
Request for Startups: Water - craigcannon
https://blog.ycombinator.com/request-for-startups-water/
======
Animats
Whatever happened to Kamen's "Slingshot" water purifier? [1] It was a little
vapor compression distillation unit powered by a Stirling cycle engine. There
was a tabletop-sized model, and a shipping-container sized model. There were
announcements of field tests. Heavy PR around 2012, then silence.

There were a few demo installations, but it never appeared as a volume
product. There's a similar technology from Simon Frasier University.[2]
They're looking for someone to commercialize it.

A YC startup might start by deploying that technology in East Porterville, CA,
where the wells have gone dry.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slingshot_(water_vapor_distill...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slingshot_\(water_vapor_distillation_system\))
[2] [https://www.biv.com/article/2016/5/water-machines-creator-
th...](https://www.biv.com/article/2016/5/water-machines-creator-thirsty-
market/)

~~~
matchagaucho
Kamen ultimately learned that distribution of water purification machines was
the most difficult problem.

~~~
dwaltrip
Are you referring to the distance between the water that is being purified and
the people who waht to use it?

~~~
matchagaucho
AFAIK the system is installed near a water source (wells, rivers).

The distance refers to the supply chain and logistics involved shipping
Slingshot to the villages, installing, and maintaining.

------
jly
I don't share a strong sense of optimism that we'll 'beat climate change'. We
need to fundamentally change how humans live on this planet and interact with
our ecosystems to move past issues like this. Projects like these will
certainly help a lot of people in the near-term, but I fear they distract us
from addressing the real problems. Sadly, the real problems don't have much of
a financial incentive to be solved.

~~~
Gargoyle
>>We need to fundamentally change how humans live on this planet

If anyone wonders why some resist accepting climate change as a fact, the
above statement gets to a big piece of the underlying puzzle. I _strongly_
suspect that if climate change was merely a scientific topic, there would be
little-to-no resistance to accepting it as fact.

But it's not just a scientific question, it's (been made into) a question of
how humans fundamentally live on the planet. And so of course a subset of
society is going to resist societal change. It's not that people are
particularly stupid, it's that they don't like the fundamental changes to how
they live that they believe will follow.

Of course, we all know all of this, but for some reason we like to pretend we
don't.

In my personal opinion, if you truly care about stopping climate change, you
should be spending our effort developing solutions that do NOT require
fundamental changes in how humans live on this planet. That path is much more
likely to be successful in the political realm and thus more likely to
actually save the planet.

~~~
RangerScience
I think Tesla and Solar City are excellent examples of this. They're not "stop
driving, turn off your house lights, etc", they're "keep doing what you do,
only now greener _"

_ Of course, issues with the greenlieness of electric cars, etc etc - but
remember when solar panels were a net negative? AFAIK, that sure as hell
didn't last.

~~~
nihonde
It's strange to me that Toyota has a hydrogen fuel car in production and for
sale today, but it gets almost no attention in discussions like this one. Why
is that? Are the CO2 effects of liquid hydrogen extraction a barrier? Or maybe
the need to establish a network of hydrogen fuel delivery?

~~~
RangerScience
Knowing nothing, my bets would be:

1) There is nothing sexy about the car. Tesla cars aren't _just_ electric cars
- they're also fantastic cars. Tesla makes a great (amazing?) car _that is
electric_ , rather than a an electric that may be a great car.

2) Yep, fueling infrastructure. You can charge your electric cars at home, at
the office; the supercharger and battery swap stations; that Tesla (AFAIK?)
charges your car for free... Where do you need to go to get hydrogen fuel?

There's also an analysis - maybe in the Wait, But Why? on Tesla - as to how
you can't sell alternative vehicle stock from normal dealerships; it just
doesn't make enough sense to the dealer, but ATM I don't remember the
reasoning. Also AFAIK, Mr Musk has a good write-up on why hydrogen fuel isn't
The Thing.

But mostly #1, IMO.

~~~
ajdlinux
My local government is doing deals to build a hydrogen electrolyser facility
and car fuelling stations in my city, which is... interesting.

