Most desalination plants (at least the ones that are economically viable) focus on brackish groundwater, not ocean water. This contributes to the problem GP is pointing out. California already does more desalination than any US state other than Florida.

But there's a million environmental restoration projects we could be doing right now to increase the water holding capacities of our environments that are simply not being sufficiently funded. The science is pretty well done on most of these strategies while desalination of ocean water is still mostly an experimental technology that is not economically viable.

Israel is using desalination for agriculture. What's your definition of economically viable?

yes they are draining the dead sea. It's an environmental disaster and the loss of one of the most unique environments on earth.

I made a very clear distinction there between brackish water and ocean water.

So what's your definition of economically viable?

There's lots of sites on oceans that are making water for fractions of a cent per gallon. For instance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minjur_Seawater_Desalination_P...

I don't know if you're doing it on purpose but Minjur is one of the most controversial sites in the desalination debate because of how much its bankrupting the government to fund it for such little water back. It's funded because of political necessity in SPITE of economic viability.

We just literally don't have the technology yet. It takes an immense amount of electricity/energy to desalinate ocean water which is way more saline than brackish water. The other half of the cost is in the very high rate of corrosion of equipment.

I'm not against desalination of oceanwater. I absolutely support funding more research into it. I'm just explaining the current state of technology. It just doesn't currently exist.

Have you considered adding this information to the Wikipedia article?

You seem to have advanced knowledge that is contrary to ~everyone else. It would be helpful if you would simply state 2 numbers. First, what you think it costs, and second, what you think an economically viable cost would be.

Just to be clear, desalination runs off seawater.

The Dead Sea is disappearing because the freshwater that flows into it keeps getting diverted for other uses.

I'm afraid your are misinformed. Perhaps the biggest desalination in Israel Sorek, on the Med coastline.

They are however, in talks with Jordan about piping water into the Dead Sea, and there is a similar operation for the Galilee.

There are however various salt mining operations around Dead sea using brine. That is, both in Israel, and less extensive in Jordan.

You do realize that agriculture uses 80% of the (mostly free) developed and deliverable water, while urban cities use about 10%?

That's true of basically all of the West and the Colorado River, too.

Sure do! But people die in a few days without potable water, crops are usually more drought resistant.

And yes, I do get the point that if you suggested we build $6B desalination plants to grow lettuce people would balk and say, "That's not worth the money!". We should use less water on crops.

People also die in a few weeks without access to agriculture. We could be growing less water hungry crops and raising drought resistant livestock, though.

It's bad but one thing not often pointed out in this conversation is that about 50% of water used in irrigation for agriculture returns as groundwater. In most other cases, used water ends up in sewers or evaporating

50% of 10% is still only 5%.

That and investing in better rainwater management -- those muddy torrents of water that pour into ocean would be much better if slowed down upstream and allowed to percolate into the aquifers.

Powered by solar