backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 28 comment(s) - last by IckesTheSane.. on Aug 8 at 11:13 AM


The student's water heater is cheap -- $100 a unit approximately when massed produced -- and harness the power of the sun to help local people.  (Source: University of California Berkley)
Helping the world, one heater at a time

In spring 2007, a group of college students received a first-hand look at life in the third-world nation of Guatemala.  However, unlike many visiting such regions, they didn't look to just observe or help out on a small scale; they looked for ways to revolutionize the energy infrastructure of the region.

While electronics are far scarcer among the impoverished residents than in the U.S., one major energy need is heat to warm water.  The group of University of California Berkeley Energy and Resources Group devised a solar water heater that was cheap, simple, easy to maintain, and could be put to use in low-income housing.  The group plans to begin marketing their design to local residents soon.

The project began in Berkley professor Ashok Gadgil's Design for Sustainable Communities class.  The students were tasked with developing an economical water heater and they hurriedly set to work.  Now, only a year later, the prototypes are complete and units have been installed in several low-income apartments in Quetzaltenango, Guatemala.

Team member Ernesto Rodriguez, who is working toward a masters in business administration, describes the town stating, "[Quetzaltenango] is an urban community with significant economic activity that has little access to new technologies ... there is a lot of potential to create a local industry that will create jobs, bring better products to the market and improve quality of life of the population."

The heater, which will be entered into a national competition in October, uses only materials that can be found locally.  It harnesses the power of the sun to heat water to 40 °C, a temperature sufficient for showering needs.  And it does not contain the hazards that other local heating methods to do.  Says engineering doctoral student Sara Beaini (referring to team member Merwan Benhabib, an engineering doctoral student), "Merwan found that ... households use electric in-line heaters for showering, which are costly due to the electricity expenses and hazardous since you are prone to getting shocked."

This spring the students travelled back to the region to install a third prototype.  Mr. Rodriguez, says that in the upcoming year the team plans to survey the families to gain insight into their experiences and how their lives were affected by the device.

Based on suggestions and feedback a final version of the product will be worked out and presented to manufacturers -- either local or in the U.S.  Kenneth Armijo, a mechanical engineering doctoral student says this field insight will be key.  He states, "It is one thing to develop a technology in a university lab, but another to develop it in the field with all of the uncertainties and unknown challenges that aren't always technically and socially apparent."

The final unit is expected to retail for around $100 when massed produced.  Mr. Rodriguez says the goal of the project isn't simply to make a financially successful business, though -- it's to help the people of Latin America and other impoverished nations worldwide.  He says, "The more we advance with the project, the more we realize it has an important impact on the life of people and it has a great potential to be replicated in other places around the world."



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

only 40C
By chris2618 on 8/7/2008 6:54:42 AM , Rating: 2
if i am not mistaken 40 C is a perfect temp for bacteria to grow and multiply. so you could be showering in a slime.

also innovation like this have been happening for years but yet the problem isn't solved.




RE: only 40C
By JasonMick (blog) on 8/7/2008 9:45:08 AM , Rating: 2
While you may be correct, that's a pretty poor criticism of the device. Water heaters virtually never heat water to boiling. Here in the U.S. for example, propane heaters typically warm water to 40-45 deg. C. Past that it becomes too hot and people would complain of discomfort when bathing.

If there's bacteria in the water its the result of a poor water treatment system (which is probably a likely possibility) down there. For all intents and purposes the heater does its job brilliantly, though, and very cheaply compared to electric or propane heating methods.


RE: only 40C
By therealnickdanger on 8/7/2008 12:06:59 PM , Rating: 2
My old boss claimed that he heated his water using "soda can" passive solar collectors. I haven't seen his array in person, but I know they work.


heating water
By mattclary on 8/7/2008 3:27:17 PM , Rating: 3
I lived in the mid-east as a kid (United Arab Emirates). We got our water delivered by truck to a ground level tank. We then used an electric pump to move it to a white fiberglass tank on the roof so it would flow by gravity feed. During the summer we would turn off the water heater and use the cold water tap for hot water, the hot water tap for cold.




Sanity Begins At Home
By fri2219 on 8/6/2008 8:32:26 PM , Rating: 1
I'd be more impressed if "American college students look to bring solar heating" to the United States. I suppose that wouldn't make as much of a PR splash as "helping those dirty ignorant furriners".

Patronizing attitudes aside, most of these projects remind me of the part of the Andy Hardy movie where Mickey and Judy put on a show to save the orphanage or the sustainability display where I work, which needs rebuilding once every two years. While they're good on paper, the execution falls short of actually making a lasting difference in people's lives.