[http://www.environment.act.gov.au/energy/growth-in-the-
clean...](http://www.environment.act.gov.au/energy/growth-in-the-clean-
economy/hydrogen-power-coming-to-canberra)

------
FreezerburnV
I actually have an uncle (on my wife's side) who is working on technology that
can purify water via Ozone generation. (their website: [http://www.ep-
pure.com/](http://www.ep-pure.com/), and an article about what they're doing:
[http://www.news-
gazette.com/news/business/2014-03-23/company...](http://www.news-
gazette.com/news/business/2014-03-23/companys-microplasma-technology-
generating-interest.html)) They can actually produce a small box (about the
size of a lunchbox) that generates enough ozone to purify a well for at least
one family that costs less than $100 and powers itself via solar panel. (it
might have been around $50 or less, but I don't remember the specifics) Along
with the obvious benefit of being cheap, the "cartridge" that actually
generates the ozone is recyclable, tiny, and easily replaceable by anybody.
This is important because the current standard way of generating ozone is
through complex industrial machinery that is difficult to service, requiring
large, expensive parts. (they have a comparison of a current piece of the
machinery that generates the ozone vs their cartridges in the office I
visited)

Note that while I'm related by marriage to one of the founders, I have no
monetary stake in the company, so please don't take this as just a shill. I
got to visit their (tiny) office where they're building the devices that
generate the ozone, and it was just legitimately exciting to see what they
were doing.

I may not be a founder of the company or anything, but I got a pretty good
explanation and tour. So if anyone has any questions, I'd be happy to answer
them.

~~~
hartator
Isn't ozone toxiq?

~~~
FreezerburnV
Yes, it is. However, because of that it works as an incredible sanitizer. I
was just talking with my uncle and he was saying it can turn the nasty water
in third world countries clear and purified within a minute.

Normally toxicity like that would be a problem, but ozone is actually a highly
unstable molecule. The reason it's toxic is because it is literally ripping
other molecules apart to get components it wants to become completely safe
oxygen. This property allows it to sanitize the water, and then leave the
water completely drinkable and safe shortly after due to it completely
transforming into something safe.

~~~
rckclmbr
"to clean the water, we poison the water!"

All jokes aside, this actually sounds really cool.

~~~
feral
This isn't unusual though. You know they add Chlorine to many municipal water
supplies? Chlorine gas was used as a chemical weapon in WW1.

~~~
ianai
I think I'd trust ozone over chlorine tho

~~~
tomhoward
Indeed. Plenty of people drink ozonated water as part of natural health
remedies, and you don't hear any reports of serious problems.

Breathing it is a different matter; it can do terrible damage to people's
lungs.

But ingesting it in water doesn't seem to be a problem.

------
nyxtom
Agriculture takes up the majority of the use of water consumption. (Nearly 70%
of all water use -
[http://www.worldometers.info/water/](http://www.worldometers.info/water/)).
Of that consumption, in terms of irrigation, nearly 50% of the water is lost
to evaporation
([https://water.usgs.gov/edu/wuir.html](https://water.usgs.gov/edu/wuir.html)).

There have been solutions to this problem with urban farming practices with a
combination of hydroponics and vermiponics for a number of years which can
grow quite a bit of usable produce in a smaller land area using significantly
less water.

Also, it could be useful to continue to break down these statistics by crop
and water use. For instance, almond farms appear to take up nearly 10% of
California's water use
([http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2014/0...](http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2014/05/_10_percent_of_california_s_water_goes_to_almond_farming.html)).

Doing so would lend credence to which crop would be most effective for first
improving upon. This report appears to suggest that alfalfa is one of the
neediest crops grown in California in terms of water consumption. There are
obvious other crops as well, in terms of land area (Corn being one of them)
but nevertheless it's worth noting.
[https://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/workgroups/lcfssustain/han...](https://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/workgroups/lcfssustain/hanson.pdf)

Now, you might be asking, what is alfalfa for? Alfalfa is grown as a feed for
animals, mainly dairy cows. Dairy cows eat roughly 70% of the alfalfa produced
in the US. It's important to note that some alfalfa farmers tend to disagree
that solutions like drip irrigation will work effectively enough - as it
sometimes depends on the soil type and exposure to critters chewing up the
pipes. ([http://www.kpbs.org/news/2015/jul/03/how-one-california-
alfa...](http://www.kpbs.org/news/2015/jul/03/how-one-california-alfalfa-
farmer-cut-his-water-us/))

~~~
Detect
Adjusting our meat consumption has a huge effect on agricultural water usage
as well.

~~~
nyxtom
It also might be useful, as noted
[https://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/workgroups/lcfssustain/han...](https://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/workgroups/lcfssustain/hanson.pdf)
to simply not grow certain low cash crops like alfalfa, wheat or grain in
California given the amount water use required in more drought stricken areas.

