Solar Energy, Vol. 16, pp. 97-105. Pergamon Press 1974.

Printed in Great Britain

REVIEW PAPER T W E N T Y Y E A R S OF WORK ON S O L A R D I S T I L L A T I O N AT T H E U N I V E R S I T Y OF CALIFORNIA

E. D. HOWE and B. W. TLEIMAT University of California, Berkeley, California, U.S.A. (Received 25 October 1973; in revised form 24 April 1974) Abstract--Solar distillation investigations at the Sea Water Conversion Laboratory, University of California, began in January 1952 and have continued to the present time. These studies have led to the development of still units of relatively small size, designed for furnishing potable water to isolated residences or small communities. Designs have been completed using wooden frames, precast concrete frames, and precast styrofoam basins. This paper gives information on the constrvction and performance of the several units; indicates the need for more effective utilization of solar energy; and offers a conceptual design of a solar collector for furnishing low-pressure steam for operation of a seawater distillation plant of advanced design with a capacity of 10,000 U.S. gal. (37-85 m3) per day. DESALINATION AND THE ENERGY CRISIS The energy crisis, about which much has been written recently, has resulted from the rapidly increasing per capita usage of energy as well as from the increase of population. The increase in usage is due largely to the multiplicity of uses for energy presented by the labor-saving devices used in industry and in dwellings. In the U S A the per capita demand for electrical energy in the r e s i d e n c e s / l , 2 / , now approximately 5 k w h per day, is increasing annually. The rate of increase is proving difficult for the power suppliers to develop added capacity fast enough to meet the demand, thereby giving rise to the probability of "brownouts" and "black-outs." Any development that adds substantially to the power demand is likely to worsen the situation, and the use of desalination on any large scale could substantially contribute to the energy crisis, To understand the problem of power for desalination, it is well to note that part of the present demand for power is due to the pumps and other devices involved in the procurement and delivery of fresh water to existing populations. Whether the water comes from local wells or from distant reservoirs through pipelines and aqueducts, power must be supplied to transport the water to the user, and to process it to make it safe. The amount of power used for these purposes is large when considered for an entire system, but is small when placed on a per capita basis, amounting to a fraction of a k w h per day. Proposals to obtain fresh water 97 by the desalination of local saline sources would increase the per capita demand for energy appreciably, some methods of distillation requiring as much as 5 k w h of heat energy per capita per day to deliver the U S A average water demand of 150 gal per day (5681/day) per person. While research and development on desalination methods can lead to some decrease in the energy required for desalting water, all m e t h o d s - - e v e n when perfected--will still require considerable amounts of energy. SOLAR DISTILLATIONINVESTIGATIONS When research and development on methods of seawater conversion were begun at the University of California in 1951-52, the above large energy demand was foreseen, and as a result much effort was expended in the investigation of solar distillation and the use of other non-fuel sources of energy. By the use of solar energy it was thought that the otherwise serious inroads on fossil fuel energy could be avoided. Investigations of solar distillation, carried on since January 1952, can be divided into two 10-yr periods. The first ten years were devoted to improving the efficiency of simple solar stills and to possibly reducing the cost of desalting water by using these devices. Because the cost of water produced by these stills exceeded that produced by other methods of desalination, the portion of the annual appropriations devoted to solar distillation was decreased and the emphasis on solar investigations greatly reduced. As a result, the second 10-yr

98

E.D. Howe and B. W. TLEIMAT feeding process. If batch-feeding is used, the amount of feed is regulated to dilute the residual brine left from previous evaporation to approximately twice the original salinity of the feedwater. The performance of this type of unit is given in Fig. 3, in which it is seen that efficiencies of operation were of the order of 50 per cent, with maximum production rates approximately 1 gpd for each 8 ft: (5-1 l./day/m 2) of glass area. The superior efficiency of the tilted-tray type is seen from the comparison of its performance with that of other simple solar stills shown in Fig. 3. It should be clear that the tilted nature of these units would require a wide spacing between adjacent units to avoid shading of one by the other. In spite of the high efficiency of this design, there has been no extensive use of it, probably due to its relatively complicated nature and resultant high cost. The work of the second 10-yr period was concerned to a large extent with the production of units suitable for use in small isolated communities in California or on the coral islands and atolls of the South Pacific Ocean. Much of this work was done in cooperation with the South Pacific Commission, under whose auspices a series of demonstration units were placed on several of the South Pacific atolls. The design conditions imposed by this service included not only low cost, but also the need for the devices to be simple and suitable for operation by people having little experience with mechanical equipment. The solar still seemed to satisfy these conditions. The various types of solar equipment suggested and tested on the atolls included a plastic-covered circular still, a tilted-tray still, and basin-type stills with a sawtooth roof arrangement, all of which are shown in Fig. 4. Of these, the one found to be the most acceptable was the sawtooth type with glass cover. The circular

