purification of water in space

reverse osmosis and ozonisation?

why not vacuum distillation/fractionation and Solar UV.

both of which are readily available (vacuum and UV that is)

Jeeez

why not hire engineers who can think of space as a resource,
rather than an enemy to be shot by missiles used as ammunition?

On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 01:51:17 GMT, "blart"
wrote:

why not hire engineers who can think of space as a resource,
rather than an enemy to be shot by missiles used as ammunition?

PLONK

....Idiot.

OM

--

"Try Andre Dead Duck Canadian Champagne! | http://www.io.com/~o_m
Rated the lamest of the cheapest deported | Sergeant-At-Arms
brands by the Condemned in Killfile Hell!" | Human O-Ring Society

In article ,
blart wrote:
reverse osmosis and ozonisation?
why not vacuum distillation/fractionation...

Because we're talking about purifying water condensed from the air -- that
is, most contaminants will be ones that move easily from vapor to liquid
and back, and won't be removed easily by distillation processes.

Also, it's not simple to build a still that will work in free fall --
gravity is very convenient for separating liquid from gas. There are
ways of dealing with this, but it adds serious complications.

and Solar UV.

Quite apart from the fact that it's unavailable when your vehicle is in
Earth's shadow or is pointed the wrong way, there is a more fundamental
problem that it doesn't penetrate water worth a damn, so arranging that
water-borne contaminants get thoroughly exposed to it is difficult.
--
spsystems.net is temporarily off the air; | Henry Spencer
mail to henry at zoo.utoronto.ca instead. |

Loss of water.

You'll evaporate the water, but if it's not in a container, you'll
loose a lot of it.

You'll also have to recompress the vapour and that's energy exprensive.

Regards

Carsten Nielsen
Denmark

OM, you plonked me before!
go away, I don't want you reading my posts!
go away OM!


"OM" om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_researc h_facility.org wrote
in message ...
On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 01:51:17 GMT, "blart"
wrote:

why not hire engineers who can think of space as a resource,
rather than an enemy to be shot by missiles used as ammunition?

PLONK

...Idiot.

OM

--

"Try Andre Dead Duck Canadian Champagne! | http://www.io.com/~o_m
Rated the lamest of the cheapest deported | Sergeant-At-Arms
brands by the Condemned in Killfile Hell!" | Human O-Ring Society

So you can't spin the still?
Centrifugal fractionation is very well known!
So is GCC, to go off on a tangent

Net solar insolation at UV wavelengths is very strong - how strong and how
effective?
I dunno, and I suggest this would be a nice simple experiment to perform.


"Henry Spencer" wrote in message
...
In article ,
blart wrote:
reverse osmosis and ozonisation?
why not vacuum distillation/fractionation...

Because we're talking about purifying water condensed from the air -- that
is, most contaminants will be ones that move easily from vapor to liquid
and back, and won't be removed easily by distillation processes.

Also, it's not simple to build a still that will work in free fall --
gravity is very convenient for separating liquid from gas. There are
ways of dealing with this, but it adds serious complications.

and Solar UV.

Quite apart from the fact that it's unavailable when your vehicle is in
Earth's shadow or is pointed the wrong way, there is a more fundamental
problem that it doesn't penetrate water worth a damn, so arranging that
water-borne contaminants get thoroughly exposed to it is difficult.
--
spsystems.net is temporarily off the air; | Henry Spencer
mail to henry at zoo.utoronto.ca instead. |

In article ,
blart wrote:
So you can't spin the still?

Like I said: "There are ways of dealing with this, but it adds serious
complications." There are reasons why you *don't* see spinning separators
in existing space life-support gear.
--
spsystems.net is temporarily off the air; | Henry Spencer
mail to henry at zoo.utoronto.ca instead. |

I agree, there are very good reasons.
One of which is a lack of any sort of commercial pressure on the design and
provision of space life support systems.
I posit that much better designs can be had, one we get away from the
current 'stunt' attitude towards the exploitation of space and into a more
economic commercial exploitation.
With attendant competition and subsequent pressure on price and performance,
rather than 'we done it this way before, so we are going to do it this way
forever' paradigm

"Henry Spencer" wrote in message
...
In article ,
blart wrote:
So you can't spin the still?

Like I said: "There are ways of dealing with this, but it adds serious
complications." There are reasons why you *don't* see spinning separators
in existing space life-support gear.
--
spsystems.net is temporarily off the air; | Henry Spencer
mail to henry at zoo.utoronto.ca instead. |