By 
For an average of 60 cents per gallon, the DewPointe DH9 Atmospheric Water Purification System extracts water vapor from the air and converts it to pure drinking water.
By pulling moisture out of the atmosphere, the DH9 is said to eliminate virtually all contaminants that might otherwise occur in groundwater. The device then further purifies the water to eliminate 99.99% of contaminants. There’s an electrostatic air filter to remove small airborne particles like pollen and dust, a germicidal uV light that destroys bacteria and other microorganisms, a coconut hull filter that eliminates heavy metals, chlorine residuals and mineral salts, and a reverse osmosis (RO) filter to remove any remaining pathogens or fine particles. Unlike other RO filters, where the wastewater is then flushed (so that the user drinks one purified gallon for each six to ten that are wasted), the DH9’s revolutionary RO filter reprocesses it so that no water is lost. A gravity-fed storage tank holds 6.5 gallons that would be accessible even in the event of a power outage.
Too good to be true?
Like a normal water cooler, the DH9 stands about 4 feet high and would replace conventional water coolers in offices and homes. However, the ability to filter water directly from air could make this technology a game changer in situations where water is scarce. It can also produce hot water and has a touch-screen display that tells you when the filters need replacing. A micro-computer monitors all working parts and has energy-saving sensors and child-proof hot water locks.
Still, there are drawbacks to the DH9 that limit its applications. The first is cost. For a retail price of roughly $1,600, the DH9 is much more expensive than a traditional bottleless water cooler, which range from $300 to $600 depending on features but require a municipal water supply (i.e., they are not able to purify non-potable water). So like solar panels, which for a long time were cost effective only where public utility lines were not feasible, the DH9 may have an advantage in rural areas, developing countries, and other areas where many basic services are not available.
From a sustainability perspective, the DH9 would appear to be a breakthrough technology with the potential to ease drinking water issues around the world. The filters are “zero waste”, as is the system’s water manufacturing process. If the technology is able to be replicated at scale, it could potentially help irrigation in drought affected areas. However, the DH9 uses electricity at a rate of 80 W while sitting, and 500 W while actively manufacturing water.
The DH9 is also somewhat limited by atmospheric humidity. In dry desert climates where the relative humidity may hover in the 30% range, the DH9 can produce 10 L (2.5 gal) of pure water every day, whereas in more humid environments, it is capable of almost three times as much.
Where surface water and groundwater are polluted, scarce, or inaccessible, the DH9’s technology presents a viable solution to providing drinking water. If the technology can be done to scale, it may represent a powerful force for a planet that faces clean water shortages amid growing populations and demand.
Scott Cooney is the author of Build a Green Small Business: Profitable Ways to Become an Ecopreneur (McGraw-Hill), and hopes that someday the green economy will simply be referred to as….the economy.
Twitter: ScottCooney
***
Like News like this? Sign up for FREE daily updates:
***
September 17, 09 at 10:37 am PDT | Is Condensed Water the Salvation for Developing Countries? : CleanTechnica writes:
[...] I wrote about the new DH9 from DewPointe, one of the cool eco-innovations to be showcased at West Coast Green October 1-3 in San [...]
September 20, 09 at 1:17 am PDT | Flow » Blog Archive » Daily Digest for September 20th - The zeitgeist daily writes:
[...] Shared Making Drinking Water From Thin Air (Literally) [...]
Comments
September 16, 2009 at 14:33 pm PDT | heh writes:
Very cool, great idea. I’d love one of these so I wouldn’t have to drink chemicalized water.
September 16, 2009 at 18:30 pm PDT | Taylor writes:
Chemicalized? Really?
September 16, 2009 at 15:25 pm PDT | Nick Aster writes:
This is brilliant stuff – however, I’m a little doubtful about the reality of applications in the developing world. The cost is just too high. The lifestraw seems like a much more sensible approach to that problem, combined with simple filtration systems on existing water streams.
Also, if it’s 1/3 as effective in deserts (where it’s really needed) then it only gets more expensive.
September 16, 2009 at 16:15 pm PDT | Intrigued Isaac writes:
10L of water a day for 12KwH isn’t great. Even standard desalination plants give you about 2000L for that.
Okay you get the transport for free but water flows. So a greener solution would seem to be an desalination plant, aqueducts and using the power saving to pump the water to it’s destination. (There is enough saving to pump 10L 1.2Km in the air.)
More importantly the moisture in the air is used by many plants, and as it is removed it will increase surface evaporation.
Okay so this is not going to be a problem for the odd water cooler but if this was scaled up you would have a serious environmental effect.
