Ok, too expensive seems like a reasonable argument, but how much too expensive, specifically? I mean if water is available but not clean how expensive can a purifier be before being at parody with cost of transporting the same amount of water?
What is the "cheaper to produce locally" method, and in what way is it not the solution?
Also, what about pipelines? Even if only useful in limited contexts (i.e. downhill, or open channels), or for very short distances.
That's a really good idea to transport water using large bladders. Perhaps you could even control movement as needed with small engine craft and nets. You'd need no where near the infrastructure of commercial shipping, yet bladders could be put in shipping containers as well.
Ok, too expensive seems like a reasonable argument, but how much to expensive, specifically?
See my other reply. In short, based on a CBA we did a few yrs back, fuel consumption alone using a diesel-powered handy size tanker to ship H20 from Alaska to Ca yields a shipping cost of ~$0.15/gal. Ca H20 costs <$0.002/gal. So, a factor of 75 more expensive.
Ok, thanks. So that particular solution is not cost effective for the CA market, but what about a different market? Or perhaps a different mechanism of transportation?
> but what about a different market? Or perhaps a different mechanism of transportation?
I'm not sure what you mean by 'a different market', but I can address the latter:
Generally, commercial shipping will yield the greatest economies of scale for bulk cargo transport of any mode of transport (except perhaps pipeline - I'm not sure). You could use a larger tanker ( https://www.google.com/amp/s/oilandgaslogistics.wordpress.co...), like a ULCC that has 4X the displacement (cargo carrying capacity) as the handy size tanker we assessed. However, that would perhaps yield a ~50% cost reduction - far short of the ~99% reduction needed. https://project-firefly.com/node/19396 - this depicts containersips, but the exponential decay scale/cost relationship is similar for tankers.
NP. This did get me thinking about the idea again. If, like you say, you could identify a market with a much higher cost/gal of water AND you find a way to significantly reduce chartering and operating costs, you might be able to turn a profit at scale.
Reducing Opex can be done by chartering a foreign flag vessel (i.e. much cheaper than US flag - although you won't be able to trade H20 between US ports due to the Jones Act (1).
Here's a crazy idea for reducing fuel costs (the biggest Opex). You could employ H2 fuel cells + motor propulsion on your ship vice diesel engines. You might think that H2 fuel would be hazardous/infeasible to carry, which is correct. However, you could possibly skirt that issue employing an aluminum H2 generation system that generates H2 fuel on demand directly from water (sea or cargo) (2). This process oxidizes the aluminum until it is depleted, however, to refuel you could offload the containerized depleted Al ashore and load fresh Al. On shore, the depleted Al can be reconditioned (de-oxydized) via a solar or wind powered reconditioning plant (basically melt the Al to liberate the O2).
Thus, while a solar-cells generally don't have the necessary energy density to power a ship at typical transit speeds, this is one way to build a very clean solar/wind (albeit indirectly) powered fleet. The Capex might be a little high, but it's doable.
Current methods of local production are desalination and wastewater recycling, both of which are heavily state subsidized, and in the case of wastewater recycling state owned. Very difficult to get into actual production of water. Most desalination companies actually just manage the desalination plants.
Pipelines have some potential, but in very limited cases. Could be useful in Caribbean though. Pipe water from Dominica to other Eastern Caribbean islands. I haven't run the numbers on that, but there might be some potential for an intrepid investor. Shallow water means its easy to lay and repair pipelines, every other island in the Caribbean being water deficient means demand. Might work.
What is the "cheaper to produce locally" method, and in what way is it not the solution?
Also, what about pipelines? Even if only useful in limited contexts (i.e. downhill, or open channels), or for very short distances.
That's a really good idea to transport water using large bladders. Perhaps you could even control movement as needed with small engine craft and nets. You'd need no where near the infrastructure of commercial shipping, yet bladders could be put in shipping containers as well.