period was devoted to attempts to minimize the cost of small or family-size units. In this size range, the cost of water produced by conventional methods was appreciably greater than that of water produced by solar distillation. Fig. 1 shows the solar distiller test area in 1960, toward the end of the first period noted above. The first stills--of the glass-covered, shallow-basin type--were constructed on stilts above the ground to protect the wooden bottom panels of the shallow basins from rotting on the ground and to facilitate changes in the bottom insulation. This scheme of mounting also made servicing and leveling easier than would have been the case with the stills placed on the ground, During this period experiments were conducted to study the features which would seem to affect the efficiency of the still, such as various geometrical configurations, batch-feeding versus continuous-feeding, means of recirculation of air, and kinds and thicknesses of insulation. The conditions which seemed to lead to maximum efficiency were found to be: (1) a low heat capacity of the still and the water contained in it; (2) a low inclination of the vapor-tight transparent cover; and (3) good insulation of the tray bottom. The majority of the stills in Fig. 1, having been constructed during the initial experiments, have steep angles of cover glass. The units with low glass angles, adopted later, are shown at the sides of the installations. Also in the photograph are some small units of the tilted-tray type, which had the highest efficiencies of any of the solar stills built during this period. A summary of the work of this first period can be found in Ref.[3]. Figure 2 shows more detail of the tilted-tray type of solar still. Water feed is introduced to the upper tray and drips down the several steps during the

Fig. 1. Solar distillation test area, UC Sea Water Conversion Laboratory, Richmond, California. View looking northeast. Pyrheliometers on tower center rear.

Solar Distillation at the University of California

Sea water in Sealant

99

.<

Glass panes 36in. x 1 8 i n

Formed cooper foil

%

~ ~.~b>>.

Proauct outlet

Polyethylene film

~r~

~'~
D i r t fill "

~
. _ _ g/ ~

Brine out

'

"-

Fig. 2. UC # 41

Copper-foil tilted-tray solar still (cross section).

The most recent developments at the Sea Water Conversion Laboratory, University of California, is ~,4[- I I I/ / ~ the cast plastic still patented by two members of the / J ~ ~ technical staff, J. C. Hensley and P. G. Young. ~,2 ~ Shown in Fig. 5, this device is cast from expanded ~ ' ~~ o * ( " ~ ~ / ~ ~ / talPlystyrene in units of 3.8 ft 2 (0.353 m 2) of horizOn-other c.o ,-,o/ ~o! area. Besides the cast enclosure, the s~ / ~ ~ ~ ~ materials needed are glass for the cover and OOB ~ ~ ~- ~ dark-colored pebbles for covering the bottom to . absorb the solar energy. Several units in series--a " o06 ~ @ / / "~ combination of 12 units being shown in Fig. 5--are ~= / / ~ ~ )~0~;'/~ -used when larger amounts of water are desired. In o 04 this installation, a single water-supply device and a single distillate-collection device serve all 12 of the 0o2 individual stills. The performance characteristics of J this type of unit is shown in Fig. 6, together with - ~ ~ooi,ooo ,5ooi 2oool 25ool 300o curves showing the comparison with other basinB,o type stills. Solar radiation, ft2dY At the same time as the experimentation at the Fig. 3. Comparison of productivity with efficiency 07) as University of California was going on, there were parameter # 7 Greenhouse 199-9 ft: (18.6 m~), # 16 n u m e r o u s efforts to design a n d c o n s t r u c t large s o l a r Greenhouse 411.2 ft: (38.2 m~), # 41 tilted tray 34.8 ft 2 (3.24m~). stills elsewhere. These several experimental accomplishments are described and summarized in publications by the United Nations[4], the US still with the plastic cover was found to be difficult Office of Saline Water [5], and a summary article by to maintain because the wind and sun caused the Eibling et al.[6]. All of these publications include sheet plastics then available to deteriorate, develop references to the very extensive work done on cracks, and break. The tilted-tray units required the simple basin-type solar stills. maintenance of rather accurate positioning to keep The general conclusions to be drawn from these the entire length functioning, investigations as well as from the publications
2o~c 4c~:
~day

~co,

G~o~

8o~,

100

E.D. HOWE and B. W. TLEIMAT ~ ~_~ i ... ~ of water produced by solar distillation will vary only slightly with size, since the unit cost of additional areas of glass or other transparent covers will be nearly the same as for the basic unit. The major saving for large units would only result from reductions in unit costs if very large quantities of the materials were to be required.
MULTIPLE-EFFECT DISTILLATION W I T H SOLAR ENERGY

i
......