In addition to this, we can also think about overall energy efficiency of
consuming a product itself. For instance, potatoes yield more energy and
protein than most crops grown.

Given the situation, if we want food we will have to pay the price in terms of
water and land for producing the product used to produce that food.

~~~
niftich
What makes these farms grow alfafa? Is it more profitable for them to grow it
instead of a less water-intensive crop?

~~~
hawkice
Essentially, water is subsidized by the Californian water pricing rules in
order to provide low-cost feed that boosts milk production in cows (this is
why alfalfa in particular probably won't be pushed out). Californian dairy is
a surprisingly powerful lobbying group with enough of a budget to also have a
general public ad campaign to protect their interests.

The price subsidy encourages overconsumption, which causes the shortage.

Most places raise prices to fund desalination plants (if they have access to
large bodies of water near the population centers, like California does), but
that's why they don't. And given they won't do the obviously ideal strategy
that works for everyone else in the world, it's been hard to get money from
the struggling general budget to build the facilities. Why should every other
department struggling for a budget to meet basic needs lose their chance
because they won't adopt a simple price structure change?

Instead, non-renewable reserves are being depleted, as mentioned in the
article.

The problem here isn't really technical in nature, though.

~~~
CN7R
I don't think the current model of agricultural production in California is
sustainable; for something that takes up 70-80% of the state's water, it only
amounts to 2-2.5% of the GDP.

If the problem for California is one of policy, what endeavors can technology
take on to help?

~~~
hawkice
Develop tech to make alternate feed cheaper without dropping milk production
or quality compared to alfalfa.

Improve water distribution in soil (I think there is a way to optimize this,
varying by soil type and many other factors, that would minimize runoff). Or,
get easier systems to recycle runoff. Ideally something with no/few moving or
manufactured parts.

Reduce the cost of desalination plants and create a more realtime water
market. Having one single water market would be a fundamentally technical task
(albeit a complex one), but would level out prices, removing the incentive to
make the policy mistakes.

~~~
Detect
Farmers are sunlight harvesters. Figuring out how to turn sunlight + carbon
dioxide (renewables) into profitable products for sale can be achieved through
good management in addition to appropriate technology.

Soil's water holding capacity can be increased through techniques like green
mature and cover cropping. The permaculture approach to water is to slow it,
spread it, and sink it.

------
JamesLeonis
I'm working on this problem right now. I believe the path to cheap water is
through a massive fleet of solar stills floating in the South Pacific that
passively collect evaporated water. Currently I'm working through my
assumptions about biodegrading materials + construction, average loss
(actuary) of such vessels in the region, logistics of collection/distribution
over wide oceanic conditions, and how to build such a fleet incrementally
without a massive amount of starting cash.

The big reason I saw this as an opportunity is the huge investments Saudi
Arabia and the surrounding region are investing in their own water supply, and
the knowledge that California's water politics will push them in the same
direction. While traditional desalinization will help, the costs in material
and electricity are prohibitive for small players.

~~~
pavel_lishin
Isn't transporting all the water likely to cost more than distilling it on
site?

~~~
JamesLeonis
To be honest I'm not sure. Transportation is one of the largest unknowns in
this idea. On top of that, there's also the unknown of _offloading_ the water
at a given destination.

My hope is to work out a solution that takes less energy than traditional
desalinization for the same amount of water, even with the transportation
energy requirements.

~~~
mason240
Couldn't you just put all the water onto converted oil tankers and bring it
right to cities like San Diego or LA?

~~~
philipkglass
Freshwater consumption absolutely dwarfs oil consumption. People also ask "if
you can build long distance oil pipelines, can't you build long distance water
pipelines?" It's not impossible, but it's not particularly affordable either
because the value of water per liter is so much lower.

~~~
toomanybeersies
You don't need a pipeline for water most of the time. You can use open canals,
which are much cheaper to build.

------
Detect
Making clean water extremely abundant and cheap is also part of the problem.
When it's cheap and abundant, instead of valuing it, we tend to waste and
pollute it. In many places, we're not paying the true cost of clean water. In
other places, some bioregions just can't support as many people as it does
today without expensive technology and its unintended consequences. It's not
technology that needs to change; it's our worldview about our relationship
with water.

~~~
anubisresources
Exactly. Best way to deal with drought is to privatize the water supply and
raise the price of water. Higher water prices leads to low value agricultural
production moving elsewhere, minimizing water consumption.

