This article is quite long-winded, but to summarize, they are proposing a desalination scheme assuming cheap solar energy.<p>Given that California electricity is pretty expensive even though we have lots of solar energy, how can that be done? Why not sell it to the grid?<p>It might help to know that the author of the article is the founder of Terraform Industries, which aims to use solar power to synthesize natural gas. Likely the hope is to get efficiency by closely integrating the solar panels with the desalination plant, similar to how they do it in that project.<p>I think if they really can get cheap desalination, there are many cities that would buy the water and pay more than agriculture. It wouldn't make sense to tackle agricultural use first, since it's more price-sensitive.
Huh; so desalinated water costs between $0.001 to $0.008 depending on the cost of the power.<p>I pay about $0.0136 / gallon so almost 10x the cost of producing.<p>Seems like (for non-agricultural use) we will be able to afford desalination -- I guess the real issue will be agricultural uses which are predicated on free water.
Leftover brine is really a problem though<p><a href="https://www.wired.com/story/desalination-is-booming-but-what-about-all-that-toxic-brine/" rel="nofollow">https://www.wired.com/story/desalination-is-booming-but-what...</a>
Love the vision. Feels like something that can’t get done and isn’t proposed as viable<p>- if a RE developer tried to do it for profit, they’d get shut down - ironically probably by environmental groups<p>- govt doesn’t actually build anything audacious anymore<p>Unless I’m missing something?
I thought this was going to describe cloud seeding, artificially stimulating cloud formation: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_seeding" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_seeding</a><p>It's been used in Dubai, the middle of the desert, to create fake rain (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_seeding#cite_ref-8" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_seeding#cite_ref-8</a>). It's been used in some US states (<a href="https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/eight-states-are-seeding-clouds-to-overcome-megadrought/" rel="nofollow">https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/eight-states-are-...</a>).<p>Though it's effectiveness is debated and it cannot guarantee precipitation. It also has environmental impacts, possibly decreasing precipitation in other areas as well as causing health issues (it basically involves spreading salt or dry ice into the air).
The reality is that 80-90% of all water used in California is used for agriculture, and about half of the produce is exported to other states and countries. All other uses of water including residential, commercial, golf courses, lawns and all the rest account for only 10-20% of the water used.<p>Sacramento, a virtual desert, is surrounded by rice fields, with huge exports to Japan.<p>Effectively California’s farmers are selling its water to other places in the form of produce.
There are 5 main water problems that affect California and the Southwest:<p>1. Increasing freshwater production along the coast.<p>2. Increasing freshwater distribution to Southwest regions.<p>3. Increasing stormwater drainage to prepare for more intense storms. This includes identifying and remediating areas of so-called "100 year" flood plains that put lives and property at risk.<p>4. Increasing freshwater storage capacity to prepare for longer droughts and lower rainfall.
I wonder how alternative energy sources would change the math on this project.
Is there a small scale or phased approach possible where a desalination plant with 1/5th the final capacity is built first? Big massive, all at once projects seem more likely than not to fail. (High speed rail anyone?)
> Last year, the world installed about 437 GW of solar electricity, or roughly one acre of panels every 10 seconds<p>How can that be true.<p>That's over three million acres.<p>Really?