Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering 6 (2022) 100270

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering

journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com/journal/case-studies-in-chemical-
and-environmental-engineering

Case Report

Performance analysis of atmospheric water generator under hot and humid

climate conditions: Drinkable water production and system
energy consumption
Fahad Faraz Ahmad a, Chaouki Ghenai a, b, *, Mayyada Al Bardan c, Michael Bourgon d,
Abdallah Shanableh e
a
Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Research Group, Sustainable Energy and Power Systems Research Centre, Research Institute for Sciences and Engineering,
University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates
b
Sustainable and Renewable Energy Engineering Department, College of Engineering, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates
c
Sharjah Electricity and Water Authority, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates
d
Drinkable Air, Canada
e
Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, College of Engineering, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: To address the problem of freshwater scarcity, this study examines the potential of atmospheric water generation
Atmospheric water generation (AWG). Filters made of minerals remove impurities from the water produced by the AWG process, which extracts
Drinkable air moisture from the air and transforms it into drinking water. Water production can be decentralized, and water
Water production
quality can be controlled even in remote areas thanks to AWG. Tests of an atmospheric water generator in hot
Energy consumption
and humid climates are the focus of this research. In an outdoor area, a water generator is installed, and its daily
Water harvesting cost
output is recorded for a year. Temperature and humidity are measured in both the ambient and exhaust air, as
well as the energy consumed by the devices in the workspace. The results show that both air humidity and
temperature have an impact on the water extraction rate. Water is generated at a maximum rate of 0.95 L/hr. by
the device in February while consuming power at a rate of 0.84 kWh/L at a cost of 0.07 $/L. The average at­
mospheric air conditions were 22.16 ◦ C temperature and 63.25% relative humidity (RH). In August, the average
water output is 0.36 L/hr., with power use of 2.1 kWh/L costing 0.17 $/L. The temperature and relative humidity
of the atmosphere were 36.12 ◦ C and 44.9%, respectively. The lowest rate of water production is reported in
January, with a rate of 0.13 L/hr. with a 1.98 kWh/L energy consumption. The ambient air conditions were
observed as 18.74 ◦ C and 47.64% during January. Maximum daily water production of 29.8 L was recorded on
February with average temperature of 21.1 ◦ C and 76% RH. Two days in January with average temperatures of
17.8 ◦ C and relative humidity of 37.2% and 18.1 ◦ C and 46.8% resulted in zero gallons of water being generated.
Both a high of 20.0 kWh and a low of 1.99 kWh were recorded as the daily maximum and minimum levels of
energy usage, respectively.. The yearly average water harvesting rate is calculated to be 0.36 L/hr., with an
electrical usage of 2.25 kWh/L at a cost of 0.18 $/L. The ideal operating conditions for the machine have been
determined to be 22 ◦ C and 63% relative humidity. Water harvesting rates are strongly influenced by inlet air
temperature and relative humidity. As a result, for AWG-based devices to work properly, ideal environmental
conditions are needed.

1. Introduction Freshwater resources are depleting due to climate change, urbanization,

population growth, lack or inadequacy in the treatment of wastewater,
The growing population of the world immensely increases the de­ and synthetic pollutants entering the water system. Falkenmark Stress
mand for fresh water, the existing water resources are already over­ Indicator (FSI) is used to categorize the countries in classes of water
burdened [1]. The humane society is on the verge of a water emergency. shortage based on the availability of per capita water resources (PWR)

* Corresponding author. Sustainable and Renewable Energy Engineering Department, College of Engineering, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates.
E-mail address: cghenai@sharjah.ac.ae (C. Ghenai).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscee.2022.100270
Received 3 August 2022; Received in revised form 30 October 2022; Accepted 1 November 2022
Available online 2 November 2022
2666-0164/© 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
nc-nd/4.0/).
F. Faraz Ahmad et al.
[2]. As per the FSI, it is predicted by the united nations that 48 countries
will suffer from water stress by 2025 [2]. Every year, 4 billion people is
facing water scarcity for at least one month of the year [3]. By 2025,
two-thirds of the world population is expected to be residing in regions
facing water scarcity [4]. The water crisis has or will soon lead to a food
crisis in many regions. To avoid the impended water–food crisis, water
conservation, pollutant management from polluting water cycle, infra­
structure upgradation and improving water generation technologies are
some of the measures that need to be enforced. Hence, the research and
development to find alternative sources of fresh water is inevitable to
meet the growing demand.
The dearth of freshwater resources can be overcome by adopting
alternative technologies such as desalination of seawater [5] and at­
mospheric water harvesting. Desalination of seawater is adopted widely
to produce fresh water and reverse osmosis (RO) membrane technology
is generally used that evolves as cost-effective in the last decade and
consequently widely adopted [5,6]. Although the RO system is among
promising alternatives, it is limited to the regions having access to
seawater or underground brackish water. Moreover, the scale formation
from dissolved salts and suspended particles, energy-intensive opera­
tion, and transportation of desalinated water require the allocation of
vast resources and heavy investment. Thus, a cost-effective, ener­
gy-efficient, and portable source of freshwater is required. The soaring
demand for freshwater can be overcome through the harvesting of at­
mospheric water. It is estimated that 12,800 trillion liters of renewable
water are available in the atmosphere mainly in the form of water va­
pours that can be extracted through atmospheric water generation
(AWG) technology, especially for the areas that lack access to saline or
brackish water [7,8]. Due to the above-mentioned facts and shortcom­
ings and challenges of existing water systems, the concept of decen­
tralized atmospheric water generation systems has gained the attention
of several researchers and followed by many manufacturers in the last
decades [7].
The water vapours or humidity is extracted through the condensa­
tion process i.e. cooling of moist air below its dew point followed by
contact with a cold surface to produce fresh water and the antimicrobial
filter and mineral treatment make it safe for human consumption [8].
The warm and humid environment is perfect for AWG technology. Many
researchers have already indicated suitable locations across the globe
due to the availability of perceptible water vapours in the air [9–12].
Patel et al. have presented a detailed analysis of AWG for the eastern
states of India [13]. Water vapours can be condensed in different ways
from the environment, but the most common method is the vapour
compression refrigeration (VCR) system. Bagheri [7] investigated the
performance of commercially available AWG systems. Results concluded
that water extraction is highly dependent and sensitive to input air
conditions. Humid and warm air is a prerequisite for the significant
extraction of water. Habeebullah et al. [14] have developed a refriger­
ation machine to extract water from the air. Authors have observed that
high air velocity reduces the amount of extracted water due to lower
evaporation capacity. A hybrid AWG was developed by Majid et al. in
Ref. [15]. A heat exchanger and pre-conditioning unit were integrated to
increase the temperature and humidity of incoming air. The energy
consumption of 0.89–1.8 kWh/L was observed for a relative humidity of
18%–55% [15]. S. Zolfagharkhani et al. [16] have proposed a thermal
model of the refrigeration system to produce water from the air. A yield
of 22–26 L/day is estimated with an air velocity of the range of 2–5 m/s.
The idea of a solar PV-powered portable water harvesting cube con­
sisting of a dehumidifier, mineral component, and water storage tank
was presented by Ferwati in Ref. [17]. The experiment in Ontario,
Canada and Doha, Qatar revealed that 15 L/day can be produced with
RH of 50%–70% [17].
Decentralized atmospheric water generation provides the solution to
several shortcomings in traditional water purification and supply sys­
tem. If the input energy is provided by a clean energy source i.e., solar,
wind, biomass, or geothermal, AWG will be a renewable as well as
2
Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering 6 (2022) 100270
sustainable water resource since atmospheric humidity is renewed
naturally, and the process has no harmful effect on the environment.
Several studies reported the process, functionality, limitation, and
feasibility of AWG for water harvesting applications [14,18–20]. It is
reported that AWG is considered viable and effective in hot and highly
humid environments, especially near tropical and coastal areas [7].
The energy consumption by AWG has been estimated by Scrivani and
Bardi [18], considering the efficiencies of major components, the results
are reported for Jordan, Lebanon, and Morocco. The possibility of
running of absorption chiller with solar energy for the condensation of
water is briefly discussed. The energy consumption is calculated be­
tween 2256.54 kWh/m3 to 7910.04 kWh/m3 in Lebanon [18].
The water yield of AWG in the hot and humid environment of Jed­
dah, Saudi Arabia has been calculated using a mathematical model by
Habeebullah [14]. The monthly estimated water yields per unit of
dehumidifier coil were 509 kg/m2 and 401 kg/m2 for August and
February respectively [14].
A moisture harvesting index (MHI) is introduced by Gido et al. [21]
to evaluate the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of AWG. MHI of several
cities is calculated and found that Cabanatuan in the Philippines with
avg. MHI of 0.59 is the most favourable location. It is also concluded that
if MHI<0.3, the climatic conditions of the location are not favourable
[21]. Lekouch et al. [22] have worked on dew and fog water collection
from the atmosphere in the southwest region of Morocco. Passive dew
condensers and planner fog collectors are employed to collect the dew
and fog water. The simulation of dew yield shows the potentials of 0.3 −
18.1 L/m2 of the surface from May to October for 15 different cities
[22]. Bergama et al. [20] worked on reducing the energy consumption of
AWG systems in warm and humid areas by the concentration of water
vapours through the introduction of a membrane before the cooling and
condensation process. The mathematical model showed that a 40% −
68% reduction in energy consumption per unit volume of water could be
achieved [20]. An experimental investigation is conducted for a
solar-powered portable device by Runze et al. [25] for maritime rescue.
The experimental results showed a maximum water production rate of
460 mL/h at 27 ◦ C and 92% with daily production of 5.5 L.
Besides the claims of the performance and effectiveness of com­
mercial AWG by the manufacturers, the literature has quite a few in­
dependent investigations. The existing investigations are conducted
either under a controlled environment or with a small period of real
environmental exposure. The purpose of this study is to thoroughly
analyze the performance, dependability, operation, and maintenance of
a commercially available AWG device, Drinkable Air C-8, over the
course of a year in Sharjah under UAE’s hot and humid climate. It also
focuses on studying the functional behaviour and limitations of the
Drinkable Air C-8 device in terms of weather conditions.
2. Description and operation of water production device
The drinkable Air Chameleon-8 is designed to produce fresh
drinking-grade water from ambient air. It works on the principle of at­
mospheric water generation (AWG) technology. The water is produced
by converting the moisture present in the air. It uses 451 ml of R410A
refrigerant for condensation. The device is of 760 W rated power, having
an internal storage tank of 26 L. The drinkable Air C-8 device is equipped
with an antimicrobial air filter, ozone sterilization, granulated active
carbon filter, and mineralization cartridge to ensure fresh drinking-
grade water at the outlet. An antimicrobial air filter removes the
airborne particles. The clean humid air flows from the condensation unit
and water are collected into a storage tank where ozonation is carried
out. An integrated ozone purification system is responsible for disin­
fection, oxidation, and deodorization. It eliminates contaminations i.e.,
bacteria, viruses, and impurities. The activated carbon filter further
purifies the water by removing physical impurities and finally, miner­
alization happens in the mineral cartridge before dispensing the water.
F. Faraz Ahmad et al. Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering 6 (2022) 100270

The C-8 device filters and dehumidifies the surrounding air. The warm Table 1
and dry air exhausted the machine. The water extraction process is Specification of Drinkable Air Chameleon-8 device.
demonstrated in Fig. 1(A). The working conditions for C-8 device are Description Value Unit
stated as working temperature: 21 ◦ C – 37 ◦ C; working humidity: 35%–
Device Manufacturer Drinkable Air USA
99%. An integrated microprocessor is employed to control the typical Model Chameleon-8
operational modes and ensure the proper functioning of all the com­ Production Capacity Water Production Up to 32 L per day
ponents. The machine has integrated sensors and displays to measure Filtration Air Filter Antimicrobial
and show the temperature and relative humidity of ambient air, tem­ Water Purification Ozone Purification System
Purification Capital Carbon and Mineral
perature, and level of water in the internal tank and operational mode of Power Requirement Voltage 208–230 V
the device as shown in Fig. 1(B). It is not advised to keep C-8 device Current 3.5 A
standing at a freezing temperature ≤0 ◦ C, which may lead to freezing the Frequency 50–60 Hz
water in lines, tanks, and filters and that may seriously damage the Power 760 W
Refrigerant System Refrigerant R410A
machine. The dimensions (H x W x D) of the machine are 102 cm × 40 –
Ref. Amount 451 ml
cm x 56 cm with a net weight of 57 Kg. The specification of the drinkable Compressor 8.12 MJ
Air C-8 device is presented in Table 1. Condenser Cell Copper Tube-Aluminum Fins
Pressure High Side 2.83 MPa
3. Experimental Setup Pressure Low Side 0.83 MPa
Evaporator Cell FDA Proprietary Coating
Evaporator Blower 186.4 W
3.1. Atmospheric water generator and data acquisition Working Conditions Working Temperature 21–37 ◦
C
Working Humidity 35–99 %
The testing setup comprises a drinkable Air C-8 device, sensors for Storage Capacity Internal Tank 26 Liters
Cold Water Temperature 6–9 C
relative humidity and temperature both at the inlet and at the exhaust of
◦

Weight Net Weight 57 kg

the machine, and an energy meter for energy consumption. The drink­
able Air C-8 device is placed in an open corridor on the roof of the W12
building of the University of Sharjah, UAE as shown in Fig. 2 (A). The
location is chosen in a way to provide nice air circulation as well as a
shaded place for the machine. The inlet/exhaust air conditions i.e.,
relative humidity and temperature are recorded with a resolution of 5
minutes through the Extech RTH-20 sensor with accuracies of ±1 ◦ C and
±3% RH. The energy consumption is recorded through the Chauvin
Arnoux Power & Energy Logger PEL103 using MA193 AC current probe
with an accuracy of ±1%. The internal tank of the device is bypassed by
the external water storage tank in order to monitor and measure the
harvested amount of water as shown in Fig. 2(B). The quantity of water
is measured twice a day i.e., at 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m.
3.2. Error analysis and uncertainty
The uncertainty in measured values can be determined by the error
analysis. All measurement instruments are calibrated before the exper­
iment and Table 2 presents the specifications and accuracy of each
employed instrument. The harvested water amount is measured through
a container having a 100ml measuring scale.
3.3. Experimental procedures
To evaluate the performance of the C-8 device, the ambient air
condition, exhaust air condition, and energy consumption are recorded
with a time interval of 5 min. The harvested water is collected twice a
day at 9:00 a.m. and at 4:00 p.m. Due to the continually varying nature
Dimensions HxWxD 102 × 40 x 56 cm
of air humidity and temperature, the daily averages are calculated. The
data is extended to monthly averages of ambient and exhaust air con­
ditions, water production, and energy consumption. The rate of water
production (L/hr.) is evaluated by dividing the total amount of produced
water to the number of operational hours of the machine. In the same
manner, energy consumption by the device (kWh/L) is calculated by
dividing the kWh consumption to the total amount of produced water.
4. Results and discussion
4.1. Ambient air and exhaust air conditions
To collect data, external sensors are installed. Two sets of tempera­
ture and humidity sensors (Extech RTH-20) are installed, one with the
inlet of the device and the other one on the exhaust air outlet. Data is
processed to calculate the daily and monthly averages. The minimum
temperature of 18.74 ◦ C was observed in January while the peak tem­
perature of 37 ◦ C was recorded in July for inlet air. The relative hu­
midity was at its peak (63.25%) in February while a minimum %RH was
observed in April (40.08%). The yearly average temperature of 29.16 ◦ C
and relative humidity of 49.36% has been observed in outdoor condi­
tions of Sharjah, UAE. Fig. 3(A) presents the monthly average ambient
air conditions during the testing. Temp (In) denotes the ambient air
temperature and RH%(In) represents ambient air relative humidity.
The machine dehumidifies the ambient air, producing the water and

Fig. 1. (A) Schematic of Water Generation Process [23], (B) Display, (C) Drinkable Air C-8 device [24].

3
F. Faraz Ahmad et al. Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering 6 (2022) 100270

Fig. 2. Experimental setup: (A) Corridor view, (B) installed external sensor.

variation in exhaust air conditions. Temp (Out) represents the exhaust

Table 2
air temperature and RH%(Out) represents the relative humidity of
Specification of measuring devices and sensors.
exhaust air.
Description Parameter Range Accuracy The maximum temperature difference between inlet and exhausted
ExTech RTH 20 Temperature − 40 ◦ C–70 ◦ C ±1.0 ◦ C air was recorded at 16.08 ◦ C in February and while the minimum tem­
(− 10 ◦ C–40 ◦ C) perature difference of 5.48 ◦ C was observed in January. Similarly, a
±2.0 ◦ C (all other maximum relative humidity difference of 45.96% was recorded in
ranges)
Humidity 0%–100% RH ±3%RH (40%– 60%)
February and a minimum relative humidity difference of 12.64% was
±3.5%RH (20%– 40% recorded in January. On a yearly avg., a temperature difference of
& 60%– 80%) 12.64 ◦ C and a relative humidity difference of 28.10% has been
±5%RH (0%– 20% & observed.
80%– 100%)
Energy Logger Voltage [10 V; 1000 V] ± 0.2% ± 0.2 V
(PEL103) Current (Mini [100 mA; 120 A] ± 1.2% ± 50 mA 4.1.1. Typical Daily Profile of Ambient and Exhaust Air
Flex MA193) Typical profiles of ambient air and exhaust air, representing the
Active Power PF = [-0.5; 0.8] ± 0.7% ± 0.007% trend of temperature variations and relative humidity evolution over 24
V = [100 V; 1000 Pnom hrs. are presented in Fig. 4 for all the months of the year. The illustration
V]
I = [5% Inom;
of temperature trend includes ambient air temperature Temp (In),
120% Inom] average Temp (In), exhaust air temperature Temp (Out) and average
Apparent Power V = [100 V; 1000 ± 0.5% ± 0.005% Temp (Out). Similarly, humidity level illustration includes ambient air
V] Snom relative humidity RH%(In), average RH%(In), exhaust air relative hu­
I = [5% Inom;
midity RH%(Out) and average RH%(Out). The sharp peaks in exhaust
120% Inom]
air temperature (Temp (Out)) and humidity (RH%(Out)) are due to the
response of the C-8 device. The compressor of the machine suspends its
exhaust warm and dry air. The exhausted air avg. temperature ranges operation temporarily if detecting unfavorable ambient air conditions
from 24.21 ◦ C in January to 50.94 ◦ C in July. The relative humidity of for water extraction and saves the operational energy. Typical working
exhaust air ranges from 14.69% in March to 34.99% in January. The conditions for C-8 device are temperature: 21 ◦ C–37 ◦ C; relative hu­
annual average temperature of 41.80 ◦ C with a relative humidity of midity: 35%–99%. If ambient air temperature or relative humidity is
21.26% has been observed for exhausting air. Fig. 3(B) demonstrates the beyond the working window of the C-8 device, the integrated sensors

Fig. 3. Testing air conditions for C-8 device: (A) Inlet Air, (B) Exhaust Air.

4
F. Faraz Ahmad et al.
Fig. 4 (A). Typical daily profile of ambient and exhaust air: January–march.
force the device to go into idle mode and minimize operational energy
consumption. The C-8 machine again starts its normal operation as long
as ambient air conditions fall back in the working window. It is also
noticed that the C-8 device periodically goes into idle mode for a very
brief period to protect the device components from being overburdened
and overheating. An integrated microprocessor controlled the opera­
tional modes of the device and ensured the proper functioning of all
system components and internal mechanisms.
4.2. Water production
The drinkable device C8 extracts humidity from ambient air by a
condensation process and drinking-grade water is obtained at the
dispensing port. Thus, the water production from ambient air primarily
depends on ambient air conditions i.e., relative humidity and tempera­
ture level. Water production has a direct relation with a relative hu­
midity level above the threshold limit. The more humid air is the larger
the water production. The temperature has a limiting window for the
machine’s operation. As per the manufacturer’s recommendation, the
5
Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering 6 (2022) 100270
minimum operating temperature is 20 ◦ C while the maximum is 45 ◦ C.
Maximum daily water production of 29.8 L was recorded on 11 February
with an average temperature of 21.1 ◦ C and 76% of relative humidity.
No water was produced in two days of January where the average
conditions were 17.8 ◦ C, 37.2% RH and 18.1 ◦ C, 46.8% RH. Maximum
monthly water production of 0.95 L/hr. was recorded in February with
ambient air conditions of 22.16 ◦ C temperature and 63.25% relative
humidity. August and September have shown average water production
of 0.36 L/hr. Minimum monthly water production of 0.13 L/hr. has been
observed in January with ambient air of 18.74 ◦ C and 47.6% relative
humidity. Despite high relative humidity, low temperature beyond the
operating conditions of the device is the cause of the least water pro­
duction. The low temperature causes frosting on the inlet which results
in significantly low water production. Overall, the average annual pro­
duction of water is calculated as 0.36 L/hr. Fig. 5 (A) illustrates the
monthly average water production. Table 3 presents the monthly avg.
values of ambient air conditions, exhaust air conditions, rate of water
extraction and power consumption by the device to extract a liter of
water.
F. Faraz Ahmad et al.
Fig. 4 (B). Typical daily profile of ambient and exhaust air: April–june.
4.3. Energy consumption and water arvesting cost
The rated power of the C-8 device is 760 W. On a typical day, the
electrical demand of the device is around 20 kWh/day. The electrical
energy consumption by the water harvesting system is defined as the
energy consumed by the device to produce 1 L of drinking-grade water.
In terms of energy consumption by the C-8 device, maximum and min­
imum daily energy consumption of 20.0 kWh and 1.99 kWh were
observed over the year. Minimum monthly consumption was found in
February with 0.84 kWh/L when the air temperature and relative hu­
midity are at optimum levels i.e., 22.16 ◦ C and 63.25%. Maximum
monthly energy consumption was observed in May i.e., 3.47 kWh/L. The
significantly high energy consumption is due to the least amount of
relative humidity and high temperature of the ambient air. The yearly
average is 2.25KW to produce 1 L of drinking-grade water. Fig. 5 (B)
presents the average monthly energy consumption by the device to
produce 1 L of water.
The operational cost of Drinkable Air C-8 can be estimated by
multiplying the electricity unit rate with energy consumption. The
electricity unit rate for residential customers is 0.3AED/kWh=0.082
6
Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering 6 (2022) 100270
$/kWh in Sharjah, UAE. Thus, the water production cost varies from
0.07$ per liter in February to 0.28$ per liter in May. Monthly avg. water
production costs are presented in Table 3. Annual avg. water production
cost is 0.18$ per liter over the year. To address usability and sustain­
ability, the exhaust air from the drinkable air C-8 device is dry and hot,
further applications can be explored to utilize this air such as pre-
heating or pre-drying. It is concluded that water harvesting from the
atmosphere can be an alternative to bottled water. A more competitive
cost of water production can be achieved by integrating renewable en­
ergy sources as a driving force for atmospheric water generators. A solar
PV-powered drinkable air C-8 would be a more economical, sustainable,
and environment-friendly source of drinking-grade water.
4.4. Comparison with existing studies
It is noted that previous studies reported in the literature evaluated
the atmospheric water generator devices either in a controlled envi­
ronment or for a short period in outdoor conditions. The present study
has been conducted over one year. Performance comparison of the
Drinkable Air C-8 device is presented in Table 4 with reported studies in
F. Faraz Ahmad et al.
Fig. 4 (C). Typical daily profile of ambient and exhaust air: July–september.
the [7,13,17,25]. An average environmental condition, water produc­
tion and energy consumption are presented in Table 4 for comparison
purposes.
5. Conclusion
To overcome the dearth of freshwater resources and provide an
alternate source, atmospheric water generation technology is a prom­
ising solution. In this study, a critical performance analysis of a
commercially available Drinkable Air C-8 device is presented in the real
outdoor conditions of Sharjah. C-8 device was operated over the whole
year. Sensors were installed to record the ambient air and exhaust air
conditions. The energy data logger was employed to collect the data of
energy consumption by the device. The data is collected with 5 minutes
resolution and due to the varying nature of ambient conditions, it is
processed to calculate the daily and monthly averages. The water yield
and energy consumption by the C-8 device are calculated to produce 1 L
of water. The drinkable Air C-8 is designed to eliminate plastic bottles
and replace conventional water dispenser units. The main findings are:
7
Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering 6 (2022) 100270
• Maximum water production of 29.8 L was recorded on 11 February
with an average temperature of 21.1 ◦ C and 76% of relative
humidity.
• Maximum average water harvesting rate of 0.95 L/hr. was observed
in February with an energy consumption of 0.84 kWh/L. The average
air humidity and temperature were 63.25% and 22.16 ◦ C.
• The least monthly water production rate was experienced in
January. The avg. water yield is 0.13 L/hr. with an energy con­
sumption of 1.98 kWh/L. The average air conditions were 47.46%
RH and 18.74 ◦ C.
• No water was produced in two days of January where the average
conditions were 17.8 ◦ C, 37.2% RH and 18.1 ◦ C, 46.8% RH.
• The low water generation rate of January is due to the fact of cold
ambient air temperature. It causes the icing on the inlet fins of the
device.
• It was noted that the low ambient temperature of less than 20 ◦ C
causes icing on the inlet side and hence reduces the water extraction
rate significantly.
• The energy consumption by the device to produce 1 L of water varies
from 0.84 kWh/L in February to 3.47 kWh/L in May. Maximum and
F. Faraz Ahmad et al. Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering 6 (2022) 100270

Fig. 4 (D). Typical daily profile of ambient and exhaust air: October–december.

Fig. 5. Drinkable Air C-8 device (A) Rate of water production, (B) Electrical energy consumption.

8
F. Faraz Ahmad et al. Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering 6 (2022) 100270

Table 3
Summary of Drinkable Air C-8 device data.
Month Inlet Air Exhaust Air Rate of Water Extraction Energy Consumption Cost

Temp (In) RH (In) Temp (Out) RH (Out)

Unit ◦
C % ◦
C % L/hr. kWh/L $/L
January 18.74 47.64 24.21 34.99 0.13 1.98 0.16
February 22.16 63.25 38.24 17.28 0.95 0.84 0.07
March 24.63 50.65 39.90 14.69 0.67 1.25 0.10
April 28.81 40.08 41.70 15.55 0.26 2.68 0.22
May 33.08 41.76 45.29 18.63 0.22 3.47 0.28
June 35.52 42.97 48.84 18.14 0.29 2.47 0.20
July 37.00 42.33 50.94 17.33 0.32 2.42 0.20
August 36.12 44.92 49.40 19.74 0.36 2.10 0.17
September 33.93 52.46 47.96 21.91 0.36 2.10 0.17
October 30.46 52.93 43.97 22.43 0.30 2.35 0.19
November 26.09 55.48 37.93 25.81 0.26 2.50 0.21
December 23.35 57.85 33.19 28.65 0.20 2.89 0.24
Average 29.16 49.36 41.80 21.26 0.36 2.25 0.18

Table 4
Comparison with existing studies in literature.
Author Technology Environmental Experimental Water Production Energy Consumption
conditions

[7] Vapour compression refrigeration T: 30 ◦ C, % Rh: 62 Experimental 0.64–0.66 L/hr. 1.02–6.23 kWh/L
[13] Vapour compression refrigeration T: 35 ◦ C, % Rh: 95 Experimental 1.78 L/hr. 0.75 kWh/L
T: 22 ◦ C, % Rh: 45 0.28 L/hr. 4.71 kWh/L
[17] Dehumidifier and condenser T: not specified, Experimental 15 L/day –
% Rh: 50-70
[25] Humidification-dehumidification T: 27 ◦ C, % Rh: 92 Experimental 5.52 L/day and 460 ml/hr. (max) 0.87 kWh/L
Present Study Vapour compression refrigeration T: 22.16 ◦ C (avg.), Experimental (long-term Avg.: 0.95L/hr (max) 0.84 kWh/L
% Rh: 63.25 (avg.). outdoor) Avg.: 0.13 L/hr min) 1.98 kWh/L
T: 18.47 ◦ C (avg.),
% Rh: 47.64 (avg.)

minimum daily energy consumption of 20.0 and 1.99 kWh were
observed.
• Considering the electricity rate of 0.082 $/kWh, the water produc­
tion cost varies from 0.07 $/L in February to 0.28 $/L in May.
• The annual average water harvesting rate is 0.36 L/hr. with elec­
tricity consumption of 2.25 kWh/L costing 0.18 $/L.
• The results have shown that the optimum condition for the ma­
chine’s operation is 22 ◦ C with a relative humidity of 63%. The
relative humidity and the inlet air temperature have a significant
impact on water harvesting rates.
Future work includes testing the performance of a higher water
production capacity system (200 L per day) in desert climatic condi­
tions, the integration of a renewable energy system (solar PV or wind
turbine) to power the atmospheric water generator, testing the quality of
water over the year and developing forecasting model for energy pro­
duction (energy supply - solar PV or wind turbine), energy demand
(energy consumption by the device) and atmospheric water production.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare the following financial interests/personal re­
lationships which may be considered as potential competing interests:
Chaouki Ghenai reports financial support was provided by Ministry of
Energy and Infrastructure United Arab Emirates.
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
Acknowledgement
Sharjah Electricity and Water Authority (SEWA), Sharjah, United Arab
Emirates, and Drinkable Air Company, Canada.
References
[1] M. Kummu, P.J. Ward, H. de Moel, O. Varis, Is physical water scarcity a new
phenomenon? Global assessment of water shortage over the last two millennia,
Environ. Res. Lett. 5 (2010), 034006, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/5/3/
034006.
[2] W.A. Jury, H.J. Vaux, The emerging global water crisis: managing scarcity and
conflict between water users, Adv. Agron. 95 (2007) 1–76, https://doi.org/
10.1016/S0065-2113(07)95001-4.
[3] M.M. Mekonnen, A.Y. Hoekstra, Four billion people facing severe water scarcity,
Sci. Adv. 2 (2016) 1–7, https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1500323.
[4] F. Macedonio, E. Drioli, A.A. Gusev, A. Bardow, R. Semiat, M. Kurihara, Efficient
technologies for worldwide clean water supply, Chem Eng Process Process Intensif
51 (2012) 2–17, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cep.2011.09.011.
[5] C. Ghenai, D. Kabakebji, I. Douba, A. Yassin, Performance analysis and
optimization of hybrid multi-effect distillation adsorption desalination system
powered with solar thermal energy for high salinity sea water, Energy 215 (2021),
119212, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.119212.
[6] C. Ghenai, A. Merabet, T. Salameh, E.C. Pigem, Grid-tied and stand-alone hybrid
solar power system for desalination plant, Desalination 435 (2018) 172–180,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2017.10.044.
[7] F. Bagheri, Performance investigation of atmospheric water harvesting systems,
Water Resour Ind 20 (2018) 23–28, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wri.2018.08.001.
[8] J. Patel, K. Patel, A. Mudgal, H. Panchal, K.K. Sadasivuni, Experimental
investigations of atmospheric water extraction device under different climatic
conditions, Sustain. Energy Technol. Assessments 38 (2020), 100677, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.seta.2020.100677.
[9] C.D. Chadwell, Y. Bock, Direct estimation of absolute precipitable water in oceanic
regions by GPS tracking of a coastal buoy, Geophys. Res. Lett. 28 (2001)
3701–3704, https://doi.org/10.1029/2001GL013280.
[10] H. Wang, M. Wei, S.H. Zhou, A feasibility study for the construction of an
atmospheric precipitable water vapor model based on the neural network
technology, Desalination Water Treat. 52 (2014) 7412–7421, https://doi.org/
10.1080/19443994.2014.933041.
[11] B. Fontaine, Atmospheric water cycle and moisture fluxes in the West African
monsoon: mean annual cycles and relationship using NCEP/NCAR reanalysis,
Geophys. Res. Lett. 30 (2003) 1117, https://doi.org/10.1029/2002GL015834.

The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support from

9
F. Faraz Ahmad et al.
[12] P. Zhai, R.E. Eskridge, Atmospheric water vapor over China, J. Clim. 10 (1997)
2643–2652, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0442(1997)010<2643:AWVOC>2.0.
CO;2.
[13] K. Patel, J. Patel, H. Raval, Potential study of atmospheric water generator (AWG)
for humid climatic conditions of eastern states in India, Renew. Energy Clim.
Chang. (2020) 239–248, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9578-0_21.
Springer.
[14] B.A. Habeebullah, Potential use of evaporator coils for water extraction in hot and
humid areas, Desalination 237 (2009) 330–345, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
desal.2008.01.025.
[15] M. Bahrami, F. Bagheri, Hybrid Atmospheric Water Generator, 2018.
[16] S. Zolfagharkhani, M. Zamen, M.M. Shahmardan, Thermodynamic analysis and
evaluation of a gas compression refrigeration cycle for fresh water production from
atmospheric air, Energy Convers. Manag. 170 (2018) 97–107, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.enconman.2018.05.016.
[17] M.S. Ferwati, Water harvesting cube, SN Appl. Sci. 1 (2019) 779, https://doi.org/
10.1007/s42452-019-0730-y.
[18] A. Scrivani, U. Bardi, A study of the use of solar concentrating plants for the
atmospheric water vapour extraction from ambient air in the Middle East and
Northern Africa region, Desalination 220 (2008) 592–599, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.desal.2007.04.060.
10
Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering 6 (2022) 100270
[19] G. Sharan, D. Beysens, I. Milimouk-Melnytchouk, A study of dew water yields on
Galvanized iron roofs in Kothara (North-West India), J. Arid Environ. 69 (2007)
259–269, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2006.09.004.
[20] D. Bergmair, S.J. Metz, H.C. de Lange, A.A. van Steenhoven, System analysis of
membrane facilitated water generation from air humidity, Desalination 339 (2014)
26–33, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.02.007.
[21] B. Gido, E. Friedler, D.M. Broday, Assessment of atmospheric moisture harvesting
by direct cooling, Atmos. Res. 182 (2016) 156–162, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
atmosres.2016.07.029.
[22] I. Lekouch, K. Lekouch, M. Muselli, A. Mongruel, B. Kabbachi, D. Beysens, Rooftop
dew, fog and rain collection in southwest Morocco and predictive dew modeling
using neural networks, J. Hydrol. 448–449 (2012) 60–72, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.04.004.
[23] Drinkable Air, Owner’s Manual-C8, 2015.
[24] Products - drinkableair technologies, n.d. https://drinkableair.tech/products/.
(Accessed 12 April 2022).
[25] D. Runze, M. Qingfen, L. Hui, W. Gaoping, Y. Wei, C. Guangfu, et al., Experimental
investigations on a portable atmospheric water generator for maritime rescue,
J Water Reuse Desalin 10 (2020) 30–44, https://doi.org/10.2166/WRD.2020.048.