Environmental Science and Pollution Research

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-15565-z

GREEN ENERGY FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY

Assessment of single slope solar still using block and disc magnets
via productivity, economic, and enviro-economic perspectives:
a comparative study
Ramasamy Dhivagar 1 & Murugesan Mohanraj 2 & Balakrishnan Deepanraj 3 & Vaiyapuri Senthil Murugan 2

Received: 23 March 2021 / Accepted: 18 July 2021

# The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2021

Abstract
In this research, the productivity, economic, and enviro-economic analysis of single slope solar stills using block magnets
(BMSS) and disc magnets (DMSS) were performed under the climatic conditions of Coimbatore city (latitude, 11° 01′ 68″ N,
and longitude, 76° 95′ 58″ E), in India, 2019. The results observed in BMSS and DMSS were compared with conventional solar
still (CSS) under the same climatic conditions. The usage of block and disc magnets in basin of solar still was improved the daily
productivity significantly. The results showed that the performance observed in BMSS was notably higher than the performance
of DMSS. The hourly productivity in BMSS was 5.8% and 13.7% higher when compared to DMSS and CSS, respectively. The
cumulative productivity in BMSS, DMSS, and CSS were found to be about 3.15 kg/m2, 2.82 kg/m2, and 2.15 kg/m2, respec-
tively, for 12h observations. In economic analysis, the estimated payback period (PBP) of BMSS, DMSS, and CSS were about
3.6 months, 3.5 months, and 4.5 months, respectively. Furthermore, the CO2 emission of BMSS, DMSS, and CSS were observed
to be about 11.04 tons, 9.37 tons, and 6.45 tons, respectively. The overall observations showed that the magnetization of saline
water has significantly improved the solar still performances.

Keywords Block magnets . Disc magnets . Economic . Enviro-economic . Productivity . Solar still

Introduction effective method to limit the demand of potable water. In these

A ratio of fresh water availability is limited due to population
growth and globalization. The impact in demand of potable
water is converted as a big threat to the human society. In
order to overcome this, desalting the excess saline or brackish
water will be the good option in this present situation
(Sivakumar and Ganapathy Sundram 2013). Desalination
using available renewable energy sources is one of the
Responsible Editor: Philippe Garrigues
* Ramasamy Dhivagar
dhivagar.papers@gmail.com
1
Department of Mechanical Engineering, QIS College of Engineering
and Technology, Ongole 523272, India
2
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Hindusthan College of
Engineering and Technology, Coimbatore 641032, India
3
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Jyothi Engineering College,
Thrissur 679531, India
renewable energy source-integrated techniques, solar desali-
nation has consistent rise in producing the purified water.
Hence, the required potable water for remote area is extracted
using solar distillation method which is very simple to operate.
The device used for this solar distillation is called solar stills.
The fabrication of solar stills is easy and is economically via-
ble. The available saline water in the solar still basin gets
evaporated due to higher heat accumulation by solar energy.
The generated bouncy force on the saline water surface lifts
the vapor towards to the inner glass cover. The higher temper-
ature difference between the saline water surface and inner
glass cover leads the condensation. Finally, the distillate is
observed in collection jar. The productivity performance of
solar stills have significantly improved with the use of differ-
ent types of heat storage materials such as sand, gravels, jute
cloth, cotton cloth, and paraffin wax (Dhivagar and
Sundararaj 2018). Sharshir et al. (2018) improved the daily
productivity in solar still using copper oxide and graphite
nanoparticles by 41% and 32%, respectively, when compared
to CSS. Mohamed et al. (2019) used basalt stones in basin of

