Water Supply: Ocean

[Throckmorton]

Originally posted by: daveymark

Originally posted by: TwiceOver
Yeah its expensive. Also it leaves a concentrated very salty waste water product.

just dump it in the ocean

That's very destructive to the aquatic organisms. Then you'll have fishermen not catching fish, shrimpers not catching shrimp...

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: Throckmorton

Originally posted by: daveymark

Originally posted by: TwiceOver
Yeah its expensive. Also it leaves a concentrated very salty waste water product.

just dump it in the ocean

That's very destructive to the aquatic organisms. Then you'll have fishermen not catching fish, shrimpers not catching shrimp...

Depends on how you do it. If you're spreading it over a wide enough area it shouldn't matter much.

 

[EarthwormJim]

Originally posted by: jagec

Originally posted by: Throckmorton

Originally posted by: daveymark

Originally posted by: TwiceOver
Yeah its expensive. Also it leaves a concentrated very salty waste water product.

just dump it in the ocean

That's very destructive to the aquatic organisms. Then you'll have fishermen not catching fish, shrimpers not catching shrimp...

Depends on how you do it. If you're spreading it over a wide enough area it shouldn't matter much.

Ok so add that to the cost of producing the water, making it even less economically feasible.

 

[NoShangriLa]

Seawater Desalination in California -- California Coastal Commission

Desalination cost isn't cost effective and energy consumption/pollution also greatly increase from traditional method.

 

[IronWing]

Originally posted by: FoBoT
we don't even have an ocean here in missouri

Back in the day, you did. Ah, the good ole days.

 

[Megatomic]

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo
Kill Devil Hills (NC) Reverse Osmosis Desalination Water Plant

from 1999:

. . . major operating cost: the electricity used to generate the reverse osmosis (RO) pressure needed to push the feedwater through the RO membranes -- 2.981 kilowatt hours per thousand gallons (ptg) with cost of $0.134 ptg and the electrical cost is 30.5% of the total cost to produce the water...

Let's say that is around $.50 per 1000 gallons

Best info I can find on amortized capital costs (from 2003)

...future plants will be built at an average rate of $3.30 per 1,000 gallons...

From my short research the lifespan of the RO plants is shorter than that of a conventional water treatment plant and maintenance costs are higher - need to backwash the membranes frequently.

From direct seawater, recovery rates are around 40-45%; i.e., for every 100 gallons of seawater you get 40-45 gallons of potable drinking water.

The Kill Devil Hills plant uses brackish seawater and they claimed a 75% recovery rate.

Our ZLDS (zero liquid discharge system) has 2 RO's in it, and to purify lake water takes alot of maintenance. I can't begin to imagine how much of a mess our water plant would be to operate and maintain if our raw water source were saline. :shocked:

 

[biggestmuff]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: Aimster
Anyone know if this is being done or why it can't be done?
Is there not a way to purify the ocean water?

Was reading about the water shortage in parts of the U.S and was wondering if we can't just use the ocean's water and purify it and use it for drinking water. The only thing I could think of is that it is costly.

Please shed some light water experts.

You can't be serious. There's no way that you thought about this for more than a minute before posting, otherwise you would've found your answer anywhere you looked.

Typical ATOT. He's just padding his post count.

It takes more time and energy creating a new forum thread than searching google.

 

[Eeezee]

Originally posted by: Aimster
Anyone know if this is being done or why it can't be done?
Is there not a way to purify the ocean water?

Was reading about the water shortage in parts of the U.S and was wondering if we can't just use the ocean's water and purify it and use it for drinking water. The only thing I could think of is that it is costly.

Please shed some light water experts.

The UK is actually in the process of starting a huge program to use ocean water as drinking water.

You can easily turn ocean water into drinking water, it just takes a lot of money. Rather, it takes a lot of power. I'm surprised we haven't invested more into solar power for this very reason; hook them up directly to desalinization plants and watch any water crisis evaporate (on the coasts).

Not sure why people are talking about piping in water. Build canals. They were invented over 6000 years ago. It's not a difficult or expensive concept.

 

[Eeezee]

Originally posted by: FoBoT
we don't even have an ocean here in missouri

That's because your state sucks.

 

[Eeezee]

Originally posted by: bunnyfubbles

Originally posted by: MegaVovaN
If we had nuclear fusion (safe/cheap reaction like on the Sun): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fusion
, then we would have pretty much free energy and this would have been possible.

Without regular nuclear fusion plants, energy costs are too high.

fixed?

I'd argue that fusion isn't necessary, fission is enough but with all the nuclearphobia that has plagued the U.S. for past few decades, getting new fission plants up and running any time soon is just about as optimistic as getting a profitable fusion reactor up and running within the next 50 years.

If we had gone full tilt nuclear (at least on the coasts) we could definitely do it and our only major worries then would most likely be how to deal with the brine (very salty sludge-like byproduct) pollution.

Sadly, it would also be "WTF do we do with all of this nuclear waste?" I can't support full tilt nuclear for that reason alone. More nuclear fission plants would be great though, since we keep talking about an energy crisis.

 

[IEC]

Think of how long it takes to boil a pot of water and how much energy it takes. Multiply by x10000000.

 

[Turin39789]

Originally posted by: Eeezee

Originally posted by: bunnyfubbles

Originally posted by: MegaVovaN
If we had nuclear fusion (safe/cheap reaction like on the Sun): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fusion
, then we would have pretty much free energy and this would have been possible.

