11 comments

  • ajb 1 hour ago
    There is a fundamental minimum amount of energy needed to desalinate: you can't take less energy to do it,than you could gain back (from osmotic pressure) if you allowed the desalinated water to expand a cylinder containing the residual brine. This is large. This paper is a thermal method, so it doesn't have an electricity input, but to justify their efficiency claim, they should really compare against what you could do by using the same surface area for solar panels, driving a conventional setup. My (limited) understanding is that conventional reverse osmosis is not far from the theoretical optimum, energy-wise, the main difficulties being operational (the membranes need declogging). And of course RO is more expensive than rain.

    This paper is interesting, however, in directly producing crystalline salt, which is lower volume than brine and easier to dispose of, maybe even valuable.

  • Animats 12 minutes ago
    The paper: [1]

    They're still at lab scale in glass. They haven't built a usable system, even a small one. The big claim here is that it doesn't clog; capillary action moves the salt out of the active area to another area, where some yet to be developed mechanism removes it. That needs to be demonstrated. If they can come up with something that runs for years without clogging or replacing the active material, that's a real advance.

    Laser surface preparation is known.[2] It's useful for roughening smooth surfaces in a very structured way, in preparation for painting. The result is a smooth paint surface. If you sandblast to roughen, the first paint layer is somewhat irregular. Then you need to sand and paint again to get a smooth surface. Laser roughening has been tried for auto painting, but didn't go mainstream. A good question here is whether commercial laser surface prep systems can make the material this new process uses.

    [1] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41377-026-02315-4

    [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKYOglHYo_Y

    • Nifty3929 6 minutes ago
      It reminds me of how the Panama canal was built, and actually the first major attempt failed and they gave up. What they learned for the second attempt was that digging was not the hard(est) part to solve - it was how to move the dirt! So much dirt!

      Great book on this BTW: Path Between the Seas. I couldn't put it down.

  • LogicFailsMe 4 minutes ago
    So crazy question: take a dehumidifier, attach some solar panels, and deploy at scale for non-potable water suitable for crop irrigation anywhere that isn't a desert. Does it work? And if not, why?
  • fhdkweig 1 hour ago
    This appears to be the same New Rochester article as 4 days ago with 20 comments.

    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48349507

  • kogasa240p 3 minutes ago
    Probably some of the best news I've seen in a while.
  • b0rbb 51 minutes ago
    Awesome, love seeing stuff out of Rochester - RIT or UofR or any of the nearby schools.

    Totally underrated area for academic pursuits.

    • mmmBacon 9 minutes ago
      UofR physic grad that also worked at the LLE here. Agree Rochester schools are underrated (although admittedly a little biased).

      At least in the sciences you have access to lots of opportunities you don’t have at bigger name schools.

      They set me up in life in a way that I don’t think would have happened elsewhere.

    • haritha-j 5 minutes ago
      Indeed, it’s the same university that gave us room temperature superconductors.
    • 0x59 49 minutes ago
      Agree! Shout out to the Laboratory for Laser Energetics
  • scythe 29 minutes ago
    They are talking about lithium recovery, but there is a less exotic byproduct I'm interested in. One tonne (≈ 1 m^3) of seawater contains about 1.3 kilograms of magnesium, equivalent to about 4 kg of magnesite ore. Typical desal prices are on the order of $1 per tonne. Magnesite ore goes for about $100 per tonne, so the crude magnesium in a tonne of seawater is worth about $0.40, which could account for a substantial fraction of the desalination cost. (These numbers are very rough.)

    Now you ask: why don't we just recover magnesium from brines if it's so great? Magnesium recovery from seawater isn't that easy: typically you have to treat it with some kind of alkali (often Ca(OH)2), so the cost is dominated by the extraction process (your alkali is consumed!), and you're competing with a pretty cheap ore. But if you have a solid byproduct, instead of a liquid, the options for magnesium recovery might be a lot more efficient, potentially offsetting the cost.

    The fourth-most-prevalent ion, sulfate, might also be interesting, at least in a hypothetical post-petroleum future where sulfur as a byproduct of fossil fuel extraction is no longer "free". Sulfate is also annoying to extract from seawater, but again if we have a solid, the rules change.

    As for the "table" salt itself, I think we'd quickly saturate (!) the market.