~~~
solarengineer
Could water cost be increased without the privatisation? I'm apprehensive
about corporates taking the pricing to another extreme [0]

[0] [http://yournewswire.com/nestle-ceo-water-is-not-a-human-
righ...](http://yournewswire.com/nestle-ceo-water-is-not-a-human-right-should-
be-privatized/)

~~~
anubisresources
The state could raise the price, but the issues with water, particularly in
the developing world, require substantial amounts of investment in
distribution, cleaning, etc. Likely will require additional investment from
private sector.

Also, a political entity like the state is unlikely to arrive at an efficient
price. Likely to still be underpriced due to political pressure.

There's a really good book by Fedrik Segerfeldt called "Water for Sale". I
highly recommend checking it out. It goes over some possible public-private
partnerships that could help expand water access and minimize excessive water
usage.

[https://smile.amazon.com/Water-Sale-Business-Market-
Resolve/...](https://smile.amazon.com/Water-Sale-Business-Market-
Resolve/dp/1930865767/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1483489613&sr=8-1&keywords=water+for+sale)

It gets a bit preachy at points, but its a quick read and goes over how to
price water, investments that need to be made, etc

~~~
niftich
Does this plan theorize that in places like sub-Saharan Africa (and other
places where similar nonprofits are active [1]), the people living on the land
will pay true market prices for water out of their meager, subsistence
agriculture-based incomes, instead of sending a family member to the well?

[1] [https://thewaterproject.org/water-
scarcity/](https://thewaterproject.org/water-scarcity/)

~~~
anubisresources
I can speak for Uganda at least, since several of my contract farmers lead
fairly low income lives. Can't really speak for the rest of sub-saharan
Africa.

One of the biggest costs a peasant family currently has is the time it takes
for the woman of the family to get to the well and back with water (in Uganda,
it is always women doing this). She usually spends several hours each day
doing so. Obviously, this situation is improved greatly if they're near the
Nile or another river, but for those who are further afield they spend hours
of potentially productive time fetching water.

An increase in the price of water could incentivize development of closer
wells, better delivery methods, etc. by profit seeking companies, minimizing
the time she spends going back and forth between the well and her house. She
can spend that time working and generating income instead.

This will not improve household wealth in all cases, but I'm betting that
something like this would help improve several of these families lots in life.

------
digitalengineer
Great timing :-) We've got a lot of experience with water I n the Netherlands
(that little country that was partially build out of the ocean and that's
several meters below sea level. Y-combinator should become a member of Water
Alliance: "The Water Alliance focuses on innovative and sustainable water
technology that can be used worldwide". Startups around water technology, a
university and global businesses like Philips and more. See:
[http://wateralliance.nl/en/about-us/](http://wateralliance.nl/en/about-us/)

------
sciurus
If you want a picture of what life could be like if we don't get ahead of the
problem, read The Water Knife by Paolo Bacigalupi.

[http://windupstories.com/books/water-
knife/](http://windupstories.com/books/water-knife/)

~~~
pcmaffey
In similar vein, an interesting indie sci-fi movie from Mexico dealing with
the topic:

Sleep Dealer
[http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0804529/](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0804529/)

------
personlurking
For what it's worth, I remember seeing a shower system, a few years ago, out
of Scandinavia that recycles water (5 liters used instead of the normal 150
liters). IIRC, it's the one in the video [1].

On a personal note, it really is amazing how little water one needs to shower
with when using a bucket, as I once had to do while in Brazil.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYoeHFJAyhU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYoeHFJAyhU)
[3m50s]

Edit: It seems they're hiring, too. [https://orbital-systems.com/en-eu/about-
us/](https://orbital-systems.com/en-eu/about-us/)

------
20years
Too bad you have to be in the bay area. My son and I have been working on a
system that captures, stores, filters water and the whole thing is powered by
solar. Already did a small working prototype and are now working on a bigger
one. Can't be in the bay area though and we really need access to land/yard
space which we have where we are at.

~~~
anubisresources
I'm guessing this is for personal use and not agricultural or industrial? How
does the cost per gallon compare with desalination and wastewater recycling?

~~~
20years
Hoping to eventually target agricultural but we are not near that stage. The
current prototype we are working on is being developed more for personal home
use and communal type gardens. We have 2 local communal gardens in town that
we will be testing it out on after our backyard prototype is complete.
Initially the captured/stored water will primarily be used for watering and
cleaning. We would eventually like the water to be drinkable too but that's a
ways off.

