The layering approach has much potential. In this case, graphene oxide layered with epoxy resin stabilizes the membrane and lets them control pore size.
The next step, problems with contaminants (seawater) fouling the membrane, might be mitigated with more layers? Say a Teflon layer to aid in cleaning. Or an ionized layer to repel many particulates.
I wish they'd said more about how they control pore size. How does the epoxy layer avoid covering the pores? Is it laid down before pores are etched or something? Fascinating subject.
The question, as always, is how much energy it takes to do the filtering.
Yup. Sieve implies that the only energy required is that necessary to pump the water to a level above the filter. I highly doubt that is the case. Surely you need some significant pressure differential. Even with pores the size of proteins (100x+ larger) you need pressure.
Indeed, and even if we live in a magical world where it was 100% free to run the filter, you need to manufacture the filter in the first place, and it will have to be replaced at some point, so there is ongoing energy expenditure no matter how you slice it.
The question, as always, is how much energy it takes to do the filtering.
Yup. Sieve implies that the only energy required is that necessary to pump the water to a level above the filter. I highly doubt that is the case. Surely you need some significant pressure differential. Even with pores the size of proteins (100x+ larger) you need pressure.
In any case, they have designed it for pressure. The article describes how pressure causes water atoms to line up, train fashion, and move water much much faster than without pressure.
Graphene was re-discovered only in 2004. It takes time.
From the discovery of new basic science to commercialization usually takes 30 - 40 years. We're not even halfway there yet. E.g. look at how long it took to develop digital cameras, flat screen TVs, etc.
That speed should be much faster now due to the information age and globalized competition. It may not approach Ray Kurzweil's predictions, but it's certainly shorter than previous generations of commercialization.
Graphene was re-discovered only in 2004. It takes time.
From the discovery of new basic science to commercialization usually takes 30 - 40 years. We're not even halfway there yet. E.g. look at how long it took to develop digital cameras, flat screen TVs, etc.
Is that really still true in the world we live in today though? Previously we were unable to instantly share information so freely and collaborate with people around the world with so little effort.
I'm not saying it shouldn't take time to develop these things, but surely the 30-40 year timeline is significantly reduced due to information sharing today?
Reverse osmosis has been around for a long time and is used on boats everywhere for desalination. This sounds like a new membrane that requires less pressure and thus energy? I guess sieve sounded better?
RO membranes are notoriously finicky and non-robust. They require a lot of maintenance and can be ruined by common chemicals like chlorine. A more robust desalination membrane would be a very good thing.
From the discovery of new basic science to commercialization usually takes 30 - 40 years. We're not even halfway there yet. E.g. look at how long it took to develop digital cameras, flat screen TVs, etc.
Is that really still true in the world we live in today though? Previously we were unable to instantly share information so freely and collaborate with people around the world with so little effort. I'm not saying it shouldn't take time to develop these things, but surely the 30-40 year timeline is significantly reduced due to information sharing today?
I'm sure it's faster now due to reasons you're describing. Also, cold war is gone - so that kind of helps too. Thing is, this isn't your average ruby on rails app and JSON API. Applied research in chemistry, physics, and industrial scale production takes certain breakthroughs, test methodologies, etc. all of which take a lot of talent and money. From what I remember we've seen significant (for certain amounts of significant) funding in applied r&d for graphene around the same time Nobel was won for it in 2010. So, even if r&d is accelerated now significantly, we're still probably at least around 10-20 years away from seeing anything utilising it in a significant and widespread manner.
Yup. Sieve implies that the only energy required is that necessary to pump the water to a level above the filter. I highly doubt that is the case. Surely you need some significant pressure differential. Even with pores the size of proteins (100x+ larger) you need pressure.
In any case, they have designed it for pressure. The article describes how pressure causes water atoms to line up, train fashion, and move water much much faster than without pressure.
right, the question is -- how much pressure is required? Is it the pressure generated by a 1 cm column of water (as is implied by sieve), or is it the pressure generated by a 1000 watt high pressure pump? The difference will determine whether they have groundbreaking technology or get a participation trophy. From the article it didn't seem like there was any sort of functional prototype.
Reverse osmosis has been around for a long time and is used on boats everywhere for desalination. This sounds like a new membrane that requires less pressure and thus energy? I guess sieve sounded better?
Sieve not only sounds better, it's also more informative to the general public - gets across not only what it structurally looks like, but also gives a general idea of how it functions.
In terms of what's new about this - yeah, less pressure and less energy. On boats the prospect of lugging around your own fresh water makes even relatively heavy and power-hungry desalination plants worthwhile, but land-based installations are very much limited by capital costs and energy usage.