solar still with the size of 2 cm and reported that the improved
productivity of about 33.7% was observed when compared to
CSS. Omara et al. (2020) reviewed the solar still performances
using various heat storage materials. The passive and active
solar stills have significant productivity improvement of about
120% and 700%, respectively, under the summer climatic
conditions. The paraffin wax has been widely used for storing
the thermal energy. However, it has poor thermal conductivity
than other heat storage materials. Dhivagar et al. (2021a) in-
creased the productivity of coarse aggregate solar still and
compared the results with numerical observations. They found
that the deviation between experimental and numerical obser-
vations were about 14%.
Researchers have concentrated on solar still performance in
economic and enviro-economic aspects. Deniz and Cinar
(2016) evaluated the thermodynamic efficiency, economic,
and enviro-economic analysis of solar still using humidifica-
tion and dehumidification methods. It has been reported that
the improved energy and exergy efficiencies of about 32%
and 2%, respectively, were observed when compared to
CSS. The economic and enviro-economic results were esti-
mated as 0.0981 USD and 2.4041 USD/year, respectively,
during the lifetime. Sharon et al. (2017) compared the overall
performance observed in tilted solar still with wick type solar
still. They reported that the tilted solar still productivity, ener-
gy, and exergy efficiencies were 19.7%, 7.23%, and 0.18%
higher than wick type. The payback period and CO2 emission
of titled solar still were estimated as 2.8 years and 17.65 tons,
respectively for, 20 years lifetime. Similarly, Joshi and Tiwari
(2018) estimated the economic and enviro-economic results as
1.2 Rs. and 7.14 tons, respectively, in active solar still using
heat exchanger under the climatic conditions of Delhi for the 1
year lifetime. Elbar et al. (2019) improved the energy and
exergy analysis of photovoltaic reflector solar still (in terms
of exergo economic and enviro-economic) by 43% and 68%,
respectively, when compared to CSS. Hassan et al. (2020)
improved the energy and exergy efficiencies of parabolic
collector-assisted solar still by 216.6% and 325% when com-
pared to CSS with the CO2 emission of 5.9 tons per year
(exergy based). Dhivagar and Mohanraj (2021b) optimized
the process and performance parameters of coarse aggregate-
assisted solar still and reported that the observed maximum
energy efficiency was about 32%.
Cai et al. (2009) reported that the magnetic field has con-
siderable influence on reducing surface tension of saline wa-
ter. Amor et al. (2017) experimentally reduced the saline water
surface tension by 24% using magnetic field under the hot
climatic conditions. Wang et al. (2018) found that the reduce
in surface tension and specific heat capacity using magnetic
field have increased the evaporation. Dumka et al. (2019)
improved the evaporation and daily productivity of ferrite ring
magnets solar still by 49.2% and 23.5%, respectively, when
compared to CSS. Mehdizadeh Youshanlouei et al. (2020)
Environ Sci Pollut Res
numerically analyzed the effect of magnetic field in solar still
performances and the results observed that the productivity
and convective heat transfer rate improved the range between
38 and 48%. Dubey and Mishra (2020) used ferrite ring mag-
nets and galvanized iron sheet in solar still basin and increased
the productivity performance by 21.7%. Also, the energy and
exergy efficiencies were enhanced to 31.3% and 22.6%, re-
spectively. Gholamabbas and Saeed (2021) modified the sim-
ple solar still with solar collector using hybrid antibacterial-
magnetic nanofluid (by volume concentration of 0.08%). The
observed productivity and energy efficiency were improved
by 218% and 117%, respectively, than CSS. In addition, the
CPL and PBP were estimated as 0.019 USD and 369 days,
respectively. Dhivagar and Mohanraj (2021c) improved the
productivity, energy, and exergy efficiencies in solar still
using graphite plate fins and magnets by 19.6%, 21.4%, and
18.1%, respectively, when compared to CSS. The payback
period and CO2 emission were estimated to be about 3.4
months and 14.1 tons, respectively. Similarly, Dhivagar
et al. (2021d) found the productivity, energy, and exergy ef-
ficiencies improvement in block magnet and graphite plate-
assisted solar still under summer and winter climatic condi-
tions. The outcomes observed that the hourly productivity was
19.6% and 22.8% higher in summer and winter days, respec-
tively, when compared to CSS. Furthermore, the energy and
exergy efficiencies were substantially improved by 20.6% and
18.1% when compared to CSS during summer days.