September 16, 2009 at 17:03 pm PDT | Mr. Whiskers writes:
Ok its a nice design but My step father just installed a RO system that takes everything out of the water for half the price. I dont see how this system is useful where water is avalible. As for where water isnt avalible i have spoted a small problem. Number one is cost. Number two is power. If these people cant get clean water then chances are they dont have power. I dont mean to knock it but i just dont see a good application for it.
September 17, 2009 at 1:41 am PDT | Seth writes:
I’m wondering what he effects of pulling so much water out of the air will be.
September 17, 2009 at 11:21 am PDT | Rom writes:
In reference to a few of the comments:
1. What a waste of money by over thinking a problem. This is too expensive by far. The filtration system will need to be replaced as well. Bah. Inflatable water evaporation balloons with a straw sized filter can do almost as well. You can even throw in a small solar powered UV light to boot.
2. Basement buckets from a dehumidifier can be used to water plants, flush the toilet… get creative just watch the acidity of the soil using pure water.
3. Absolutely pure water is not good to drink. The lack of minerals in the water causes it to remove a lot of minerals from your body like calcium and magnesium and makes you vitamin and mineral deficient. I don’t see a mineral supplement stage in the diagram.. That worries me.
September 17, 2009 at 5:50 am PDT | Eric Raymundo writes:
this is a cool green technology. great stuff….scott
September 17, 2009 at 5:53 am PDT | Christopher Haase writes:
This is a dehumidifier with a filter. The army and others have used this tech for decades.
However, there are models that utilize solar power to produce power and are beneficial … otherwise all other sources of energy require more water during energy creation than return from device. Making no ‘net water gain’ just a loss.
A little like corn ethanol for energy ;-)
September 17, 2009 at 7:13 am PDT | ruoli writes:
Woo! Moisture farms here we come
September 17, 2009 at 8:52 am PDT | Kirsten Corsaro writes:
Very interesting, especially if it could be made more affordable for the developing world. I wonder if there would be any overall effects on the atmosphere if a lot of these were in use (less rainfall?).
September 17, 2009 at 9:40 am PDT | Metqa writes:
I have two of those Damp Rid buckets in my house cause my landlord is too much of a louse to care that my house is full of environmental moisture contributing to an ongoing mold problem. These buckets are full of water now,and the only option I have is to toss them. How cool would it be to have a machine to not only draw the water out of the air, starving the mold in the walls, and at the same time giving me purified water as good as the store bought stuff!! I’d like it!!!
September 17, 2009 at 19:29 pm PDT | Mal writes:
Why not just use a dehumidifier and a Brita filter? instead of spending whatever this thing would cost?
September 17, 2009 at 12:24 pm PDT | Wes writes:
Amazing, my only concern is, wouldn’t this take most of the moisture out of the air, leaving the room dry and uncomfortable?
September 17, 2009 at 12:34 pm PDT | FR writes:
Add solar panels for power generation and take it completely of the grid…
September 17, 2009 at 22:39 pm PDT | z_kenny writes:
Solar Power!
This is the comment I was looking for.
The amount of electrical power needed to run one of these doesn’t make it practical, but if it could work off of solar power then this would indeed be very usefull in developing nations.
September 17, 2009 at 18:51 pm PDT | Idiots writes:
Buy a dehumidifier and it’ll do most of the work for a whole lot less.
September 17, 2009 at 19:51 pm PDT | calico writes:
This is such a dumb idea. Go to Home Depot and buy a basement dehumidifer — which does the exact same thing, pulling H2O out of the air. Run it through a filter and drink it.
The power these units use is far in excess of the cost of other water sources. It might be useful in rural Africa where there are no wells, but in places that rural, there are also no reliable electrical outlets either.
October 31, 2009 at 21:56 pm PDT | Zach writes:
I have been using dehumidifier for years, and I want that multi-stage filtering process before I drink that water, that stuff is pretty nasty if used in the basement, and the basement is really the only place where there is enough moisture in the air to meet the needs of most people. I don’t think one can just GO OUT and buy a filter to run it through, there is still the matter of taste…
September 18, 2009 at 5:00 am PDT | tommy writes:
I wonder if it works in Arizona around June.
October 31, 2009 at 21:49 pm PDT | Zach writes:
Thats funny, if in Arizona those machines could be animated like in the cartoon’s it would huff and puff until it’s face turned red with an Ice pack on the head, until finally it squeezes out one drop of water like it just had a baby…
September 18, 2009 at 5:12 am PDT | Leon Dias writes:
Oh well .. true its very expensive, but consider this. Everything was expensive before theywere mass produced. So why not for this technology? Everything needs to be developed.