This is nothing revolutionary
By sviola on 8/7/2008 9:16:13 AM , Rating: 1
We have solar energy technology for use in homes in Brazil since 2001. Here we use it to heat water, power heaters and light bulbs.




Ripping off the poor
By Eats Wombats on 8/7/08, Rating: -1
RE: Ripping off the poor
By freaqie on 8/7/08, Rating: 0
RE: Ripping off the poor
By dreddly on 8/7/2008 4:24:31 AM , Rating: 3
So, if I had read up on the numerous problems with microcredit and the ways in which it bases success on repayment rates, targets the most marginalized and results in increasing levels of violence against women, would that make my point valid? Moreover, if I had taught University-level courses on development economics and foreign aid, would that make my point more valid?

I will see your NYT article and raise you an academic journal:
Isserles, Robin G “Microcredit: The Rhetoric of Empowerment, the Reality of "Development As Usual" Women's Studies Quarterly; Fall 2003; 31, 3/4;

In terms of $ amount the United States remains the largest donor of "official development assistance" at $23.53 billion in 2006 (wiki). You can argue % but for the poor real dollars count.

Third, Reverse 'foreign aid' is a misnomer - these are reserves which help stabilize the countries of the south - until this has happened - having local dollars (see Zimbabwe for example) negatively impacts the financial capabilities of governments - foreign reserves are NOT aid.

Mircocredit has no data on whether repayment = increasing GDP, increasing quality of life, or the destabilizing effects of empowerment in systems with high levels of corruption. It simply isn't known - though the WB and IMF are now supporting microcredit without this information.

For more info see:

Woller, Gary M.,and Warner Woodworth."Microcredit as a Grass-Roots Policy for International Development." Policy Studies Journal29.2(Summer 2001):267.


RE: Ripping off the poor
By kyleb2112 on 8/7/2008 5:21:17 AM , Rating: 4
"US is by far the least generous developed country on earth"
Only if you ignore private donations:
http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Debt/USAi...

But as we all know, only government charity is real charity.


RE: Ripping off the poor
By FITCamaro on 8/7/2008 7:30:01 AM , Rating: 3
That link mentions the Global Poverty Act. Probably one of the greatest threats to our country ever supported by Barack NObama. It will steal nearly $1 trillion dollars from the American people ON TOP of the foreign aid we already provide.

I hope to god it gets voted down.


RE: Ripping off the poor
By Seemonkeyscanfly on 8/7/2008 10:38:19 AM , Rating: 2
Study your history better. The US is among the top if not the top for give out aid and has been that way for at least 50 years (look at any hurricane, earth quick, flood struck country, who's usually the first one at the door with food and water asking what help do you need?). Your poverty.com example is a poor example. That is a government run type program that just sends money to any problem. Most US citizen know these programs do not work and donate money to programs that are very specific... Like feeding the Children of X country, or sending medical aid to X country to help with X medical problem. Not a shot gun blast of feed anything and everything that is poor. That does not work, to generic, no focus.


Very Humanitarian
By dreddly on 8/6/08, Rating: -1
RE: Very Humanitarian
By StevoLincolnite on 8/7/2008 12:07:52 AM , Rating: 2
Allot of these people lack what we take for granted in more developed nations like:

1) Hot water.
2) Cheap Transport.
3) Cheap Food.
4) Sometimes a roof without holes.
5) Decent Education.

If they can get a hot water system put in incredibly cheaply, that has NO on-going bills, then I think they need it more than we do. - Heck allot of the people in developing nations work harder than most people do in Developed nations, and still struggle trying to support there families.

Foreign aid goes to other projects like water, education, hospitals and other "Basic" support, this would seem like a luxury for most people over there.


RE: Very Humanitarian
By dreddly on 8/7/2008 4:03:40 AM , Rating: 2
Except that there are massive amounts of money being siphoned off every year in corruption, and the US is dumping money into that leaky bucket.

http://www.usaid.gov/stories/guatemala/cs_gt_antic...

If the US took 1% of the money lost in aid it could buy 165,000 of these for a total population in Guatemala of 13 million.

Is it better to ask - as you say - those who lack the basic necessities to pay for this when there is so much money being lost annually to corruption and top-down waste?


RE: Very Humanitarian
By StevoLincolnite on 8/7/2008 5:07:31 AM , Rating: 2
There will be corruption no matter what, there are those who will make a dollar anywhere they can, legal or illegal it generally doesn't matter to them.

Then there are those who are truly genuine.