Similarly, the energy and exergy efficiencies were increased
by 18 and 19% than CSS in winter days.
The literature review above shows that there has been a
great deal of experimentation on enhancing the productivity
performance in various solar still configurations. It is found
that, in order to achieve the productivity improvements, the
more important adjustments and modifications were made in
solar still basin. Nevertheless, the work on the solar still also
has a gap in the basin using different types of magnets.
Therefore, an experimental work to test the productivity im-
provements with the impact of ambient parameters has been
performed in both block and disc magnets. The results ob-
served in block magnet solar still (BMSS) and disc magnet
solar still (DMSS) were compared with conventional solar still
(CSS). In addition, the cost effectiveness and CO2 emission
impacts of both the solar still were estimated and compared
with CSS.
Experiments
The experimentations have been carried out in BMSS, DMSS,
and CSS under the same climatic conditions during the year
2019.
Environ Sci Pollut Res
Experimental setup
The schematic views, dimensions, and arrangements of mag-
nets in BMSS and DMSS are illustrated in Fig. 1. The solar
still is fabricated using galvanized iron sheet which has 1.5-
mm thickness and the entire system area is 0.65 × 0.78 m2. In
both the solar stills, the basin is attached with 16 block and
disc magnets, respectively, and painted black to increase heat
absorption rate during peak sunshine hours. The thickness of
3-mm glass cover is placed over the top surface of solar still
and it has a higher transmissivity of about 0.9 and a lower
absorptivity of about 0.05. The solar still angle is kept at 12°
according to the latitude of Coimbatore city. In addition, sili-
con rubbers are used to close the solar still tightly to prevent
the vapor losses to the surroundings. The condensate is col-
lected using collection tray and it is mounted at the bottom of
glass cover. The absorptivity of solar irradiation is maximized
by keeping the solar still at east-west direction. The basin
saline water depth is observed at each 1h interval and the
(a) Schematic view of BMSS
(b) Schematic view of DMSS
Fig. 1 a Schematic view of BMSS. b Schematic view of DMSS. c
Dimensions of block magnets. d Dimensions of disc magnets. e
Arrangements of block magnets in basin. f Arrangements of disc
magnets in basin
consistent range is maintained. The salt accumulation in the
basin is removed regularly.
The dimensions of block and disc magnets are 40 × ∅ 25 ×
10 mm and ∅15 × 5 mm, respectively. It is ideally positioned
in the basin to confirm the steady flow of heat transfers and
magnetic fields. These block and disc magnets are not only
used for the saline water heating and magnetization. This can
further act as good sensible heat storage material in higher
solar irradiations. The properties of magnets are listed in
Table 1.
Instrumentation
The saline water, glass cover, block, and disc magnet temper-
atures were measured using calibrated thermocouples with the
accuracy of ± 0.2 °C. A digital temperature indicator was used
to connect these thermocouples with the resolution of 0.1 °C.
During experimentation, the intensity of solar irradiations was
observed by solar intensity meter (accuracy ± 5 W/m2). The
fluctuation observed in ambient wind velocity was recorded
by cup type anemometer (accuracy ± 0.1 m/s). A digital
Gaussmeter (precision ± 1 mT) was used to observe the mag-
netic field. The hourly productivity was calculated using col-
lection bottle. The saline water depth was measured by mea-
surement scale. The specifications of measuring instruments
are listed in Table 2.
Experimental procedure
The experiments have been conducted in all the three solar
stills during the year 2019. The findings obtained in this study
were reported on March 30. Before the experimentations, the
saline water was filled in solar still basin to warm up. The
glass cover top portion was unsoiled using a smooth cloth to
eliminate the accumulation of dust particles which affects the
effectiveness of the entire system. The ambient parameters
were measured at every 1-h interval from 9:00 to 21:00 h
during the experimental observations. Ten experimental trials
were made in solar stills to evaluate the correctness of the
results. Finally, these results were used to estimate the produc-
tivity improvements, cost effectiveness, and CO2 emission of
both BMSS and DMSS. Then, the results were compared with
CSS.
Productivity analysis
The mathematical formula used to estimate the observed pro-
ductivity in solar stills were given using following relations:
 Environ Sci Pollut Res

