Self-filling waterbottle announced!

Originally posted by Chargeit
Great, because the world isn't already facing over population problems.

Great idea, we just need to be careful about how easy we make it for everyone to thrive on this planet. Maybe a future in providing water for settlers of another planet? Clear military applications.

You're obviously not in favor of humanity ruining this planet, would you support humans doing the same thing to other planets?

Originally posted by jeantherapy

Originally posted by Chargeit
Great, because the world isn't already facing over population problems.

Great idea, we just need to be careful about how easy we make it for everyone to thrive on this planet. Maybe a future in providing water for settlers of another planet? Clear military applications.

You're obviously not in favor of humanity ruining this planet, would you support humans doing the same thing to other planets?

This entire notion is a myth. We will not destroy this planet, we are egotistical to think that we will.

The only thing we risk destroying is species - our own and others. The Earth will continue for billions upon billions of years long after we are gone.

If we dropped a thousand nuclear warheads around the world tomorrow, the Human race would probably be on the edge of extinction within a decade, and many other species would die out. But others would continue, new life would evolve to be able to live in that environment.

Look at the area around Chernobyl and you'll see that life continues even under that environment. It's not the same life as before in many cases, but those rodents, birds and insects are evolving in different ways to be able to continue in that environment.

I have this same debate with people about global climate change. We're not going to become extinct from it, we're probably not going to even be diminished in any significant way by it, we'll learn to adapt and we'll evolve. But even if we didn't, the Earth would continue without us.

People need to look at the History of this Earth, the time-line of events, and see that we have been here for a gnats fart of a time frame in comparison to other species and the life of the Earth itself. We're very insignificant.

Originally posted by detachedindividual

This entire notion is a myth. We will not destroy this planet, we are egotistical to think that we will.

I said ruin, not destroy. We are like children given a nice toy that proceeds to smash it all over the room. We have poisoned the air, the soil, and the water. Our actions affect every other species on Earth in a negative fashion. We may not have destroyed the Earth, but we are surely enough transforming it into a toxic chemical bath where it is increasingly more unlikely that any of us will live a disease free life. It's also about morality which is about defeating your ego, not embracing it. It's egotistical to think that we have moral grounds for turning our planet into a giant piece of litter.

Originally posted by jeantherapy

Originally posted by detachedindividual

This entire notion is a myth. We will not destroy this planet, we are egotistical to think that we will.

I said ruin, not destroy. We are like children given a nice toy that proceeds to smash it all over the room. We have poisoned the air, the soil, and the water. Our actions affect every other species on Earth in a negative fashion. We may not have destroyed the Earth, but we are surely enough transforming it into a toxic chemical bath where it is increasingly more unlikely that any of us will live a disease free life. It's also about morality which is about defeating your ego, not embracing it. It's egotistical to think that we have moral grounds for turning our planet into a giant piece of litter.

I agree, but when you say we are ruining it, we are ruining it for ourselves and other species. That's what I mean.
If we did set off nuclear bombs all over the planet, that would undoubtedly end a lot of life, but what would be ruined? It's our perception of the world around us that makes it what it is.

If there was a way to transform Mars into an Earth like planet, would that be considered "ruining" it? If there was intelligent life there already, somehow living in that environment, they would believe we have ruined their planet by changing it.

We look at the Earth through our own mentality, and what we believe to be beautiful or pleasant, but life exists in all kinds of weird places.

I think you misunderstood what I was saying in my post. I'm Pagan, I love the world in which we live. If I could I would make it so every city was greener, every concrete building overflowing with vines and ivy, every street lined with lawns and trees...
I believe that we are damaging our world, obviously, and we want to save what we find beautiful.

I'm just pointing out the scientific fact that the Earth will continue to support life for billions of years long after we've poisoned ourselves and other species. It doesn't "forgive" the fact that we're doing it, I'm just stating scientific fact that many of the ecologically minded completely ignore - and it's one of the reasons it's been such a struggle to change people for the last two decades.

If we'd spent the last twenty years explaining that the Human race will be damaged irreparably, that our kids and grand-kids will be harmed by our pollution, waste and environmental laziness, rather than saying "save the planet!" maybe more people would be on board by now?

Humans are selfish by nature, tell them an intangible idea of Earth will die and they'll nod and go about their day. Tell them their kids and grand-kids will not have safe water to drink, or clean air to breathe, or unpolluted natural food to eat and they might actually get off their fat ass to make an effort.

We do need to change to make the world a cleaner place, but saying the world and all life will end is a nonsense. We'll die off, and something else will take our place. And right now I say that probably wouldn't be such a bad thing for this planet.

bump :

just to kick the dead horse and point out that NBD nano have quietly dropped the " self filling bottle " concept

there is of course another " self filling bottle " being promoted at the moment - that is even more implausible than the MDB nano version [ from a practical POV - the problem is that thies " ideas " cannot provide a usefull amount of water , in a practical timeframe , using integral power ]

i was going to do a new thread - but like i say - kicking a dead horse

This is cool and all but mankind should think big here...
Its time we see moisture farmers and the Tera forming of large parts of deserts... To promote new plant life and food sources not to mention help lower co2 levels... And of course many people could benefit from clean water and additional food sources...

If this technology can be used instead of water bottles but perhaps water tanks, or even water bottles with holes in it sitting on top of enclosed water tanks... then this would be powerful stuff... 3 liters an hour is huge.

It doesn't matter what you think.

3 liters of water out of the air per hour. Seriously stop thinking about an environmental impact as there really really is none considering how much water is in your average cumulous clouds.... which if you google "how much do clouds weigh" will result in the average cumulous cloud weighing in at 1.1 million pounds aka 500,00 kg aka 500,000 liters.

Have 10 of these bottles set up on the top of a water tank with a hole in the bottom of each bottle and you have up to 30 liters per hour which is up to 720 liters per day. What could you do with 720 liters per day? you could have the water tank raised and have the water flow into your hot water system and shower with it, drink it with a filter on your taps, use it to wash your clothes with, then flow it through a generator creating electricity before the water flows into your garden or onto your crops.....

What couldn't you do with free water to be honest?

AMAZING TECHNOLOGY!!!

"We are the Borg. Lower your shields and surrender your ships. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile."

a reply to: DaRAGE

Yes that is exactly my point...

Is this still going to be in stores?

This can get rid of world thirst.

Next should be a self-making bread machine, then the problem of world hunger will be solved.

This tech has existed for a while, (not this exact model). But until now it takes an investment and the devices aren't exactly portable.

IF....they could pull this off, there's a list of at least 20 ways this would change our species, a step down from free energy

As far as pulling water from the ecosystem/air.I don't think the Hydrologic Cycle wouldn't even notice a BLIP.
The overall ecological benefits would far outweigh the negatives I think.

a reply to: DaRAGE


Agreed. People talking about the risks to the ecosystem, but this tech could in theory revolutionize the planet. All that goes into water distribution and treatment. Plastic in the oceans. Money for water bills. Energy spent getting water you your home. And the amount of water vapor in clouds like you said, this would be pretty much negligible.

There's so many things that could be affected by this tech on a larger scale. The planet would be completely different.