Israel does this by burning massive quantities of fossil fuels: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_Israel#/media/File:E...
It's not even remotely economical without huge government subsidies. Completely untenable with current technology for poorer countries, or anyone that cares at all about carbon emissions.
on a serious note, it's a smallish research/etc facility. probably most of things are as deep underground as possible. it's not same thing as full blown nuclear power plant
Same reason it's hard to do anything with solar. Grid scale storage is an unsolved problem.
I wonder if there are more energy-expensive desalinization processes that are better to use with intermittent power sources, like solar.
Israel btw supplies desalinated water to Jordan and PA.
Another consideration is political sovereignty, since solar can’t easily be turned off by a foreign adversary.
But in general in Israel solar has a couple of problems: very dusty (sand storms) and local electrical company which tends to create problems
However the details are important. You'd need to do a deep operations analysis to get an answer. That also would include energy storage as well.
Why shouldn't drinking water of all things receive subsidies? Why must drinking water be a for-profit enterprise?
It's about sustainability, not profit. Of course wealthy nations can (literally) burn enough money turning fossil fuels into water to make their population comfortable and happy. But most can't, and the externalized cost is unimaginable at a global scale.
Easy to say when your government can afford the subsidies. But the vast majority of freshwater-insecure nations will never be able to do this without a 10x technological breakthrough.
Would you tell that to the Israelis if they couldn't afford it?
The point is that yes, the original article is correct. Current desalination tech is woefully inadequate to replace fresh water surface reserves without putting a massive burden on the society using it.
Yes? What else would I tell them, to pray for a miracle? If they don't have enough water, can't get water profitably and cannot even afford to subsidize water, what else is there to do besides find somewhere new to live? What would you tell them?
> without putting a massive burden on the society using it.
Yeah, in some places it will be necessary to subsidize water, placing a burden on society. But considering we're talking about water, that's obviously a burden that needs to be borne. Acquisition of water comes before literally anything else a population might want to spend money on. And if there isn't enough money around to acquire sufficient quantities of water, there isn't enough money to live there at all.
Israel has a strong enough economy, they can afford to make desalination work for them. You objected that they have to subsidize the desalination, but I don't see any sense in that objection. If that's what they need to do, that's what they'll do.
Fresh water, economically speaking, is a classic private good. It gets consumed as someone uses it, and can people can be easily restricted from acess if they dont pay.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_good_(economics)#Defini...
Why not use nuclear power plants to power desalination plants? I even wonder if some of the salt from the brine could be fed into certain types of nuclear reactors (Molten Salt Reactors and the like, possibly) making it an even more symbiotic relationship
https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.$b643596&view=1up...
More modern take here: https://www.iaea.org/topics/non-electric-applications/nuclea...
"the country" in this context is Israel, since HN truncates the wiki link right before that.
Maybe it's time to understand that it's not a long term strategy ? That may be they should move to another place where water is naturally more abundant ?
As if immigration isn't a hugely fraught political topic. And you might want to consider how many people moved to Israel and why.