(c) Dimensions of block magnets (d) Dimensions of disc magnets

(e) Arrangements of block magnets (f) Arrangements of disc magnets

in basin in basin
Fig. 1 continued.

Latent heat of vaporization (Belyayev et al. 2019): Economic analysis

 
L ¼ 2:4935  106  1−9:4779  10−4 T w þ 1:3132  10−7  T w 2 −4:794  10−9  T w 3
The economic feasibility of solar stills is assessed using fol-
ð1Þ lowing relations (Esfahani et al. 2011):
Fixed annual cost is estimated using capital recovery factor
The solar still hourly productivity is given by (Belyayev and capital cost. The required formula is given in the follow-
et al. 2019): ing relation:


heva w−g T w −T g  3600 FAC ¼ CRF  CC ð3Þ
mw ¼ ð2Þ
L

Table 2 Specifications of measuring instruments

Instrument Accuracy Range Error (%)

Thermometer ± 0.2 °C 0–100°C 0.5

Table 1 Properties of magnets Thermocouple (K-type) ± 0.1 °C 0–200°C 0.5
Digital temperature indicator ± 0.1 °C 0–200°C 1.2
Parameters Magnets
Solar intensity meter ± 5 W/ m2 0–1000 W/ m2 1.5
Thermal conductivity (W/mK) 7.7 Cup type anemometer ± 0.1 m/s 0–15 m/s 10
Thermal expansion coefficient (μm/mK) 3.4 Gaussmeter ± 1 mT 0.1–2400 mT 1.2
Magnetic field strength (mT) 95 Measuring jar ± 10 ml 0–1000 ml 10
Environ Sci Pollut Res

Capital recovery factor is observed with the interest rate of Annual energy output is estimated by:
12% for the solar still lifetime of 10 years (Esfahani et al.
mw  L
2011): E out ¼ ð13Þ
3600
n
ið1 þ iÞ
CRF ¼ ð4Þ Net CO2 emission for the 10-year lifetime of solar still is
ð1 þ iÞn −1
evaluated by:
Annual salvage value is estimated with sinking fund factor ð Eout  LT −Ein Þ  1:58
and salvage value: N co2 ¼ ð14Þ
1000
ASV ¼ SSF  S ð5Þ Carbon credit earned (CCE) is assessed by net CO2 emis-
Salvage value is calculated by 20% of capital cost sion with market price:
(Esfahani et al. 2011): CCE ¼ N co2  Rco2 ð15Þ
S ¼ 0:2  CC ð6Þ

Sinking fund factor is estimated using following relation:

i Results and discussion
SFF ¼ ð7Þ
ð1 þ iÞn −1
The observed results in BMSS, DMSS, and CSS experimen-
Annual maintenance cost is given by 15% of fixed annual tations are discussed in this section. The comparative analysis
cost (Esfahani et al. 2011): has been made in the same climatic conditions.
AMC ¼ 0:15  FAC ð8Þ

Annual cost of solar still is calculated using following re- Experimental observations
lation:
Figure 2 depicts the variations of solar irradiation and wind
AC ¼ FAC þ AMC−ASV ð9Þ velocity during the observations. The observed maximum so-
lar irradiation in morning to afternoon hours were about 814.7
Cost per liter of distillate is estimated by annual cost and W/m2 and it was decreased to 90–74.2 W/m2 during the eve-
the productivity observed in particular day: ning hours. Although the sunshine period was found to be
AC around 12 h during the daytime, the successful sunshine avail-
CPL ¼ ð10Þ ability (more than 250 W/m2) for the experiment was only
Pd
about 8–10 h. It is also observed that the fluctuation in ambi-
Payback period of solar stills are given by (Dhivagar and ent wind velocity was much effective with respect to time. In
Sundararaj 2019): order to this, the temperature of glass cover has decreased
which results in improvement of condensation. The maximum
Investments
PBP ¼ ð11Þ wind velocity of about 2.5 m/s was observed at 18:00 h. The
Net earnings

The annual productivity is observed during clear sunny

days (selected 270 days).