It is more than just a capture/store system though. It taps into multiple
sensors to determine how much water to use for given situations in order to
not waste the water it does capture.

Honestly, I don't know how the cost would compare with desalination and
wastewater recycling. Isn't desalination really expensive?

~~~
anubisresources
Desalination is pretty pricey at ~$2000 per acre foot, but desalination and
wastewater recycling are your likely competition. Assuming of course that
you're only going to sell this in drought-stricken areas. If you're aiming for
wetter areas, you're competing with rain water, and its tough to beat free.

Could you give a walkthrough of how this works? I'm trying to get a better
grasp on your prototype

~~~
20years
"going to sell this in drought-stricken areas"

Yes. I am in California so see the affect of the drought.

Do you mind if I send you an email to the address in your handle?

~~~
CN7R
If you really want to see the affect of the drought, visit the Hispanic and or
local farmers.

------
clumsysmurf
Wondering if anyone is commercializing graphene based water filters anytime
soon:

[http://phys.org/news/2016-03-revolutionary-graphene-
filter-c...](http://phys.org/news/2016-03-revolutionary-graphene-filter-
crisis.html)

There is also nano-cellulose

[http://phys.org/news/2016-02-nano-cellulose-filters-
highly-e...](http://phys.org/news/2016-02-nano-cellulose-filters-highly-
effective.html)

------
joshuamcginnis
Why isn't there more support for nuclear-powered desalination?

[http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/non-
power-n...](http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/non-power-
nuclear-applications/industry/nuclear-desalination.aspx)

~~~
Ericson2314
I've always thought it really cool how we can collapse the water problem into
the energy problem. (And, to be clear, I agree with your solution to the
energy problem.)

~~~
debacle
Every problem is at its core an energy problem.

~~~
kmicklas
This is the one fact that keeps me relatively optimistic about the future of
civilization.

------
joshuak
Ok, I'll bite. I'm the dumbing guy in the room, so I need some help
understanding.

Given that water is 71% of the earth's surface[1], it seems like this is
mostly a transportation problem.

We don't need to create water, unless that would make transport easer.

We don't need to filter water, unless that is easer to do then transporting
it.

In the case of drought, the problem seems to be the transport of water, and
near zero cost irrigation provided normally by rain.

Optimal water transportation seems to be the core problem to solve. With cost
effective localized irrigation replacement for rain a subset related problem.
(Perhaps if drought is more spacial than temporal, the irrigation solution
could be temporary and mobil so as to move to areas of drought as needed).

So what ways can we think of to transport water? Or if that's not the core
problem, then what is the right problem to solve?

[1]:[https://water.usgs.gov/edu/earthhowmuch.html](https://water.usgs.gov/edu/earthhowmuch.html)

~~~
kevlened
The 71% statistic is from all water sources. The difficulty is easily
accessible freshwater sources, so cheap desalination seems to be critical.

"Freshwater makes up a very small fraction of all water on the planet. While
nearly 70 percent of the world is covered by water, only 2.5 percent of it is
fresh. The rest is saline and ocean-based. Even then, just 1 percent of our
freshwater is easily accessible, with much of it trapped in glaciers and
snowfields. In essence, only 0.007 percent of the planet's water is available
to fuel and feed its 6.8 billion people."

[http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/freshw...](http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/freshwater/freshwater-
crisis/)

~~~
dogma1138
It's not that simple, you can't give people water without a sewage and water
waste management just look at what happened in Africa.

We had charities digging wells and what it did is make it worse for many many
people.

They had running water and with it came toilets with no treatment.

Fecal mater and water don't mix in nature it decomposes in drainage ditches it
becomes a hotspot for bacteria and parasites.

A lot of the feel good water projects in Africa didn't pan out that well for
the local population, they often bring deseases and contaminate the local
water supply, brake down and actually reduce the water security.

If we want to give people access to readily available water we have to give
them a full solution including what to do with the waste water and how to
safely treat and recycle it.

~~~
jacalata
Interesting, I've seen criticism of well projects in Africa but more about
having them run dry/break with no funds for maintenance. Do you have any
sources I could read for disease/problems caused by working wells?

------
saycheese
>> "We’re now reviewing applications on a rolling basis, so you can apply here
now."

What percentage of YC investments are funded on a rolling basis?