Think computers .. :)
September 19, 2009 at 9:44 am PDT | Scott Cooney writes:
Obviously the cost is prohibitive for many applications, but the opportunity for this technology to replace delivered bottled water presents a tremendous opportunity for many eco-entrepreneurs, and will greatly reduce the carbon footprint of companies that 1) filter the water, 2) put it in giant plastic jugs, and 3) transport those jugs to clients homes and offices. Once the efficiency comes around, both in terms of money and energy, this technology, mass-produced, can greatly alter the game in terms of drinking water.
September 21, 2009 at 8:15 am PDT | Caroline writes:
Won’t people be reluctant to drink what they breathed ?
Caroline
Find Green Eco-Friendly Products Here
October 31, 2009 at 21:44 pm PDT | Zach writes:
I don’t know, you aren’t reluctant about tap water and there is another MORE involved bodily function that goes into that?
September 30, 2009 at 5:48 am PDT | Recording Studios Leeds writes:
This is amazing for the west, but to be intergrated into developing countries? I dont think they have the facilities to be able to cope with the amount of energy that this machine would need. But in the future it could be a very plausable thing for dry and water scarce climates.
October 05, 2009 at 15:07 pm PDT | William J. Broderick writes:
My basement dehumidifier waters my plants. Cost about $40. Seems the same but with a filter for drinking water. Limitation of use is electricity requirement.
October 08, 2009 at 16:35 pm PDT | water which writes:
There is no doubt that atmospheric water’s time is now. I own one and it makes so much water we give away a gallon or two. The DewPointe has a mineral infuser in it so it has the proper pH (7.2-7.4) Everyone who has seen this machine and tastes the water can hardly believe it, they love it! Im no water snob, but this water is the best i’ve ever tasted. Loved it so much I became Oregon’s DewPointe dealer. check out http://www.allaboutgreenstuff.com to learn more.
October 15, 2009 at 13:54 pm PDT | peter springer writes:
you could do the same thing with a pit dug into the ground, some plant material and plastic sheet.
a $100 air conditioner pulls water out of the air as does a dehumidifier. spend money on desalination or water filters.
October 29, 2009 at 12:01 pm PDT | MJR writes:
Excellent, can be used in African and Subsaharan countries where electricity is provided but no clean drinking water. Lot os places in SouthEast Asia have eletricity but no clean water.
UN might provide funding.
October 31, 2009 at 21:41 pm PDT | Zach writes:
Great idea, but one thing that happens in my apartment with my De-humidifier is that it sucks every drop of moisture from the air, and my de-humidifier doesn’t sound nearly as efficient OR capable of removing water from the air. This purifier can store “gallons” of water, where my unit may store ONE GALLON.
The AIR in my Den becomes SO DRY that even my skin feels dried out and I reach for the lotion after approximately one quart of water is removed from the house, making the reason for having a de-humidifier only minimally more uncomfortable than the described “side effect” of TOO LITTLE moisture in the air, creating an untenable situation for People with Asthma OR other breathing/ Lung deficits.
I think for $1600.00 people need to understand that your indoor environment will be subjected to an extremely powerful de-humidifier essentially, this is especially easy to understand when compared to a simple de-humidifier that will work 24 hours to pull from a half gallon to one gallon of moisture from the AIR while the DewPointe DH9 Atmospheric Water Purification System can pull 2.5 gallons of water from the air in that same 24 span.
Wait and see.
November 05, 2009 at 1:50 am PST | WaterFilterReview writes:
It’s always a question of cost vs added value. For $1600.00 I think it’s a bit steep.
Check out http://www.ted.com/talks/michael_pritchard_invents_a_water_filter.html
November 09, 2009 at 13:07 pm PST | Bruce McHenry writes:
This is truly revolutionary iff one has unlimited free power and no water, not even sewage. Otherwise, it is the most inefficient, expensive and environmentally unfriendly idea I can recall. What exactly are the writers for this phoney green site trained in? Obviously, they can copy press kit materials. Do they have a clue about how to analyze and think? There is not much sign of that here.
November 11, 2009 at 7:26 am PST | cyndi lee writes:
This has to be the most anti-environmental invention since the Hummer. A 500W power consumption to obtain a few liters of water a day?!?
This would use billions and billions times as much energy as tap water. I didnt think someone could create a more wasteful water delivery system than putting the stuff in throwaway plastic bottles and trucking it to destinations, but this machine would actually use even more energy than that.