Enviro-economic analysis

The CO2 emissions and carbon credit earned by solar stills

during its lifetime are estimated using enviro-economic anal-
ysis. The CO2 emissions during combustion of fossil fuels in
conventional power plants are estimated as 1.58 kg/kWh
(Dwivedi and Tiwari 2012).
CO2 emissions of the solar still ðkgÞ ¼ Ein  1:58 ð12Þ Fig. 2 Variations of solar irradiation and wind velocity during
experimentation

variation between the ambient wind velocities were observed
to be about 1.4 m/s and 2.5 m/s during experiments.
The variations of different temperatures during experimen-
tation are illustrated in Fig. 3. The ambient temperature in-
creases in afternoon hours (14:00 h) and attains the maximum
of about 40.1 °C. During evening hours, it was reduced to
around 25.2 °C as solar irradiation decreases. The maximum
glass cover temperature of about 51.8 °C was observed in
afternoon hours and decreases slowly to 31.4 °C at evening
time. It is observed that the block and disc magnet tempera-
tures were increased in noon hours and reaches to 67.5 °C and
64 °C, respectively. In night hours (21:00 h), the temperature
observed in block and disc magnets were falling down to 39.6
°C and 36.2 °C, respectively. It is observed that the tempera-
ture observed in block magnets were 5.1% higher than disc
magnets. It happens due to the size and heat storage capacity
of block magnets during high sunshine hours. However, the
usage of both block and disc magnets in basin has improved
the temperatures significantly (Holysz et al. 2007).
Furthermore, the maximum observed water temperature in
BMSS, DMSS, and CSS were about 68.5 °C, 65 °C, and
54.3 °C, respectively. The reason behind the improvements
of water temperature in BMSS is that, the heat storage capac-
ity of block magnets in the basin. The observed saline water
temperature in BMSS was 5.1% and 20.7% higher than the
water temperature observed in DMSS and CSS, respectively.
Finally, it is clearly observed that the usage of block and disc
magnets in solar still basin have significantly improved the
saline water temperature (Dubey and Mishra 2020).
Productivity performance
Figure 4 depicts the hourly and cumulative productivity of all
the three solar stills. The maximum evaporation process in all
the solar stills was observed during the afternoon hours (13.00
to 15.00 h). The maximum hourly productivity observed in
Fig. 3 Variations of different temperatures during experimentation
Environ Sci Pollut Res
Fig. 4 Variations of hourly and cumulative productivity during
experimentation
BMSS, DMSS, and CSS were 510 ml, 480 ml, and 440 ml,
respectively. The rise in hourly productivity happens due to
increase in evaporation process with the heat harvested in both
the magnets in the solar still basin. In addition, it occurs due to
higher temperature difference between the inner glass cover
and the surface of saline water. The observed hourly produc-
tivity in BMSS was 5.8% and 13.7% higher than the hourly
productivity observed in both DMSS and CSS, respectively. It
happens due to the maximum size, heat storage capacity, and
effect of magnetic field observed in BMSS. In DMSS, the size
of the disc magnets, heat storage capacity, and observed mag-
netic field were significantly low which resulted in lower pro-
ductivity when compared to BMSS. The BMSS has 10.1% of
productivity improvements when compared to the earlier
work reported in solar still using 6 kg of phase change mate-
rials (Jahanpanah et al. 2021). The cumulative productivity
observed in BMSS, DMSS, and CSS were about 3.15 kg/
m2, 2.82 kg/m2, and 2.15 kg/m2, respectively.
Economic analysis
The cost-effectiveness in all the three solar stills were estimat-
ed using economic analysis and listed in Table 3. The solar
still basin and top glass cover are cleaned by weekly basis to
prevent the corrosion and dust accumulation. In order to this,
the capital cost was calculated by considering all the fabrica-
tion, maintenance, and operation costs (Dhivagar et al. 2020).
The CPL observed in BMSS, DMSS, and CSS were about
0.0216 USD, 0.0213 USD, and 0.0271 USD, respectively.
The CPL of BMSS is 1.3% and 20.2% lower than the CPL
estimated in both DMSS and CSS, respectively. Furthermore,
the payback period of BMSS, DMSS, and CSS were estimat-
ed to be about 3.6 months, 3.5 months, and 4.5 months, re-
spectively. The observations proved that the increase in annu-
al productivity of solar still decreases the CPL and PBP
significantly.
Environ Sci Pollut Res