~~~
8a
What changed?

On what basis where applications reviewed before?

What do you mean here by rolling basis?

------
exabrial
Water is a very California problem at the second... Not every part of the USA
is in drought, but CA sure has. Nearly all of CAs water goes to agriculture.
It's a shame there's so much snobbery and false information around GMOs...
Having crops that could be grown with less water would be a huge benefit to
the world. Amazes me that people will take the scientific highroad to global
warming, but a witchcraft based approach with GMOs. That's where I'd put my
focus

~~~
DoodleBuggy
The problem most people have with GMOs is not that they have been genetically
modified per se, it's the pesticides and herbicides which are then flooded on
those GMO crops. In fact, everyone I know who eats organic is not doing so to
avoid the GMO component, but they are doing so to avoid the biocides.

And by the way, those biocides get into water supplies too.

~~~
ddispaltro
Isn't the point of GMO to reduce reliance on pesticides?

~~~
tnorthcutt
Assuming you mean herbicides as well as pesticides the answer is sometimes
yes, sometimes no. The classic example of a GMO crop is "Roundup Ready" corn,
developed by Monsanto. It makes the plant resistant to glyphosate, so the crop
can be sprayed, killing weeds &etc. without killing the corn.

~~~
ddispaltro
I guess as a lay person, I meant both. Makes sense, so does that effectively
reduce the volume of pesticides/herbicides, or does it just allow you to lay
it on with less precision?

~~~
munchbunny
I had to look it up to check what I was about to say:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_crops#Gly...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_crops#Glyphosate)

In the case of roundup ready crops, it sounds like it's both more effective as
an herbicide and less toxic. The Wikipedia page didn't say whether that was
toxicity towards humans. So in that sense roundup ready crops seem to be net
better for the consumer anyway.

Jury seems to be still out on whether roundup is actually harmful, leaning on
the no side at least according to the Wikipedia article on Glyphosate.

------
kanzure
How about moving around some ice bergs to areas in need of fresh water?

Dassault was working on "Project Ice Dream" \-
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PL5blnAH9xw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PL5blnAH9xw)
\- which centered on tugboats to move ice bergs around... sails would probably
work too.

This also doubles as large-scale cargo transportation between continents, for
cargo that can tolerate a 6 month journey. An awful lot of cargo can fit on an
ice berg with a surface area of many hundreds of square kilometers.....

more:
[http://gnusha.org/logs/html/2016-11-22.log.html#t20:04-166](http://gnusha.org/logs/html/2016-11-22.log.html#t20:04-166)

~~~
bootload
_" How about moving around some ice bergs to areas in need of fresh water?"_

Not easy. This was a problem my high school math tutor, a glaciologist
discussed with me one evening doing some applied math. cf
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12341964](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12341964)

~~~
kanzure
Tugboats aren't the only option--- you could use on-shore rope wrangling and
pulling, you could use sails, you could use focused orbital mirrors to melt
ice on one side as a propulsive force... and so on.

~~~
bootload
This idea of pushing, pulling icebergs was investigated by ppl much smarter
than me (Glaciology/Maths dept. Uni Melb) to see if it was at least feasible.
The idea has some merit, the physics (moments of inertia) get in the way. Make
for an interesting experiment to prove how.

------
SamBam
What is being done to use the brine produced by desalination?

Whenever I look into this, it seems that all the brine questions revolve
around how to dispose of it in a safe manner, or how to re-introduce it
gradually to the sea.

Why can't we turn brine into table salt, or use it in some industrial process?

~~~
pranjalv123
Sea water is about 3.5% salt by weight [1]. The city of Los Angeles uses about
14 billion gallons of water in a month [2]. This works out to something like 2
million tons of salt being produced just by LA in a single month. So we can
turn it into table salt... but it's something like six tons of table salt per
year per person.

[1]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seawater](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seawater)
[2]: [http://projects.scpr.org/applications/monthly-water-
use/los-...](http://projects.scpr.org/applications/monthly-water-use/los-
angeles-department-of-water-and-power/)

~~~
brianwawok
Where does all the waste water go? If 10 billion goes down the sewer and back
to the ocean, you can "re-salt" that water on the way out..

~~~
kaybe
Even better, you can build an osmosis power station and create a lot of
electricity. The energy in the salinity difference between the water of a
river and the water of the ocean is enormous.

(It basically works like this: You have two containers with water of different
salinities, connected with a membrane that only lets the water pass, but not
the salt. The water will move through the membrane to balance the salinity -
osmosis - and one container will have a rising water level, which can be used
to generate electricity with turbines.)

