The necessity of research regarding the disruption of the balance between the elements in the air

Published on by in Technology

HI,

Recently, the new technology of producing water from air in dry areas is being developed and implemented by some companies. This idea can be good and has been effective in meeting the water needs of people in areas that are facing drought, but here the need for research and study regarding the disruption of the balance between the elements in the air can also be considered.

As the recent research of scientists has shown, solar panel projects and energy production in order to produce heat in their surroundings should be built near a water environment such as a pool, river, etc. Therefore, it seems that water production from Air can affect the balance of the elements in the air of these areas and disturb this balance, and this issue should be followed by researchers.

What is your opinion about this?

3 Answers

  1. I have indeed expressed my views on this aspect right when I heard about water from air.  Nature has its own balances which we have not yet understood properly like, climate change - it is just not carbon dioxide because when emitted, it does not remain so but gets transformed into complex forms.  More importantly, there are many other toxic gases which behave entirely differently.  That is the reason we need to still understand 'Atmospheric Chemistry' properly before embarking on the solution to climate change.  Similarly, we may pat our back of generating water from air but, inadvertently, we are interfering with the natural balances.  The entire water cycle has already undergone change due to atmospheric chemistry - untimely rains, floods, drought which have been witnessed in the recent past.  Tapping water from atmosphere could lead to further disturbances that we don't understand at this juncture until it flares up after a couple of years hence. 

    Answered on by

    1 Comment

    1. Thank you for your attention and this positive and constructive view that you have.

  2. My opinion is that the direct environmental impact of widespread use of water-from-air machines is negligible. 
    I have done a couple of quantitative analyses.

    (1) Even if all 7.9 x 10^9 people on Earth used water from water vapour processors at the rate of 50 litres per day, they would consume temporarily only 0.0025% of the available atmospheric water. For details please visit https://www.atmoswater.com/atmoswater-blog-by-roland-wahlgren/impact-on-the-atmospheric-water-reservoir-from-using-water-from-air-systems-an-update

    (2) A recent analysis by me about the direct environmental impact of widespread use of dehumidifiers and air-conditioners dripping condensate from more than a billion machines since about 1950 showed that the specific humidity field at Earth's surface has been remarkably stable over the past 70 years (see the figure above and the associated earlier blog post). In fact, Wikipedia: Air Conditioning stated, "According to the IEA [International Energy Agency], as of 2018, 1.6 billion air conditioning units were installed,...". For details please visit https://www.atmoswater.com/atmoswater-blog-by-roland-wahlgren/direct-environmental-impact-of-water-from-air-systems

    However, along the lines of what Steven Cooke said, there can be indirect consequences of the widespread use of water-from-air systems. Using a new technology such as atmospheric water vapour processing in drinking-water-from-air machines may have other impacts on Nature. These include

    • possibility for more people to live in a region, increasing the population density;
    • increased sewage and other waste (including material waste from machines which have reached the end of their operational life);
    • increased energy use (to operate the machines); and
    • increased material use (to build the machines).

    Some research has been about the sustainability of water-from-air systems. for example:

    Any disadvantages of water-from-air technologies (which are continually evolving with much peer-reviewed research ongoing -see recent articles listed at Water-from-Air Article Links - Atmoswater Research) must be balanced against the huge number of drinking water distribution gaps that exist today affecting millions of people. See the discussions at:

    1 Comment

    1. Thank you for your complete explanation. Of course, I think this subject should be evaluated and researched by other experts and researchers to get a more reliable result.

  3. That is a VERY important question along with FULL "Lifecycle Cost Analysis" (including where the materials your system came from) too often being overlooked or completely ignored in the rush to promote "new" technologies!  A single electric lightbuld is a technical marvel.  BILLIONS of them in use create completely unexpected problems.

    3 Comments

    1. Если из воздуха обработать воду, то как повлияет этот метод для здоровья людей, вы это предусмотрели Алиреза Макванди?

      1 Comment reply

      1. That is a good and often overlooked point!  I think that it may not seriously affect the overall water cycle balance, but it MIGHT affect local weather patterns in ways that we won't know until they happen!  Those many not be a problem compared to water security, but we should understand that there will be changes.

    2. Therefore, this issue will cause air and environmental pollution, in other words, by absorbing oxygen and hydrogen elements from the atmosphere and producing water, we increase other elements such as nitrogen, sulfur, methane, etc.


    3. With the studies and research that I have done so far, I realized that this technology, despite being useful, can cause atmospheric and environmental pollution, which should be investigated by researchers.

      1 Comment reply

      1. I wouldn't jump too far ahead with any particular conclusions, either!  Suffice it that it does indicate that the impacts on the overall environment (and maybe in unanticipated ways) NEED to be more carefully considered and investigated.  Even well-meaning "Green" can be too-easilty manipulated into "green-washing" and early profits for particular backers than improvements to life or society.