Table 3 Economic analysis of

BMSS, DMSS and CSS Parameters BMSS DMSS CSS

Capital cost (CC) 95.6 USD 84.7 USD 82 USD

Capital recovery factor (CRF) 0.177 0.177 0.177
Fixed annual cost (FAC) 16.92 USD 14.99 USD 14.51 USD
Salvage value (S) 19.2 16.9 16.4
Sinking fund factor (SFF) 0.056 0.056 0.056
Annual salvage value (ASV) 1.07 0.94 0.91
Annual maintenance cost (AMC) 2.53 USD 2.24 USD 2.17 USD
Annual cost (AC) 18.38 USD 16.29 USD 15.77 USD
Annual productivity (Pd) 850.5 kg 761.4 kg 580.5 kg
Cost per liter of productivity (CPL) 0.0216 USD 0.0213 USD 0.0271 USD
Payback period 3.6 months 3.5 months 4.5 months

Enviro-economic analysis
The CO2 emissions of BMSS, DMSS, and CSS were estimat-
ed in enviro-economic analysis and listed in Table 4 and
Table 5. Table 4 provides the individual embodied energy in
all the three solar still components. In this, the total embodied
energy in BMSS, DMSS, and CSS were estimated as 250.6
kWh, 250.6 kWh, and 239 kWh, respectively. Table 5 lists the
variations in CO2 emissions and carbon credits earned (CCE)
for all the three solar stills during the lifetime of 10 years. It is
observed that the net CO2 emission of the BMSS, DMSS, and
CSS were estimated as 11.04 tons, 9.37 tons, and 6.45 tons,
respectively. The CCE for all the BMSS, DMSS, and CSS
were estimated as 264.9 USD, 224.8 USD, and 154.8 USD,
respectively. Results observed that the increase in annual pro-
ductivity of solar still increases CO2 emissions and CCE dur-
ing its lifetime.
Conclusions
The experimentation have been conducted in BMSS, DMSS,
and CSS to heat and magnetize the saline water in basin under
the same climatic conditions of Coimbatore city during the
year 2019. The following main conclusions are drawn:
a) The observed saline water temperature in BMSS was
5.1% and 20.7% higher than the saline water temperature
observed in both DMSS and CSS, respectively, during
peak sunshine hours.
b) The hourly productivity performance of BMSS was 5.8%
and 13.7% higher than DMSS and CSS, respectively. The
cumulative productivity of BMSS, DMSS, and CSS were
observed to be about 3.15 kg/m2, 2.82 kg/m2, and 2.15
kg/m2, respectively.
c) The estimated CPL in BMSS was 1.3% and 20.2% lesser
than the CPL estimated in both DMSS and CSS, respec-
tively. The observed PBP of all the solar stills (BMSS,
DMSS, and CSS) were 3.6 months, 3.5 months, and 4.5
months, respectively. The observations proved that the
increase in annual productivity decreases the CPL and
PBP significantly.
d) The CO2 emission of BMSS, DMSS, and CSS were esti-
mated to be about 11.04 tons, 9.37 tons, and 6.45 tons,
respectively, during the lifetime of 10 years. The observed
CCE for all the solar stills (BMSS, DMSS, and CSS) were

Table 4 The embodied energy of

various components of solar still Solar still components Embodied energy (Ein) Embodied energy (Ein) Embodied energy (Ein)
BMSS DMSS CSS
kWh kWh kWh

