AquaMaker AM10 Extracts Water from Air

The AquaMaker AM10 generates potable water from moisture harvested from the air—up to 36 liters in 38 hours, depending on the level of humidity. It's designed to replace traditional office water coolers, and when you calculate in the overall cost of distributing bottled water, it may very well be more efficient. Yet I can't help but point out that there is an even cheaper source of water in every office: the tap. Still, for what it is, the AquaMaker looks well designed. It includes an air filter that removes dust, spores, and bacteria from the moisture it turns into water, cleaning the air in the process. According to Ubergizmo, the AquaMaker AM10 retails for $1,200 and costs about $15 a day to operate. That's far too expensive for most part of the developed world, but perhaps in tropical, high-humidity areas where fresh water is hard to come by but power is not it might be a smart solution. Product Page [ via Appliancist] Update: The manufacturer of the AquaMaker sent updated, accurate operational costs for its device: "The MSRP for the AquaMaker AM10 is $1799. The operational cost is only $17 dollars per month."
This entry was posted in am10. Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to AquaMaker AM10 Extracts Water from Air

  1. Crash says:

    Even in a drought, wouldn’t it be more cost effective to take the $1000 that everybody would be willing to pay for this over a $500 water fountain, pool it all together into a big pile, use it to build a big desalination plant on the coast, and then just pipe that extra water into people’s houses?

  2. EdwardF says:

    Does not cost $15 a day to operate. It runs on 650w (per info in downloaded manual. That would be 650w *24hrs = 15.6Kwh(kilowatt hours) per day at a national average of about $0.10 per Kwh would mean about $1.50 per day to run, and that would be continuously running, if you were only using a few gallons a day(in a high humidity area) and not keeping the hot water on, it would only cost 20 or 30 cents a day to run. Don’t believe me, run the numbers yourselves.

  3. Anonymous says:

    A moisture vaporator? *This* needs to be steampunk’d Star Wars style.

  4. jrice68 says:

    OK I’ve done my homework on this subject and there are a few points to clear up. First of all it’s not $15.00 a day to run its about $15.00 a month depending on the consumption. As a rule it makes a gallon of water for about 10 cents.

    I thought being on a high tech gadget website I wouldn’t have to see moronic statements such as drinking another persons sweat or farting near the machine but it just goes to show ignorance is everywhere. The air coming in from the machine is filtered through a filter used in hospital surgical rooms which takes evrything out of the air prior to condensation. The collected water is then run through a 4 stage filtration system and becomes the purest water you can get. A good point is you can bring the air from outside rather that inside so there is an option there. It won’t remove all of the humidity in the room as it is evaporative dehumidification and not dessicant dehumidification. It will only drop humidity abot 10-15 % in a normal sized room.

    We have a machine here that makes water from air. You are in control of making your own water and not having to trust someone else where your water is coming from. Greenwise we eliminate plastic bottles so another plus there. The machine will act as an Air Filter, Dehumidifier, and a safe water source. You wouldnt believe what is in regular tap water and even bottled water is only tap water filtered and your paying a buck a bottle for that.

    So whats not to like????

  5. didymos says:

    My initial reaction upon reading the first paragraph of this post was that, here in Raleigh, NC, we are in the midst of some serious water restrictions due to an extended drought, and even though the tap may be cheaper or more convenient, every little bit helps. If we could cut our office water use by getting water from the air, that would be great. At $15 a day, though? That’s a bit much.

    On top of that, the collected moisture has to come from somewhere, and I have to imagine that running one of these things would have a dehumidifying effect in an enclosed environment, such as a house or office building. That probably wouldn’t sit well with a lot of office workers, especially in parts of the world that are already uncomfortably low-humidity. Seems like this thing would be better off pulling air from outside.

    I wonder how such a thing would scale? Might the cost per liter per day decrease if one of these were built on a much larger scale, perhaps to supply water to a community, rather than a single office?

  6. Registrado says:

    I’ll be interested to see who buys more of these: Star Wars fans wanting their own vaporators, or Dune fans wanting their own dew collectors.

  7. Chris says:

    It’s funny I was thinking the opposite of DIDYMOS, a dehumidifier, awesome! Keep in mind, I’m from Miami and you can cut the air with a knife.

  8. tlayzell says:

    That $15 a day running cost seems high for a device that use ~1KW of power according to the specs at

    The number doesn’t appear in the original Appliancist article, but seems to come from Ubergizmo.

    Anyone have more information on how the running costs are made up?

  9. meegs says:

    We have one of these in our office….it’s definitely a fun concept, I know my first question when I started was something to do with somebody farting nearby…..

    That aside, they seem to be pretty crap, really expensive, really really loud when their operating and it breaks down alllll the time.

    Also apparently the water that it creates is highly oxygenated which is apparently good for you…..hmmmm

    All up, it’s a big thumbs down and now sits derelict in our office lunchroom :(

  10. acx99 says:

    Great. Now not only can you smell the body odour of your coworkers, you can now drink their condensed sweat.

  11. sonny p fontaine says:

    because office air isn’t quite dry enough. maybe the same company could roll out a large scale Van de Graaff generator, just in case this thing doesn’t cause enough static. and, of course there should be salt licks, plenty of salt licks.

  12. Anonymous says:

    The yield figures given are completely wrong the AM-10 produces up to 40 litres in 24 hours.

    Desalination is an incredibly costly process both monetarily and environmentally. Just look at Dubai who are currently trying to convinvce the world to the contrary by showing us how the sea life has returned in abundance, but only 4 km out to sea around their artificial reefs. Meanwhile next to the coast all the sea life is dead.

    Western Australias desalination plant has a 600 million dollar 5 year maintenance contract. That is not even including running costs.

    Desal is a joke.

    Well done JRice68 and EdwardF you obviously have a bit more common sense than the average.

  13. Anonymous says:

    Charging $1,500 for a $100 dehumidifier and a $25 filter, plus you get to pay for the electricity to run it and replacement filters. Hard to imagine how they could make it less efficient. Maybe incorporate a humidifier into it, and have the overflow from this go right into the humidifier? That would be sweet! Call it “ultrafiltered” or something…

  14. Benjamin says:

    Let’s get a bunch of these to Atlanta. … and for fun make them Star Wars.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>


More BB

Boing Boing Video

Flickr Pool




Displays ads via FM Tech

RSS and Email

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution. Boing Boing is a trademark of Happy Mutants LLC in the United States and other countries.

FM Tech