~~~
s0rce
Wouldn't it be better to simply recycle the non-salty water instead?

~~~
kaybe
Depends. You only need a difference in salinity, not non-salty water. If the
brine is much more saline than the ocean, there's your energy potential. On
the other hand, this kind of power plant also goes well at the mouth of a
river. You don't need clean water at all.

I don't know about California, is all the fresh water fully recycled until the
rivers are dry? That would be hard to imagine.

~~~
CN7R
I don't think the rivers would run dry if we recycled waste water, as a
majority of it is just dumped into the ocean.

------
spangry
I don't know if this is useful, but if you're looking to acquire more
background knowledge from someone with 'expertise' on water scarcity, perhaps
you might consider contacting the Singaporean government?

Water scarcity became a major policy issue for them around the time they were
kicked out of the Malaysian Federation in the 60s, probably because their main
water supply is located in Malaysia... They currently have the capacity to
satisfy 30% of their water demand using 'reclaimed water' (i.e. recycled) and
10% using desalinated. Although I don't think they actually need to fully
utilise these capacities as 50-75 per cent of their water needs are met by
man-made rainfall catchments [0].

I realise how strange it is to say 'just go have a chat with the Singaporean
government', but I suspect they'd be happy share their expertise. My sketchy
understanding is that Singapore has found that 'reclaimed' (i.e. recycled)
water is far more cost-effective (and cleaner) compared to desalinated water.

And despite being a semi-benevolent autocracy, the Singaporean government has
had to work pretty hard to convince their population that there's nothing
wrong with drinking recycled water (i.e. water that previously had poop in
it). Learning how they overcame this issue could be valuable...

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_supply_and_sanitation_in...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_supply_and_sanitation_in_Singapore#Water_sources_and_integrated_management)

------
msd81257
Surprised no one's mentioned Nebia: [https://nebia.com](https://nebia.com)

Super cool startup working on minimising water usage through increasing the
surface area/volume ratio of water droplets while taking a shower.

~~~
jayjay71
Nebia is already funded by Y Combinator (S15).

------
sethbannon
Love seeing YC increasingly focus on helping solve the world's biggest
problems.

------
torpfactory
Here's an idea:

Build out massive solar and wind power capacity and create electricity for the
grid. Use specially designed desalination plants which operate well at low
utilization and significant swings in production to smooth out the peaks in
the solar / wind production curves. Excess power is converted into clean
water. Water seems like a reasonably good place to "store" the value of the
energy you just created. Furthermore, what is the value of having a somewhat
more predictable power supply from solar and wind resources?

------
DoodleBuggy
It seems the lowest hanging fruit is rather simple; protect existing clean
water supplies.

Not sure how exciting of a startup idea it is to buy up and preserve large
tracks of land containing water and aquifers, though.

------
andrewl
This letter to the editor from the January 3, 2017 New York Times argues for
public funding of water systems:

 _Failures of the Private Water Industry_

[http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/03/opinion/failures-of-the-
pr...](http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/03/opinion/failures-of-the-private-
water-industry.html)

I wonder if there's any public funding of water system _research_?

------
delegate
> We’re optimistic we will beat climate change.

"Beat" climate change ? I think you people totally misunderstand the problem
then.

The reason it's happening in the first place is very simple and we all know
it: mindless, senseless, useless consumption of everything.

Armies of methodically brainwashed "consumers" unleashed upon the limited
world around them - under the war drums of advertising and marketing.

Water tech will help, but it will not fix climate change...

You can't "beat" climate change without addressing the elephant in the room.

Now that's a truly "hard" problem.

~~~
Kiro
You make it sound like consumption is only a bad thing.