Basin plate 55.5 55.5 55.5

Frame body 138.8 138.8 138.8
Glass cover 25 25 25
Insulation 2.7 2.7 2.7
Basin plate coating 12.5 12.5 12.5
Silicon rubber seal 4.5 4.5 4.5
Magnets 11.6 11.6 -
Total embodied energy 250.6 250.6 239

Table 5 Enviro-economic
analysis of all the three solar stills S. Solar Annual
No stills productivity (kg)
1 BMSS 850.5
2 DMSS 761.4
3 CSS 580.5
264.9 USD, 224.8 USD, and 154.8 USD months, respec-
tively. The results showed that the increase in annual pro-
ductivity increases CO2 emission and CCE during its
lifetime.
Nomenclature E , embodied energy, kWh; h, heat transfer coefficient,
W/m2K; L, latent heat of vaporization, kJ/kg; m, hourly productivity, kg;
T, temperature, K; N co2 , net CO2 mitigation; Rco2 , market price of CO2
mitigationSubscripts eva, evaporation; in, input (embodiment) energy;
g, glass; out, output energy; w, waterAbbreviations AC, annual cost;
AMC, annual maintenance cost; ASV, annual salvage value; BMSS, block
magnets solar still; CC, capital cost; CSS, conventional solar still; CCE,
carbon credit earned; CPL, cost per liter; CRF, capital recovery factor;
DMSS, disc magnets solar still; FAC, fixed annual cost; LT, lifetime of the
solar still; S, salvage value
Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank the anonymous
reviewers for their useful comments and suggestions.
Availability of data and materials Applicable.
Author contribution Ramasamy Dhivagar– concepts and design, data
collection, and original draft.
Murugesan Mohanraj – technical correction.
Balakrishnan Deepanraj – technical correction.
Vaiyapuri Senthil Murugan – technical correction.
Declarations
Ethics approval Not applicable.
Consent to participate Not applicable.
Consent for publication Not applicable.
Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests.
References
Amor HB, Elaoud A, Salah NB, Elmoueddeb K (2017) Effect of mag-
netic treatment on surface tension and water evaporation. Int J
Advert 5:119–124
Belyayev Y, Mohanraj M, Jayaraj S, Kaltayev A (2019) Thermal perfor-
mance simulation of a heat pump asssited solar desalination system
for Kazakhstan conditions. Heat Transf Eng 40:1060–1072
Cai R, Yang H, He J, Zhu (2009) The effects of magnetic fields on water
molecular hydrogen bonds. J Mol Struct 938:15–19
Environ Sci Pollut Res
Ein Eout CO2 Net CO2 CCE
(kWh) (kWh) emissions emission (tons) (USD)
(kg)
250.6 724.1 395.9 11.04 264.9
250.6 618.4 395.6 9.37 224.8
239 432.6 377.6 6.45 154.8
Deniz E, Cinar S (2016) Energy, exergy, economic and environmental
(4E) analysis of a solar desalination system with humidification-
dehumidification. Energy Convers Manag 126:12–19
Dhivagar R, Mohanraj M (2021b) Optimization of performance of coarse
aggregate-assisted single-slope solar still via Taguchi approach. J
Renew Energy Environ 8:13–19
Dhivagar R, Mohanraj M (2021c) Performance improvements of single
slope solar still using graphite plate fins and magnets. Environ Sci
Pollut Res 28:20499–20516
Dhivagar R, Sundararaj S (2018) A review on methods of productivity
improvement in solar desalination. Appl Mech Mater 877:414–429
Dhivagar R, Sundararaj S (2019) Thermodynamic and water analysis on
augmentation of a solar still with copper tube heat exchange in
coarse aggregate. J Therm Anal Calorim 136:89–99
Dhivagar R, Mohanraj M, Hidouri K, Belyayev Y (2020) Energy, exergy,
economic and enviro-economic (4E) analysis of gravel coarse ag-
gregate sensible heat storage-assisted single-slope solar still. J
Therm Anal Calorim
Dhivagar R, Mohanraj M, Hidouri K, Midhun M (2021a) CFD modeling
of a gravel coarse aggregate sensible heat storage assisted single
slope solar still. Desalin Water Treat 210:54–69
Dhivagar R, Mohanraj M, Raj P, Radha Krishna G (2021d)
Thermodynamic analysis of single slope solar still using graphite
plates and block magnets at seasonal climatic conditions. Water
Sci Technol
Dubey M, Mishra DR (2020) Thermo-exergo-economic analysis of dou-
ble slope solar still augmented with ferrite ring magnets and GI
sheet. Desalin Water Treat 198:19–30
Dumka P, Kushwah Y, Sharma A, Mishra DR (2019) Comparative anal-
ysis and experimental evaluation of single slope solar still augment-
ed with permanent magnets and CSS. Desalination 459:34–45
Dwivedi VK, Tiwari GN (2012) Thermal modeling and carbon credit
earned of a double slope passive solar still. Desalin Water Treat
13:400–410
Elbar ARA, Yousef MS, Hassar H (2019) Energy, exergy, exergo eco-
nomical and enviro economical (4E) evaluation of new integration
of solar still with photovoltaic panel. J Clean Prod 233:665–680
Esfahani JA, Rahbar N, Lavvaf M (2011) Utilization of thermoelectric
cooling in a portable active solar still – an experimental study on
winter days. Desalination 269:198–205
Gholamabbas S, Saeed N (2021) Retrofitting a thermoelectric-based solar
still integrated with an evacuated tube collector utilizing an
antibacterial-magnetic hybrid nanofluid. Desalination 500:114871
Hassan H, Yousef MS, Fathy M, Salem Ahmed M (2020) Assessment of
parabolic trough solar collector assisted solar still at various saline
water mediums via energy, exergy, exergoeconomic, and
enviroeconomic approaches. Renew Energy 155:604–616
Holysz L, Szczes A, Chibowski E (2007) Effects of a static magnetic field
on water and electrolyte solutions. J Colloid Interface Sci 316:996–
1002
Jahanpanah M, Sadatinejad SJ, Kasaeian A, Jahangir MH, Sarrafha H
(2021) Experimental investigation of the effects of low-
temperature phase change material on single-slope solar still.
Desalination 499:114799
Environ Sci Pollut Res
Joshi P, Tiwari GN (2018) Energy matrices, exergo-economic and
enviro-economic analysis of an active single slope solar still inte-
grated with a heat exchanger: a comparative study. Desalination
443:85–98
Mehdizadeh Youshanlouei M, Yekani Motlagh S, Soltanipour H (2020)
The effect of magnetic field on the performance improvement of a
conventional solar still: a numerical study. Environ Sci Pollut Res
Mohamed AF, Hegazi AA, Sultan GI, El-Said EMS (2019) Enhancement
of a solar still performance by inclusion the basalt stones as a porous
sensible absorber: experimental study and thermo-economic analy-
sis. Sol Energy Mater Sol Cells 200:109958
Omara AAM, Abuelnuor AAA, Mohammed HA, Khiadani M (2020)
Phase change materials (PCMs) for improving solar still productiv-
ity: a review. J Therm Anal Calorim
Sharon H, Reddy KS, Krithika D, Philip L (2017) Experimental perfor-
mance investigation of titled solar still with basin and wick for dis-
tillate quality and enviro-economic aspects. Desalination 410:30–54
Sharshir SW, Peng G, Elsheikh AH, Edreis EMA, Eltawil MA,
Abdelhamid T, Kabeel AE, Zang J, Yang N (2018) Energy and
exergy analysis of solar stills with micro/nano particles: a compara-
tive study. Energy Convers Manag 177:363–375
Sivakumar V, Ganapathy Sundram E (2013) Improvement techniques of
solar still efficency: a review. Renew Sust Energ Rev 28:246–264
Wang Y, Wei H, Li Z (2018) Effect of magnetic field on thephysical
properties of water. Results Phys 8:262–267
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdic-
tional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.