Without regular nuclear fusion plants, energy costs are too high.

fixed?

I'd argue that fusion isn't necessary, fission is enough but with all the nuclearphobia that has plagued the U.S. for past few decades, getting new fission plants up and running any time soon is just about as optimistic as getting a profitable fusion reactor up and running within the next 50 years.

If we had gone full tilt nuclear (at least on the coasts) we could definitely do it and our only major worries then would most likely be how to deal with the brine (very salty sludge-like byproduct) pollution.

Sadly, it would also be "WTF do we do with all of this nuclear waste?" I can't support full tilt nuclear for that reason alone. More nuclear fission plants would be great though, since we keep talking about an energy crisis.

Shoot it at teh suns

 

[ATLien247]

I would think that desalinization of ocean waters would only become mainstream when all other fresh water supplies have been exhausted globally. At that point, I don't think cost would be an issue.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: ATLien247
I would think that desalinization of ocean waters would only become mainstream when all other fresh water supplies have been exhausted globally. At that point, I don't think cost would be an issue.

Like most technology and sciences, just about anything can be done if you dump enough money and brain power on the issue. This will happen once there is enough demand just like all natural resources.

 

[KMc]

Originally posted by: necine
desalinization... it's very expensive.

This is already being done every day all across the world and it costs nothing.

 

[buck]

Originally posted by: biggestmuff

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: Aimster
Anyone know if this is being done or why it can't be done?
Is there not a way to purify the ocean water?

Was reading about the water shortage in parts of the U.S and was wondering if we can't just use the ocean's water and purify it and use it for drinking water. The only thing I could think of is that it is costly.

Please shed some light water experts.

You can't be serious. There's no way that you thought about this for more than a minute before posting, otherwise you would've found your answer anywhere you looked.

Typical ATOT. He's just padding his post count.

It takes more time and energy creating a new forum thread than searching google.

Alot of people look forward to the day when someone throws a brick at aimster.

 

[LS20]

whats funny, remove the profit margin from bottled water, and desalinization would cost less than per volume than your fancy dasani/aquafina/voss/fiji

 

[ahurtt]

I'd think it would almost be more cost effective and easier to trap condensation from clouds.

1) It's "clean." You don't have to desalinate it. Just treat it like normal.
2) It's up. Way up. It naturally wants to flow down. You don't have to pump it from sea level to cities further inland that are above sea level. You can trap it on top of mountains and let it flow down naturally.

The only question is can you really trap enough condensation from clouds to make a significant dent in the water deficit for a major metropolitan area? And then of course there are those nasty clear sunny blue sky days that happen from time to time.

 

[Casawi]

If it comes down to it, I am sure they'll do it ior find cheaper ways to do it.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: Aimster

Was reading about the water shortage in parts of the U.S and was wondering if we can't just use the ocean's water and purify it and use it for drinking water. The only thing I could think of is that it is costly.

In many areas, the water supply problem si caused by overbuilding. Buildings, parking lots, roads etc prevent rainwater from soaking into the aquafer. Instead it because runoff and is basically routed into the ocean eventually. This is a significant part of Atlanta's problem, for example.

Yes, desalination plants exist already. But I think a better solution is use of sisterns to capture the rain water that would otherwise just run-off.

Fern

 

[GoatMonkey]

Originally posted by: Tobolo
Yes very expensive and then you also have to figure out how to get the water inland. For instance, Georgia needs water in the northern portion of the state. The cost to build a pipeline would be huge and you also have to figure how to get the water to flow up aprox 900ft (above see level near atlanta).

So, anyway, there are many reasons why.

Since Coca-Cola is in Atlanta, we could have them move the bottling for Dasani over to the coast. That way instead of bottling regular tap water they could bottle the desalinated ocean water, leaving a lot left over for other uses in Atlanta. Of course, they would have to change the name to "Desalti".

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: necine
desalinization... it's very expensive.

QFT, this had to be a trolling post if not I am going to stab myself.

 

[Gooberlx2]

Originally posted by: daveymark

Originally posted by: TwiceOver
Yeah its expensive. Also it leaves a concentrated very salty waste water product.

just dump it in the ocean

You can't do that because then it over-salinates that area where you're dumping and kills everything.

 

[ForumMaster]

cause it's very expensive. although back in the day when the US government was trying to persuade Israel to stop pursing nuclear weapons, they offered about $60 million to build a nuclear power desalinization plant. the idea was rejected. nevertheless, at least $60 million for the plant and that doesn't include the cost of bringing the water to the plant and connecting it to the water system.

in other words, it's very very expensive.

 

[Eeezee]

Originally posted by: GoatMonkey

Originally posted by: Tobolo
Yes very expensive and then you also have to figure out how to get the water inland. For instance, Georgia needs water in the northern portion of the state. The cost to build a pipeline would be huge and you also have to figure how to get the water to flow up aprox 900ft (above see level near atlanta).

So, anyway, there are many reasons why.

Since Coca-Cola is in Atlanta, we could have them move the bottling for Dasani over to the coast. That way instead of bottling regular tap water they could bottle the desalinated ocean water, leaving a lot left over for other uses in Atlanta. Of course, they would have to change the name to "Desalti".

Maybe Dasani wouldn't taste like utter crap then?