|
|
Post by inconceivable on Nov 8, 2010 12:49:31 GMT -4
In oceanography textbooks they claim that in every cubic mile of seawater there is approximately 25 tons of gold. So if the largest desalination plant in the world produces 300 million cubic meters of water per year. Does that mean they are extracting more or less than 1.75 tons of gold per year? Would that be about $78,000,000 U.S. per year?
300,000,000 cubic meters =.0719 cubic miles
.0719 X 25 = 1.75 tons
If they are extracting 1.75 tons of gold per year at this plant, would that have a value of $78,486,187 U.S. per year?
Gold $1395 per ounce. 32150 ounces per ton X $1395/ ounce X 1.75 tons per year = $78,486,187 U.S. per year
Is this correct? Probable?
What would be the worlds output of gold from desalination process be with 4,380 billion gallons per year?
|
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Nov 8, 2010 15:38:54 GMT -4
Reverse Osmosis is the most commonly used way of desalinization. It works by extracting water molecules from sea water, not removing salts and other contaminates, those are flushed back into the sea. The purpose of desalinization is to economically produce fresh water. Why do you think the process also produces gold?
|
|
|
|
Post by lukepemberton on Nov 8, 2010 15:39:20 GMT -4
I recall hearing something similar. Whether it was urban myth or not I don't know. If my memory serves, it is not, but it is practicaly impossible to extract as it exists as single atoms.
|
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Nov 8, 2010 15:42:50 GMT -4
Wikipedia says this
|
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Nov 8, 2010 15:50:10 GMT -4
To me the question comes down to a comparison between the cost of energy needed to boil off the sea water and extract gold from the salt residue versus the revenue from selling the fresh water and gold. Boiling is a inefficient way to make fresh water, so the gold would have to make up a big difference.
If you had a massive source of waste heat near the sea coast, perhaps it would be feasable, but otherwise it appears to be cost prohibitive.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tanalia on Nov 8, 2010 22:42:16 GMT -4
Even if the plant completely separated all the water from the original 300,000,000 cubic meters of seawater, you're talking about trying to isolate maybe 2 tons of gold (primarily as gold chloride) from roughly ten million tons of sodium chloride and other salts...
Good luck with that.
|
|
|
|
Post by lukepemberton on Nov 9, 2010 8:41:25 GMT -4
Even if the plant completely separated all the water from the original 300,000,000 cubic meters of seawater, you're talking about trying to isolate maybe 2 tons of gold (primarily as gold chloride) from roughly ten million tons of sodium chloride and other salts... Good luck with that. Exactly. The gold is in such trace quantities that it would not be economicaly viable to extract, |
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Nov 9, 2010 13:28:46 GMT -4
So if the largest desalination plant in the world produces 300 million cubic meters of water per year. Does that mean they are extracting more or less than 1.75 tons of gold per year? No. Desalination plants don't extract the impurities from seawater, they extract the water from seawater. In other words, they don't leave big piles of salts and other impurities as a waste product. Seawater goes in, water plus slightly more concentrated seawater goes out. |
|
|
|
Post by lukepemberton on Nov 9, 2010 14:27:32 GMT -4
So if the largest desalination plant in the world produces 300 million cubic meters of water per year. Does that mean they are extracting more or less than 1.75 tons of gold per year? No. Desalination plants don't extract the impurities from seawater, they extract the water from seawater. In other words, they don't leave big piles of salts and other impurities as a waste product. Seawater goes in, water plus slightly more concentrated seawater goes out. I never knew that. It makes sense I guess. That rather tears apart the enviromental argument I heard. |
|
|
|
Post by inconceivable on Nov 10, 2010 9:07:59 GMT -4
The U.S. gets most of its supply of the metal magnesium by removing it from seawater. 1 lb of magnesium from 142 gallons of salt water. Bromine is extracted from seawater. - 1 lb from 2,500 gallons of seawater. Maybe the technology exist for drawing gold from seawater like centrifuges.
|
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Nov 10, 2010 10:16:00 GMT -4
The U.S. gets most of its supply of the metal magnesium by removing it from seawater. 1 lb of magnesium from 142 gallons of salt water. Bromine is extracted from seawater. - 1 lb from 2,500 gallons of seawater. Maybe the technology exist for drawing gold from seawater like centrifuges. First you say it is from desalinization. Then when that is shot down, you propose some hypothetical method. A centrifuge? How would that work? Among the differences between gold and magnesium, is that the latter is abundant in seawater while gold is in minimal amounts. Why are you interested in the extraction of gold from seawater? If you want some gold, try the tried and true method of panning. |
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Nov 10, 2010 10:31:56 GMT -4
The U.S. gets most of its supply of the metal magnesium by removing it from seawater. 1 lb of magnesium from 142 gallons of salt water. Bromine is extracted from seawater. - 1 lb from 2,500 gallons of seawater. There is about 117 million times more magnesium than gold by weight, and about 6.1 million times more bromine by weight. That brings them into the realms of reasonable economic return for the effort required to extract them. The problem with any extraction from seawater is separating what you want from all the other crap. Selectively separating material present in trace quantities is incredibly difficult. It is hardly worth the effort if you can dig it up in chunks out of the ground. The composition of seawater has been well known for a very long time. Given the way we humans exploit every natural resource we can get our hands on, do you honestly think that if it was economically viable to extract gold from seawater using existing technology it wouldn't already be happening? People have been trying to extract gold from seawtaer for some time. So far it is simply not there in sufficient quantity to make the process of extraction worhthwile. There's no point in extracting $1 million worth of gold if it costs $3 million to do it, is there? |
|