~|!RI ............ : ~ *,~ ~ , ~~i~ ~ ' z ..... '

~ I~ ~l~ ,~

: ................ ~

..... ~ ~, .......... ,,,,, , .._~,~ ]

..........
...... ~ : ~ : : , . ~ (

L~ . . . . . .......~,~, ~ ..,,~

~ .................. ......

~,:~ ;~ ; ~

..... .................. "~

The experience of the past 20 yr indicates (to the writers) that the simple solar distiller, with its poor efficiency and its large capital outlay, is not likely to find wide usage for water desalination. It is therefore essential to consider other ways in which solar energy can be applied to water desalination. Several possible schemes have been devised for using solar heat more effectively than in the simple solar stills already described. Humidificationdehumidification schemes, such as that originated by Hodges[7], use separate units for solar heat collection, evaporation, and condensation. Other schemes, discussed by Eibling e t al.[8], Brice [9], and Weihe [10], propose the use of conventional distillation units with heat supplied from tionalSlar collectors.distillers ThiSrequiresUSe solarvacuumheatinconditionsCOnvenof throughout much of the plant, thereby involving deaeration of the feed as well as the expenditure of energy for maintaining the vacuum. No sizable solar plants of this type have been constructed to date, probably because the estimated cost of collected solar heat has been greater than that of heat from fossil fuels, and experimentation with distiller units can be conducted more readily with fossil-fuel heat than with solar heat. The critical element in all of the above schemes is the solar collector, since its unit cost and effectivehess determines the cost of the heat energy produced. Although the previously mentioned reports have different bases, the costs of heat energy determined from their figures are of significant interest, ranging from $1-15 per million Btu ($4.56/million kcal) reported by Weihe[10] and as high as $6.44/million Btu ($25-56/million kcal) according to Brice[9]. Hodges[7] does not give the direct cost of heat energy, but does give the cost of the collector and the amount of the water produced by the plant, from which the writers have deduced an energy cost of $3.64/million Btu ($14-44/million kcal) for the "most expensive" solar collector and $1-30/million Btu ($5-16/million kcal) for the "least expensive" collector. It is noted that Hodges and Brice both used collectors built on the ground,

"~'~i~ .....~~,~ ~.~, ,=~R!,: . ~ .. ~ . . . . . ....... ~ i~ /~,,,

~/

~~

....

Fig. 4. Solar Stills at the University of California. # 41-Copper-foil tilted tray. 34-8ft ~ (3.24m'-) open glass area [8 glass sheets each 18in.36in. (0.457 m 0.914 m)]. #42--Round still with conical plastic Tedlar cover, Projected open area 49.8 f(- (4.63 m~). # 52--Sawtooth type with concrete frame. 252 ft-"(23.4 mz) open glass area 128 glass sheets each 18in.36in. (0-457m 0.914 m)]. # 55--Sawtooth type with wooden frame. 47.2 ft ~(4-4 m~) open glass area [6 glass sheets each 24 in. 36in. (0.61 m 0.914 m)]. referred to above, are that water produced by simple solar-still distillation costs approximately $3 to $5/1000 gal. ($0.80-$1.30/m3), and is competitive with the cost of water produced by other methods of desalination only in the size range below about 5000-10,000gal/day (19-38 m~/day). The unit cost

Solar Distillation at the University of California

101

Fig. 5. UC #58--Polystyrene still. 12 units in parallel, each with glass sheet 24in.24in. (0.61 m 0.61 m).

m 2 x cla y

,:co,

laF 0,2
0"10

2~ [

4000

6~o

eooo

t
~"
~

[ [ r/ / ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t o0

I 5

)1

0.08

~ o 1

JS/
~ 1

~ o . c ~ - / ~ / ~ ~ ~ ~ / ~:=

E 2

covered with two or more layers of transparent plastic and arranged to warm up the water flowing through the collectors without permitting evaporation. The tempe ratures were of the order of 140F (60C) to 160F (71C). In contrast, the collectors proposed by Eibling et al. [8] and Weihe [10] were of the concentrating type, both of them used parabolic cylinders, with the heat receiver in the form of a pipe along the axis of the cylinder. These devices were used to produce steam at pressures slightly above atmospheric, thus delivering low-pressure steam to the distiller units. DESIGN OF A 10,000gal/day (37.85 m-~/day) SOLAR-HEATED DISTILLATIONPLANT Believing that further efforts should be made to apply solar energy to efficient distillation processes, the writers present the design of a small plant utilizing solar energy and producing 10,000 gal/day (37.85 m3/day) of distilled water. Figure 7 shows a schematic flow diagram of the proposed plant. The upper part of the diagram illustrates the heat collection and steam production section while the

o,oz

800

1000

~500

2000

Solar

radiation,

: Beuo y ft2xd

2500

Io

5000

Fig. 6. Comparison of productivity with efficiency (-q) as parameter # 7 Greenhouse 199.9ft (18.6 m), # 16 Greenhouse 411.2 ft (38-2 m), # 58 Expanded polystyrene (12units).

102 j
" I~ ....

E.D. HOWE and B. W. TLEIMAT producing section, so that this portion of water is recirculated over and over again. The steamproducing section consists of a solar heat collector, two hot-water storage tanks, a deaerator, a flash chamber, circulating pumps, vacuum equipment,

I I60F Vocuum 2 " " to*or

_ 1:~']2 .....

90F

32%

and the required piping and valves. In operation, one hot-water storage tank--for example, Tank L-'~~ ~mber I I~ l--supplies the hot water through Valve 1 and into ! ,~ ~ hsoo v the deaerator where the noncondensible gases are =1 _ ~ I ~65.5oc ~%ovc ' L r removed. The deaerated water enters the flash chamber where part of it flashes into vapor, and the 59 C 62oc I~ other part is delivered by Pump 1 through Valves 7 t 158 F [44 F I I

If~a9

[__

vowu~ ,

an

6,n,o,

o,a

co,,ectorand.enbac

in,o

,~----~]Hj

;
e l l ] w ~g_o ~ f

I lll
p

) I

L___2L___ !.,J - - ' ~ _ _ ] i

Finol condenser .

- - ~

wu'er ~X

Pout rdc

Tank 2. During the evening, night and morning hours, Valves 7 and 4 would be closed, Pump 2 stopped, and Valve 8 opened, thus bypassing the solar heat collector to minimize heat loss. During any 24-hour period, one tank would be emptied while the second tank would be filled with hot water ready for the cycle to be repeated by reversing the procedure outlined above.

Fig. 7. Ten-effect upflow vertical tube distillation plant with solar heat collector steam generation (schematic flow diagram), lower section depicts the multiple-effect verticaltube upflow distillation plant. The only connection between the two parts is the steam supply and the return condensate. It will be noted that solar heat produces steam at 150F (65-5C) and that this steam is used to operate the distiller. This proposed plant is assumed to serve a small community located on or close to a sea coast between 30 north and 30 south latitude. The calculations are based on the assumption that cloud cover will exist not more than 25 per cent of the time and that electricity is available or could be generated on the site by a Diesel engine generator. The average annual solar radiation intensity for 30 latitude is approximately 600,000 Btu/f/yr (1.628 million kcal/m"/yr), or an average daily isolation of 2000 Btu/ft2/day (5425 kcal/m2/day) for 300 sunny days per year. This average figure is used to calculate the size of the solar collector needed for supplying the necessary heat to the plant,

Solar collector
The conceptual design conditions selected for this plant and indicated in the foregoing paragraphs assume a temperature of 150F (65,5C) for the vapor produced by flashing of the solar-heated water from 160F (71C), the average temperature of the water in the hot-water storage tank. The 160F (71C) temperature limitation makes it possible to use a collector of the non-concentrating, or flat-plate, type. This is preferred by the writers because of the large amount of experimental information available on such collectors, although the proposed collector would be much larger than any of those previously constructed. Two possible collector configurationsare suggested: one i s a l o n g shallow flow channel covered with two transparent layers; and the other, a metal tube-in-sheet receiver covered with a single transparent layer. The first of these configurations, similar to the design used by Hodges[7] at Puerto Pefiasco, would have a basin liner of butyl rubber forming the flow channel and serving as the radiation receiver. A sheet of transparent plastic would float on the surface of the flowing water to prevent evaporation. Above this would be a second transparent cover serving as a radiation shield and as a suppressor of convection currents over the floating cover. Glass, rather than sheet plastic, would be used for the outer cover to achieve maximum useful life for the collector. One possible design would have a sawtooth outer cover, as shown on the solar still in Fig. 4. The low edges of

Steam production by solar energy

The steam-producing section of the plant, shown in the upper portion of Fig. 7, contains a supply of fresh water which circulates through this section of the plant to collect heat and produce steam for heating the distiller. The steam so used is condensed in the distiller and returned to the steam-

Solar Distillation at the University of California the glass panes would rest on aluminum Tee-bars, and would be hinged along the ridges with silicone sealant, as in the Australian stills reported by Morse and Read[13]. It is estimated that a large collector of this type should cost about $0-75 per ft 2 ($8/m2), and should operate with a collection efficiency of about 50 per cent. The second configuration suggested for the collector would be the type of flat-plate collector used for solar water heaters. In this case it is proposed to use an aluminum tube-in-plate element for the receiver, with a wooden or metal frame around the edges to support the single glazing required and to secure the insulation beneath the receiver. The outer surface of the receiver would be coated with a selective material to give the surface a low emissivity for low-temperature radiation. This type of collector, when mounted with the long axis east and west and the surface sloped toward the equator with an inclination angle equal to the latitude, is reported by Tabor[12] to have a collection efficiency of about 65 per cent. The cost of this type of collector would depend on the availability of the tube-in-sheet material and its unit cost. It is to be expected that the cost would be at least as great as that of the first configuration mentioned, and probably would be approximately $1 per ft" ($10.76/m:) of collector surface. The difficulties met with in older tube-in-strip experiments could be avoided in this case since the same water is in continuous recirculation, thus making it feasible to either treat the surfaces of the flow channels or to treat the water to avoid the corrosion problems previously encountered, The area of collector surface required will depend on the amount of steam needed by the distiller and on the efficiency of the solar collector, On the assumption that the distiller must produce a yearly average of 10,000 gal/day (37.85 m3/day) and that the solar collector will operate for 300days/year, the given conditions of insolation noted above would require collector area of 18,000f( (1672m 2) for a 35 per cent efficiency; 13,000 ft ~ (1208 m 2) for a 50 per cent efficiency; and 9000 ft 2 (836 m 2) for a 70 per cent efficiency.

103

19,000 ft 3 (538 m3), thereby fixing the minimum size of the tanks. This volume could be satisfied with a square tank 35 ft (10.67 m) on each side and 16.5 ft (5.03 m) deep. These dimensions allow for a 5 per cent additional quantity of water. The tanks would be constructed with the side walls of concrete blocks and the bottom containing a layer of sand 8 in. (20 cm) deep. The two tanks would be placed side by side in a pit and surrounded with a polyethylene sheet to serve as a vapor barrier. This vapor barrier would also extend under the bottom layer of sand. Between the vapor barrier and the side walls there would be two inches (5cm) of insulation, either glass wool or foamed plastic. The insides of the tanks would be lined with a plastic film to ensure dry concrete walls and a dry sand bottom, thus giving maximum thermal insulation and ensuring minimum heat losses to the grour,d. Tank covers would be constructed of wood, with adequate seals to minimize the escape of vapor to the outside air.

Multieffect evaporator This proposed evaporator is a 10-effect verticaltube evaporator operating in the upflow mode to eliminate in-between-effect pumps. The vapor produced in the flash chamber is fed into the first effect where it condenses on the outside of the tubes, and is then returned to the steam-producing section of the plant. The heat transfer tubes in each of the ten evaporators would be of the doublefluted type made of aluminum brass. To further improve the heat transfer, surfactants in the amount of 10-25ppm, would be added to the feedwater, thereby increasing the heat transfer coefficient. The amount of heat transfer surface needed was determined from experimental data given by Sephton [11] for this combination of tubes and suffactant. In this plant the ten effects would be housed in a single vessel to minimize cost, with the piping and flow channels contained in the same enclosure. Plant operation According to Fig. 7, seawater enters the final condenser at 70F (21C), and sel, cs as cooling water to condense the vapor produced in the last effect and to cool the product water from the other effects. At the outlet of the condenser, part of the warmed cooling water is discharged for heat dissipation, and the balance is fed in a countercurrent direction through heater tubes in the ten effects for preheating. Then, after the seawater is passed through a deaerator where the noncondensible

