• Memeburn
      Tech-savvy insight and analysis
    • Gearburn
      Incisive reviews for the gadget obsessed
    • Motorburn
      Because cars are gadgets
    • Jobsburn
      Digital industry jobs for the anti 9 to 5!

Is Durban man’s Airwater solution to Cape Town’s drought really that water-tight?

It sounds like a breakthrough solution – producing water from condensation in the air. But in his bid to solve Cape Town’s water crisis, a Durban man could be knowingly wasting thousands of litres of water.

Airwater CEO Ray de Vries has in recent weeks appeared on television talk shows and in newspaper articles warning that if the water crisis is not tackled Cape Town will be “dry by Christmas”, while punting his machines that he claims can provide a sustainable water solution to everyone from offices and restaurants to car-wash services.

De Vries, the former marketing manager for the country’s Dusi Canoe Marathon, claims his solution has the perfect “talkability, profitability and responsibility” to make it a winning product.

But there’s just one hitch. His water makers rely on electricity to produce the water. The catch is about 90% of South Africa’s power is generated by coal-fired plants, which the US-based Union of Concerned Scientists estimates use between 75 and 225 litres of water to produce just one kilowatt hour of electricity.

De Vries’s Airwater website states that his machines – which can produce up to 32l a day – use between 0.45 and 0.55 kilowatt hours of electricity per day. It means that for every litre of water a machine produces, coal-fired power stations are using a further one to four litres just to produce the electricity that powers his machines. This doesn’t exactly make it a water saver.

Yet when this is pointed out to him De Vries, surprisingly, agrees. “That’s 100% (true) but it’s highly theoretical,” he says, adding that he’s “had this conversation before”.

He however points out that unlike water produced by spring water bottling companies, the water his machines produce “never existed before”.

For every litre of water a machine produces, coal-fired power stations are using a further one to four litres just to produce the electricity that powers his machines

While De Vries imports the smaller machines which make up to 32l a day, he’s aiming to sell the larger SA-produced ones to private bottlers.

In November he plans to open a plant in Cape Town which will produce water in glass bottles for likely hotels and tourism-related businesses, he says. He claims while ordinary bottled water uses about three litres of water to produce one litre of the bottled stuff, his machines don’t use any additional water to make a litre of filtered water.

He claims to have already sold four of the big machines since the first machine came off the factory floor in March, including one to a bottling plant in Thailand which is producing 2000 litres of water a day. Now he is betting on selling “over 30” by June next year.

‘Water more alkaline, soft’

Yet if Ventureburn’s calculations are anything to go by the electricity the machines gobble mean it will consume quite a lot more water than he lets on.

But argues De Vries: “The water you’re putting in (at power stations) is different to the water you’re getting out – it’s more alkaline, very soft”.

He admits that his solution isn’t perfect however and that off-grid power would help make the solution more sustainable. Some years ago he did however use a wind turbine to drive one of the machines, but he says renewable power options require a significant outlay of capital, which he doesn’t have at present.

Currently he and his team of five imports the smaller machines from China and sells them for R26 500. The larger ones retail for between R785 000 and R1.5-million.

Machines in demand

The machines, he claims, are in demand – not only by rich home owners, such as a woman who uses them to water her horses, but by restaurants and dental offices as well. He’s also approached car-wash businesses in the Cape, many of whom have been shut down by the city, to sell units to them.

De Vries was previously a director in another company, Water from Air, but he left in recent months to run his own venture Airwater, which he says is more a consultancy. He estimates that since his time at Water from Air to now he’s sold a collective 1300 of the smaller units.

But he admits that his main challenge will be to ensure that the machines stay in working order. To deal with this he says he has teams on standby in Cape Town, Durban and Johannesburg and adds that his office can supply spare parts (imported, he says from places like Lebanon, China and the US) to users within 72 hours.

De Vries says the water crisis in Cape Town is dire and warns against what will happen if more measures like his aren’t adopted soon. “You will have political strife and businesses closing beyond reason,” he adds.

So is De Vries then just capitalising off the fear of others?

Not at all, he claims, saying people just need to look at the “sincerity” of his organisation. “You don’t have to scare someone, they’re scared enough.”

  • Ventureburn should do their research. Even though it is correct that coal fired stations use said amount of water, Cape Town gets its electricity from the national grid of which 95% is generated in Mpumalanga and 5% at the Koeberg nuclear station.

    Moreover, power stations like Kusile uses a reticulation system that recycles the same water for steam generation by pushing it through a cooling process. This minimises the consumption of water and impact on the environment.

    The issue here is that the air-to-water machines may provide a practical (albeit expensive) small to medium scale for distributed water generation that is less costly than trying to pump water all the way from the North where the power stations currently sit.

    Finally, if the air-to-water machine is coupled with a solar solution that would make for a proper solution to clean drinking water where it is needed most.

    • zerohero

      another rich white home owner saying how easy it is to afford a solar system in conjunction with this machine. nice

      • Another racist that lacks the basic education to do some basic math and strategic thinking. Nice.

    • Robin Meisel

      We are making units at 10% of the cost and also running them off solar.

      • Who are “we?” It would be interesting to see your product!

      • Graham Davies

        Contact me please grahamdavies62@gmail.com
        I am interested looking for a supplier

      • Keanan Reis

        I’d like to know as well please!

    • Graham Davies

      Excellent answer, Ventureburn is just critical towards positive steps taken to try and relieve a serious situation

  • Marius

    This is a hit job on De Vries,
    1) if 0.5kW/h is such a big user of water in power stations then kettles, geysers and stoves should be banned as they use significantly more, placing this project which provide essential water at the bottom of concerns

    2) All our electricity does not come from coal so you cannot make a linear equivalence

    3) The city should be cornered to why the power stations are using drinking water and not alternative grey water. Its only for cooling and steam. The city is wasting water to supply drinking water as all electrical loads will have the same impact. Criticizing De Vries”s machine is as valid as blaming TVs and Kettles it is absurd, find the real problem!!

    4) We do not have a water problem, What we have is La Nina effect, it comes every 5 to 10 years. But as people are given more houses and water supplies, our infrastructure is not growing with it. The result is the water demand grow while the city knows very well about the el nino and la nina effects which come and go but they do not plan for it, what is part of a normal climate cycle which should be controlled for, now becomes a crisis because it was not controlled for. It will strike us in 5 years again, we do not not have a natural disaster, we have a management disaster the same as a few years ago with ESKOM, They dont plan, the information is out there, we know about these climate cycles, the change in usage, but they dont make work of it, they just let it lay until it becomes a crisis. But why change if they can capitalize on it by increasing tariffs and fines in exchange for poor management? they learn form ESKOM how to profit from this

    5) De Vries has a good idea it will help provide more drinking water for those who need it, other loads on the grid has far greater effect on water usage.

    6) People and live stocks lives depend on drinking water and must remain top priority. Instead of blaming the people, the people must start holding their authorities accountable, any water management official that does not know about el nino and la nina is not qualified for the job, we need to plan for these cycles. we cannot just build houses, we need a certain amount of capacity for a certain amount of usage.

    7) if our power stations still use drinking water and we have not expanded on water infrastructure to adapt with usage and the normal climate cycles, then we know where the real problem lies and it is not with the climate nor with De Vries. It is with management and until we address the management problem, we will be in the same situation in 5 years if not worse.

  • Simon the Sowetan

    They are making the electricity anyway!!! Skrik Wakker!

    • zerohero


  • Graham Davies

    The power stations produce the power on a continuous basis and will use the water irrespective of the fact that you have a air to water machine running or not,, Solutions are what is needed,, not critics

WP Twitter Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com