------
toomuchtodo
Maybe reach out to these folks?
[https://openawg.github.io/](https://openawg.github.io/)

~~~
gault8121
This is awesome. Thanks for sharing.

------
niftich
What is the current state-of-the-art for portable, personal water purification
methods and devices, like the sort you could use to treat a bottle's worth of
water?

Devices like the LifeStraw [1], the LifeSaver bottle [2], the WaterIsLife
straw [3], and the SteriPEN [4], are nice, but they're pricey. Any ways of
reducing the cost?

[1] [http://lifestraw.com/](http://lifestraw.com/) [2]
[http://www.iconlifesaver.eu/](http://www.iconlifesaver.eu/) [3]
[http://waterislife.com/clean-water/the-straw](http://waterislife.com/clean-
water/the-straw) [4] [https://www.steripen.com/](https://www.steripen.com/)

------
PerfectElement
Aren't companies like Hampton Creek, Beyond Meat and Impossible Foods
indirectly working on this? I'd love to see other types of innovation but it
seems to me that the lowest hanging fruit is to decrease the demand for animal
based foods.

------
Pica_soO
If the climate becomes unreliable you need large scale underground water
storage of rain to compensate this.

Basically you need cheap, replaceable solar-pumps (that one is allready
doable).

And you need cheap, near surface volumes dug out and sealed. Actually all you
need for that is - a water pump and a glorified fridge. You drill a initial
hole- and now you pump water in and freeze it. Water expands, you thaw it and
repeat. Basically a giant intentional pothole.

Now, anyone here into tunnel engineering? How to cheaply seal the resulting
artificial cavern?

------
Entangled
Whatever the solutions, I'd like to see distributed, decentralized and
individual water generation/purification systems, specially using solar.

------
keithnz
we are doing a bunch of tech around better water usage on farms.
[http://www.mywildeye.com/wildeye/](http://www.mywildeye.com/wildeye/) We have
done a bunch of work in New Zealand and Australia and now moving into
California and the rest of the US.

One of the big things is not just to optimize water, but optimize the whole
problem which water is one part of.

------
chermanowicz
I'm excited about this quite a bit, but does YC have any experts on water &
science/engineering in general? "lower-cost desalination plants, novel
purification technologies" are technical science & engineering problems often
closely tied to academia & research. Fortunately though there are some great
resources in the Bay Area in these fields.

------
ALee
I've thought a lot about this and the key is not just technology, but the
ability to quickly automate the markets for the sale of water. In many cases,
water is plentiful, it's just very hard to get it somewhere. Infrastructure
combined with a way to automate water rights exchanges is a really important
part of this equation.

------
mmmBacon
Michael Burry of The Big Short fame is investing in water. Pretty interesting
article about investing in water.

[http://vintagevalueinvesting.com/how-to-invest-in-water-
like...](http://vintagevalueinvesting.com/how-to-invest-in-water-like-michael-
burry-from-the-big-short/)

------
nether
Is YC spreading this announcement anywhere else? Seems like Engineers Without
Borders might be a good audience (which is mostly
civil/environmental/mechanical engineers IME).

------
SeoxyS
Isn't the obvious solution here cheap/clean electricity = cheap/clean purified
water? Seems higher leverage to focus on the energy part of the equation.

------
olakease
If politicians were working for the common good and not just for the big
transnational companies we will not have this problem. What about fixing that?

------
franciscop
From the linked article:

> We’re now reviewing applications on a rolling basis, so you can apply here
> now.

However the "Apply page" is highly misleading:

> please submit your application online by 8 pm PT on October 4

So are water applications on a rolling basis or all of them?

~~~
cbcoutinho
It also reads as if you will be moving to the Bay Area now - did they already
make choices or was there a typo? The article is from today, but the rest of
the details make me think otherwise. It's pretty confusing..

Another thing to think about - why move to the Bay Area? Water is not a
software problem; water is an infrastructure, political, energy intensive
(we're talking drinking water, right?), and most importantly cost prohibitive
problem.

What does moving to the Bay Area get you in this arrangement - besides access
to YC people?

~~~
s0rce
If you are doing scientific R&D, the bay area has access to analytical
facilities at Stanford, Berkeley and a few DOE labs. It's not the worst place
in this regard. I'm sure you could manage in plenty of other places also, say
Boston, for example.

Source: I work at a startup in the bay area doing materials science research.

~~~
cbcoutinho
That's true, but I'm not sure you would have access to those institutions
through YC unless you or your team have prior contacts at one of them.

What's the startup?

------
cjbenedikt
Finally! Congrats!

------
marknutter
I thought the whole point of YCombinator was to find startups run by people
who are willing to listen to the market, "pivoting" to what might be a
different problem in a different market.

------
hackuser
> We’re optimistic we will beat climate change. But, at the same time, we need
> to prepare for things to get worse.

No, we need to act urgently to stop climate change; saying only "We're
optimistic" sends the message that it's not a critical problem that needs
urgent attention.