Hot water storage tanks As indicated in Fig. 7, the system requires two hot-water storage tanks, one to supply water to the flash chamber and the other to supply water to the solar collector. Each of these tanks must have sufficient capacity to supply water to the flash chamber for 24 hours. The amount of water needed under the assumed conditions of operation is

104

E.D. HOWE and B. W. TLEIMAT 3.5

gases are driven out, it is pumped into the first effect. In this effect, part of the seawater is evaporated by condensation of the steam from the steam-producing section of the plant, and the slightly concentrated brine is passed to the second effect. The vapor from the first effect constitutes the heating steam for the second effect. This process repeats itself in each succeeding effect until the tenth effect. The final brine residue is then pumped from the last effect at 90F (32C) and discharged, while the vapor produced in the last effect, together with the accumulated liquid products from the other effects, is introduced into the final condenser for condensing the vapor from the last effect and cooling the product. The product is then pumped out from the condenser and discharged out of the plant boundary for consumption or storage. Economic considerations The two quantities of economic interest are the cost of heat energy and the cost of water. The cost of heat energy at 150F (65.5C) is based on the capital outlay needed for the entire production system, i.e., the cost of equipment in the upper section of Fig. 7, including the solar collector and all other devices needed to deliver the steam to the distiller. The cost of the several components of the steam-producing section is estimated at $10,600 without the solar collector. The cost of heat energy delivered to the distiller is shown in Fig. 8 as a function of the useful life of the steam-producing section of the plant. The curves in this figure are based on the use of money at 6 per cent and on the assumption that the entire cost of the heat is the amortization of the capital cost of the equipment, The several assumed values for the collector cost appear as parameters on the curves. Obviously the cost of heat is a function of the interest rate and varies proportionally with the interest rate. The cost of the distiller plant was computed from the unit costs of the several components. Due to the relatively small size of the plant, the cost of the evaporator section will be high, and is estimated on the basis of $20/f ($215 per m 2) of heat transfer surface. The cost of the final condenser will be somewhat less, and is assumed to be $10/f ($107.60]m2). The inter-effect feed-heater tubing is estimated on the basis of $5/f ($53.80/m2). It is assumed that this plant, with an estimated total capital cost of $32,000, can be amortized in 30 yr at 6 per cent interest. The annual operating cost is estimated at $14,900, based on an estimated $2310 for amortization, $2590 for electric power at

3.0 \ ~o~~k
~m 2-e =g E ,~ ~ "~Oo/ ~ ,.5 r~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m 2 ~6 Jo "~'Oo/f~2 ~ - ~, [ ~ "~. #/o.~,~,_~ o5

-~z -~o

~2o k

" ~

~" 2-= _ ,~

'5

Collectorlife, yr

,;

2o

2'5

3o

Fig. 8. Cost of useful solar heat as a function of system life at an inlerest rate of 6 per cent with the cost of col[ector per unit area as a parameter. $0.03/kWh, and $10,000 for labour. The total operating cost does not include the cost of land and makes no allowance for the cost of fresh water distribution or storage beyond the boundaries of the plant. Seawater for cooling and feed purposes is regarded as available at the plant boundaries, i.e., the plant is located very near to the shoreline of the ocean. Similarly, no allowance is included for costs related to brine disposal, which implies that the waste brine could be returned to the ocean without harm to the local ecology. Using the annual operating cost noted above, the cost of water production can be computed. With an assumed life of 20 yr for the solar collector, the cost of water produced can be shown to lie between $4.52 and $6.45/1000gal ($1.19 and $1.80/m3), depending on the cost of the collector. While these figures are high as compared with the cost of water from large desalination plants, they are of the same order of magnitude as those for water from simple solar distillers. The advantage of this proposed type of plant as compared with simple solar distillers would be the reduced amount of ground area required as a result of the increased efficiency o( the usage of solar energy. It is also noted that the major elements of annual cost for this plant are the labor and the electrical power for operating the pumps, with the plant amortization costs slightly less than the cost of electrical power.

Solar Distillation at the University of California

REFERENCES

105

I. G. R. Bell, Conventional energy--possibilities/limits. Paper presented at The Energy Crisis : Who Owns the Sun? Conference, Oakland M u s e u m , Oakland, California (1973). 2. P. N. Ross, D e v e l o p m e n t of the nuclear-electric energy e c o n o m y . Power S y s t e m s , W e s t i n g h o u s e Electric Corporation. 3. E. D. Howe, Solar distillation research at the University of California. Paper No. E/Conf. 35/S[29, UN Conference on New Sources of Energy (1961). 4. United Nations, Solar Distillation as a m e a n s of Meeting Smallscale W a t e r D e m a n d s . U N Publication ST/ECA/121 (1970). 5. S. G. Talbert, et at., Manual on Solar Distillation of Saline Water. U.S.D.I. Office of Saline Water R & D Progress Report No. 546 (1970). 6. J. A. Eibling, et al., Solar stills for c o m m u n i t y use. Solar Energy 13, (2), 263-276 (1971). 7. C. N. Hodges et al., Solar distillation utilizing

multiple-effect humidification, U.S.D.I. Office of Saline Water R & D Report No. 194 (1966). 8. J. A. Eibling, et al., Research investigations of multiple-effect evaporation of saline waters by steam from solar radiation. U.S.D.I. Saline Water Conversion Program R & D Progress Report No. 2 (1954). D. B. Brice, Saline water conversion by flash evaporation utilizing solar energy. Saline Water Conversion 1I, Advances in Chemistry Series, No. 38, pp. 99-116. American Chemical Society, Washington, D.C. (1963). H. Weihe, Fresh water from sea water, distilling by solar energy. Solar Energy 13. (4), 439-444 (1972). H. H. Sephton, Interface e n h a n c e m e n t for vertical tube evaporators. American Society of Mechanical Engineers Paper No. 71-HT-38, (August 1971). H. Tabor, Solar energy collector design. Bull. Res. Comm. Israel. C. Tech. 5C, (1), 5-27 (1955). R. N. Morse and W. R. W. Read, A rational basis for the engineering development of a solar still. Solar Energy, 12, (1),5-18 (1968).

9.

10. I1.

12. 13.

R ~ s u m 6 - - L e s recherches sur la distillation solaire ont c o m m e n c 6 au Laboratoire de Conversion de I'Eau de M e t de l'Universit6 de Californie en Janvier 1952 et elles se sont poursuivies j u s q u ' h pr6sent. L e s recherches ont abouti h la mise au point d'unit6s de distillation de dimension relativement petite. c o n q u e s pour fournir de l'eau potable ~ des habitations ou groupes d'habitations isol6es, l,eur dessin convient ~ l'utilisation de cadres en bois, en b6ton pr6fabriqu6 et de bassins en m o u s s e de plastique moul6. Le rapport d o n n e des indications sur le r e n d e m e n t de plusieurs unit6s ainsi que sur leur construction. S'y trouve 6galement un expos6 des besoins pour une utilisation plus eflicace de l'6nergie solaire, et la pr6sentation d ' u n projet dans lequel un collecteur solaire est utilis6 pour fournir de la vapeur '~ b a s s e pression b. une installation de distillation d'eau de m e t d'un type avanc6, d ' u n e capacit6 journali6re de 10,000 gal. (37.85 m'). R e s u m e n - - L a s investigaciones en distilaci6n por energia solar que se llevan a cabo en el Laboratorio para la Conversi6n del Agua del Mar de la Universidad de California, e m p e z a r o n en el mes de enero de 1952, y han continuado h a s t a el m o m e n t o actual. Estos estudios resultaron en el desarrollo de alambiques de un tamafio relativamente pequefio, disefidos para proporcionar agua potable a viviendas o pequefios vecindarios apartados. Se hart completado disefios empleando bastidores de madera, bastidores de hormig6n prefabricados y e s t a n q u e s de e s p u m a de poliestireno prefabricados. Este articulo detalla los datos sobre la construcci6n y el rendimiento de las distintas unidades; indica ta necesidad de u n a utilizaci6n mils efectiva de la energia solar; y ofrece un disefio conceptual de un colector solar para proporcionar vapor de baja presi6n para el funcionamiento de una instalaci6n de distilaci6n del agua del mar de un disefio moderno, con una capacidad de 10,000 galones E s t a d o u n i d e n s e s (37.85 m ~) por dia.