  • doublerabbit 1 hour ago
    What about removing oil from water, have we conquered that yet?
  • mkl 1 hour ago
    > without waste

    ...except for the huge piles of salt.

    If the salt was not waste, surely people would already be extracting it from the brine and the existing methods would also be "without waste".

    • eimrine 1 hour ago
      Persian Gulf has 20% more salt in water because of the humans which are throwing the oversalinated waste back into the sea. Dehidrated salt may be a big deal for some areas because of no waste into input.
      • Jblx2 52 minutes ago
        >Persian Gulf has 20% more salt in water because of the humans

        I would like to read more about this from an authoritative source.

      • ImPostingOnHN 28 minutes ago
        So now they'll throw the dehydrated brine into the sea?

        Or set up an expensive refining operation to get heavy metals, etc out?

  • phtrivier 52 minutes ago
    "in mice". No, wait, that auto-reply is for cancer breakthrough.

    Let me check, is that a wonderful battery ? Nope.. A promising fusion ? Neither...

    Ok, so this must be the fourth kind of pseudo-wonder discovery that will maybe make it out of the lab in 20 years, if the research team managed to get scraps of funding while VC pick the next way to waste pensioners money.

    Anyway, whenever they have desalinated enough water to get each researcher a pint, the round is on me.

  • kaonwarb 1 hour ago
    This reads like hyperbole:

    > The brine byproduct wreaks havoc on sea life when it’s deposited back into the ocean by raising the salt level and lowering oxygen in the water.

    Managing return of concentrated brine should be entirely tractable in the literal ocean.

    • rconti 1 hour ago
      Sure, but typically desalination plants are located in a single physical place, so a discharge pipe dumping brine 24x7 is bad for all of the things around it, as the local concentration is extremely high.
      • joshred 1 hour ago
        Seems like you could run a long perforated tube to diminish that effect.
        • dieselgate 1 hour ago
          I wonder what the linear diffusion gradient would look like for that. Like the perforated garden hoses or whatever for soaking soil. Aquatic organisms grow so quick though very curious on the constraints for something like this.
        • dylan604 1 hour ago
          I liked the idea of loading it up on a ship that sails out releasing as it goes out and back. Make it solar powered or even go old school with literal sails.
          • sgc 1 hour ago
            I thought they tend to pipe far out and discharge as far below the surface as possible, since there is a lot of surface life and it is less damaging this way.

            Ships (with long submerged pipes) would be prone to weather events and generally less reliable than an installed pipe. Perforation would be prone to clogging from build up so a nonstarter I would expect. Adding flex tubing and a relocation robot would be a maintenance headache as well. Not sure there is an easy optimization.

          • scythe 52 minutes ago
            If you want to be really clever about it, maybe the ship is powered by the brine.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osmotic_power

            • gibspaulding 28 minutes ago
              I like this! Though I’m not sure the math works. That page says ideal efficiency for that system would be something like 0.75 kWh/m^3. Compared to 4000 to 5000 kWh/m^3 of diesel. Now we don’t need to be efficient since the point is to use up our “fuel” and we don’t need to cary cargo for this to make sense but with numbers like that, I don’t think our boat will be able to make enough power to move at all.
        • 01100011 1 hour ago
          And it doesn't even need to be a rigid pipe. A flexible pipe made out of, say, waterproof fabric, could be cheaply made to extend miles while remaining open due to the pressure of the water pumped into it.
          • dylan604 1 hour ago
            Things left underwater tend to collect things on it which would make this much less porous over time.
    • gausswho 32 minutes ago
      It kinda depends where it's deposited, right? The expected AMOC collapse is fundamentally about salt imbalance.
    • wolfi1 1 hour ago
      depends of course, how easy does the brine dissolve, how long does it take that it is so diluted that it can't do any harm, without that information it's not easy to tell
      • dylan604 1 hour ago
        These are often built near shallower parts along the coast where changes are more pronounced.
    • boxed 54 minutes ago
      I mean.. we really want to permanently desalinate the ocean somewhat too so putting the brine back seems kinda stupid. Put it on land, let it dry, sell some as table salt and dump the rest into abandoned mines.
      • wizzwizz4 5 minutes ago
        Excellent idea! The largest abandoned mines I'm aware of are salt mines, which… hang on.