There truly couldn’t be much of a downside to these technologies.
What you mean to say is “We don’t know what the downside will be untill these technologies are implemented and used for a long time and then studied.” Otherwise you sound like the well-intentioned-but-unhinged chemist that accidentally starts the zombie apocalypse at the beginning of the movie.
Hi_ImSomeone@lemmy.world 2 days ago
There’s two impacts these panels could have. There’s the solar irradiation aspect, and the air humidity aspect of them.
In the solar irradiance balance, you have a net energy in, most of which goes directly to heating the ground. A panel would aim to absorb as much as that energy as you can, most of which would go towards a phase change of the material to release the water bonds. MOFs are extremely clean in terms of their re-usability, and don’t release any other compounds into the steam when released. Think of it like a condensation system, but without having to collect any water from any ground based source.
The air humidity is the other balance. In theory you could “absorb all the water out of the air”. In most business cases, these need to be deployed to more coastal regions, not literally smack in the middle of the desert. But in such cases, the atmosphere is highly dynamic and more or less equalizes total air water content in a certain microclimate. It makes it very renewable since the sun evaporates massive amounts of water from water bodies, which can be returned via either rain, or through water harvested through water-from-air chemistry.
The industry will want to buy water regardless of where they are, so when evaluating technologies, these provide much lower impact to the environment than any existing groundwater based system.