I'm not aware of the "Aid" money that the U.S Spends as I am an Australian residence and such knowledge isn't something common place here (Ignorance I guess), but I can imagine it is a significant sum, but it's not really the point where the money goes, it's if *these* people are getting help they need, money should be a secondary concern, one thing I notice with our own government is that they seem to throw money at everything and hopes it solves the problem, most of the time it's a very large sum of money, possibly way more than what is actually required to get the issue solved. - Hows about getting some man-power over there and help build more Schools, Hospitals, Water/Electrical Supplies?


RE: Very Humanitarian
By Seemonkeyscanfly on 8/7/2008 10:11:23 AM , Rating: 2
Though a nice idea, the man power needed to build the schools and say a big hospital not really needed. Can teach just about anywhere and really any clean room for hospital needs. Yes, a nicer building is "nicer". I think they need more permanent man power solution for teachers and Doctors. I'm sure they have some teachers and Doctors, but I doubt they have enough. Then later build some nicer buildings, or maybe the education level goes up enough that they build it themselves, without outside aid.


RE: Very Humanitarian
By StevoLincolnite on 8/7/2008 10:06:21 PM , Rating: 2
Your missing the point, by sending man power over to these countries ti build these facilities, it would allow the less fortunate to learn new skills, by participating in such events, they have to start somewhere.


RE: Very Humanitarian
By FITCamaro on 8/7/2008 7:34:13 AM , Rating: 2
That link just talks about the corruption that exists in the Guatemalan government, not anything about how US aid dollars are being wasted.


RE: Very Humanitarian
By Alexstarfire on 8/7/2008 3:17:22 AM , Rating: 2
More like "nothing quite like figuring out how to dupe the poorest of the poor into buying a $100 magnifying glass." I mean seriously, the only way they would come close to making it less than $100 without subsidies it to just focus the sunlight into one spot. It's obviously not going to be solar cells, though it might have a way to store a bit of power. Which I have no idea how they'd transfer it back into heat without the aforementioned "electric in-line heater."


RE: Very Humanitarian
By freaqie on 8/7/2008 3:54:21 AM , Rating: 2
it would have been nicer if they would be able to get the temperature up to a 100 degrees c
then you can use it to drink safely boil and downmix it for showering etc...
if it is in a contained tank one could even hook up a generator to a turbine for power...
costs for a unit like that would be higher but its use is also way larger.

a few mirrors and a boiler is all one'd need....
but it would probably require mainatanece,, and locals and maintenance do not mix as we've learned on several occasions


RE: Very Humanitarian
By IckesTheSane on 8/7/2008 8:34:43 AM , Rating: 2
These are solar thermal panels, not photo voltaic. That is, they capture heat directly to heat the water; there's no electricity involved.


RE: Very Humanitarian
By Alexstarfire on 8/7/2008 9:28:58 AM , Rating: 2
I think you misinterpreted my post or something, because that's basically what I was talking about. You know that thing they have in Spain that focuses light into one spot to rapidly boil water. I was thinking along those lines. They use that structure in Spain to spin turbines to make power. I was basically stating a smaller version. Of course, if they made something like on Mythbusters, but just a bit bigger so it could heat more water.... that'd work just fine. My point about electricity was that if it had no way of storing power then it'd be useless on cloudy days and at night. Better than not having anything at all, but still.

And if they made something like they did on Mythbusters.... why would it be $100. The materials and effort put into something like that for mass production would be well under that price. Perhaps shipping it there is where the rest of the price comes in. I have no idea how much shipping stuff to places like that would cost.


RE: Very Humanitarian
By IckesTheSane on 8/8/2008 11:13:41 AM , Rating: 2
Ahh, ok. Yeah, I misunderstood the concept you were trying to get across... makes much more sense now. And how could I have missed that episode of Mythbusters?


RE: Very Humanitarian
By fic2 on 8/7/2008 9:20:40 PM , Rating: 1
Why not sell them for $200 in the U.S. and have the $100 donated to a charity/trust set up to give one away in a poor country.

I know that it would cost more that $200 if installation was included. But basically charge enough to donate one in another country.

BTW, a friend of mine in Denver got a free solar water heater on his house a few years back - some program. He loves it since he basically pays nothing for hot water now. He said that the group was going around his neighborhood trying to sign people up to get them for free but very few people accepted it.


why not AC?
By killer robot on 8/6/08, Rating: -1
RE: why not AC?
By middlehead on 8/6/2008 9:32:18 PM , Rating: 2
Water heater. So they and their clothes can stank less.


RE: why not AC?
By SeeManRun on 8/6/2008 9:41:00 PM , Rating: 2
Relax. I thought the same thing until I read more than 2 sentences. The guy posting must have just needed to post something and didn't bother to read so he could post intelligently.


"When an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song." -- Sony BMG attorney Jennifer Pariser














botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki