yes that seems so much cheaper and more practical than pumping all the water you would ever need out of the ocean and processing it.
I doubt that mass production of water by fog capture is feasible with current technology, but it could be a good local supplement to the overall water supply.
Coastal fog capture can be highly productive. It is being used successfully in Peru and Chile to provide water for agriculture in desert areas. California has better coastal weather patterns for fog capture. The only problem is political, the public may object to the massive fog capture assemblies necessary and there is no political interest for funding even a pilot program. Desalinization has a far larger political constituency, being more energy intensive.
It would be like ethanol--you would need more water to keep the vegetation alive than you will capture on its leaves and drain into your cup I support desal. The more we do it, the cheaper it will become as we innovate within the practice which will then make it easier to put in places like Mexico, the Middle east and Northern Africa to allow them to transition toward the post-oil world in which water control won't be the weapon of oppression
If CA experiences a mega-drought (as some climate scientists say has been decade long in the past) those massive fog capture assemblies or desalinization plants could start looking really good.
It is difficult to do so because climate change issues are complex. The only safe way is to lower resource and energy consumption, but that can't happen if all stakeholders (governments, businesses, and households) need or want the opposite.
This is why many people choose to sleep next to someone else's significant other... - - - Updated - - - How much energy? Can solar and wind supply most of the power required for desalination?
The other side to it is that moisture goes somewhere, and waters something. Fog capture will steal moisture from somewhere.
Granny says is cause... ... ever'body talks about the weather... ... but can't nobody do nuthin' `bout it.
Not really. Most of the fog simply dissipates back into the atmosphere when the sun comes up. Capturing fog would not prevent the fog from wetting whatever it comes into contact with while it is present. It would only reduce the amount of excess fog that is dissipated by the sunlight. This could, of course, affect rainfall patterns, if fog capture was widely implemented.
That water that "dissipates" is still present. Fog that dissipates is simply evaporated back into the air as water vapor. The other thing is the current flora and fauna in those areas is adapted to getting the moisture from that fog (or not). Any time we manipulate nature we change it, and rarely is it for the better.
Because Man is a weak and puny creature opposed to Mother Nature and her awesome powers. Hell! We don't even understand local weather. And much of the rest of the world is simply outside out knowledge.
When you say "we" you speak for yourself only....scientist have a very good knowledge of weather and climate even if you don't...
Yup, and they're very good...a week ago the weather in my area for today was projected to be partially cloudy with scattered rain showers and guess what?...partially cloudy and scattered rain just as forecast...and the weather where I live on the edge of the Rocky mountians and the great plains can be very volatile so meteorologists do very well indeed...
