. Its a really big issue in a lot of the world. Some places can cut back use per person, while others can't. And cutting back isn't the panacea some make it out to be. For example you could take one shower a week, but that is not sanitary imo, and you would get other problems.

[Mumbles]

One thing I would like to see is the aquifers in the world refilled...

...So you can put the plants near the ocean, then have pipelines going to the big aquifers.

...Then of course clean pure water for people to use in cities.

I would offer that there is no profit in dumping reverse-osmosis produced clean water into the aquifers. No one would pay for it. (Yes, I will admit it is getting cheaper, and if we get IEC fusion electricity down in price, that could make it affordable.) But the issue is who is going to pay for it?

Unless you try to force it by law, and the proposal, IMO, would face ridicule to any sponsoring politician - "So Senator, you mean to tell me that we are going to pay taxes to produce clean water from the ocean, which you are going to just dump into the ground?"... No one wants to see their taxes thrown away quite so blatantly.

On the other hand, your last comment about direct selling of the reverse-osmosis produced potable water to the cities and to the current users of water from the aquifers will result in a natural re-filling of those aquifers. Stop people from draining the groundwater because what you have to sell is cheaper/cleaner/better/greener/in some way superior, and then you have an ECONOMIC reason that would result in the aquifers refilling.

My two cents
Be Safe
Mumbles

[JohnP]

I'm no geologist but I'd think that if you're in an area that's prone to sinkholes, or already has had them, that would be an argument in favor of pumping up the aquifer.

[aa2]

I would offer that there is no profit in dumping reverse-osmosis produced clean water into the aquifers. No one would pay for it. (Yes, I will admit it is getting cheaper, and if we get IEC fusion electricity down in price, that could make it affordable.) But the issue is who is going to pay for it?

Unless you try to force it by law, and the proposal, IMO, would face ridicule to any sponsoring politician - "So Senator, you mean to tell me that we are going to pay taxes to produce clean water from the ocean, which you are going to just dump into the ground?"... No one wants to see their taxes thrown away quite so blatantly.

Good points.. imo the profit motive is sometimes not aligned well with the general welfare. Probably the biggest thing for the aquifers is the farmers who use them. Farmers use most of the water in America. A small rate charge on water is one option, although that is easier said then implemented. Another is supporting your homegrown industry. Free abundant water may be a big competitive advantage for a state's farming industry. We don't mind building roads, ports and railways and subsidising college education to help local industry.

I'm skeptical of heavily participatory democracy like we have now. Its probably not a coincidence that most of the desalination being built is in non-democratic nations. There has been a lot of protests and anger about the plants being built or proposed in Australia for example.

[aa2]

I'm no geologist but I'd think that if you're in an area that's prone to sinkholes, or already has had them, that would be an argument in favor of pumping up the aquifer.

Good point just because someplace was an aquifer before we got there, doesn't mean its automatically a good idea to refill it:).

The lakes I think everyone would agree if we could refill them we should. Especially lakes at risk of dying.

[Roger]

No profit to be made saving the human race...

[scareduck]

Orange County, CA is doing exactly this with a new system that takes raw sewage, pushes it through reverse-osmosis filters, and recharges local aquifers:

http://www.ocregister.com/sciencetech/w ... -treatment

The system is scheduled to go online mid-December.

[aa2]

Wow great article scareduck... I had not heard of this plant, they are doing exactly what I was talking about!

70 million gallons a day is .26 million cubic meters a day I believe. Or about 80 million cubic meters a year. Thats a lot of water.. the new plants in the world tend to be around 100 million cubic meters a year. Although I guess they have more work to do, going from seawater. The cost of 480 million seems an incredibly good deal to me.

I like how they seem to have just went and built it. Too often I see infrastructure public companies trying to get consensus which is never going to happen, then having the issue turn into a big issue and get stopped. I'd just go ahead and build, telling as few people as possible.

[Mumbles]

Orange County, CA is doing exactly this with a new system that takes raw sewage, pushes it through reverse-osmosis filters, and recharges local aquifers...

And so reality intrudes into my ASSumptions... Go figure.

That was a good article. I did note that the electrical power requirements are SIGNIFICANT. In fact, from the article:

"Our operating cost – roughly half of it is power," Shivaji Deshmukh, GWR system program manager.

The article goes on to discuss the costs of the alternatives - and how the cost of this water is less than importing from the regional water wholesaler.

So that is where the economic reality is - there is a profit for them to do this...

Very interesting none-the-less. And since half their cost is power, fusion-produced electricity - assumeably (I already got in trouble with this one!) at a much reduced price, would make this even more affordable...

Thanks for the idea discussion, and for the article.

Be Safe
Mumbles

[aa2]

Its interesting that half the cost is power. I've been predicting for some time that a growing percentage of the cost of whatever we use is going to be electricity.

A lot of thinkers today want to raise the price of electricity to discourage consumption. Sometimes quite dramatically. One problem they don't account for is industry will relocate to where energy is cheap if its a big part of their budget. Then the people will have to follow to go where the jobs and opportunity are.

[aa2]

Btw another mega scale desalination possibility with very cheap energy is to try to grow crops in the desert. If you look at Morocco-Egypt, and the Saudi Arabia area.. that is immense amounts of land. But the people only live in small parts of it, like along the Nile River.

On a really big scale like that I bet the pumping of the water would take even more energy then the desalination. At least on the coasts you could put in some polywell fusion plants, and gigantic complexes that went on for miles of the latest reverse osmosis plants. I prefer the plants a few miles back from the ocean, to keep the ocean property. Then pipe the water to inland areas. You can have massive farms. They make them now in circles, like a mile across. And they have those rolling water sprinklers that go around the radius. You can search and see some of the ariel pictures of them.

Besides farming the peoples of those sand covered nations could spread out more. And create oasises all over the place in their nation.

[aa2]

Subtropical Desert Distribution






Saudi irrigation