641–644 of 644 posts
Is it just me, or did this article dance around the question? I am not a physicist but let me give it a stab: except for a few specialized steps like UV or oxidizing heavy metals, most filtration is mechanical. A series of filters with smaller and smaller pores capture more and more of the mess in the water like bacteria and particulates while UV breaks down viruses, the oxidizer precipitates out metals, and so on. N…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
By that definition, when my kid goes to the beach and digs a hole in the sand and fills it with water they are "changing the environment". Do we need a proper environmental impact statement to determine the negative aspects of these changes? Come on. They are literally moving salt a few meters.
No, they are fundamentally changing the salts state and manner of interaction with the environment. What do giant piles of salt do aside from melt and "burn" whatever they touch? That's right, they Spread.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, they are fundamentally changing the salts state and manner of interaction with the environment. What do giant piles of salt do aside from melt and "burn" whatever they touch? That's right, they Spread.
You realize these piles of salt are right next to natural piles of salt?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It will change the salinity on the short term though at the release location and the amount a large plant will be discharging is enough to alter the local salinity so long as the plant remains operational which will negatively affect sea life in that area.
Only if the discharge is not diluted sufficiently. There is nothing about reverse osmosis that is fundamentally more toxic or harmful than the typical evaporation that takes place naturally in the ocean. And it’s pretty dishonest to claim otherwise. If there’s a problem with too high salinity of discharge, that’s an engineering problem that should be fixed with greater dilution.