3 ms·

The fact it is integrated and insulated with seals, is inline with studies that show the benefits of an insulated hive with the added value of real time statist

The fact it is integrated and insulated with seals, is inline with studies that show the benefits of an insulated hive with the added value of real time statistics through the sensors direct to your phone or computer via a cellular connection on each hive. When we were considering the development of the product, I reverse engineered the cost to benefit ratio with a Cost of Ownership that considers all aspects of a hive and the HH comes in less expensive after 2 years than a standard uninsulated hive.

cameron_b 5y ago
I would be interested to learn more about that analysis. Responding to your other comments here, I'm given to being a data nerd, but I also think that there's little replacement for the hive inspection. I like that your system seems to be out of the way more than, say, the Flow hive super. The Flow super is a good example of something that is good for beekeepers interested in -not- scaling up. By that I mean that the cost of outfitting one hive is tenable because it offsets the infrastructure for extraction. But it doesn't offset the Flow super for the next hive. At three hives, you're better off with some supers you can lift and a two-frame extractor. A lot of the monitoring systems I've seen are similar. You spend $300 per hive to know what's going on and for N hives you spend 300*N. Broodminder lets you piecemeal that a little bit and hang "80" hives (temp/humidity sensors?) off one Cellular hub. My gut here is that the data are more valuable when you have more correlations in a similar area, so the best case for hive monitoring is when it is cost effective to outfit a whole yard, rather than just a "flagship" exemplary hive. I'm also very interested in edge-case detection like when a hive becomes honey-bound ( putting on weight, but no room for brood ). I've read up on the auditory analysis before, and the anchor seems to be with the Apidictor. Have you been able to head off swarms? What's your window for sensing that? Sorry for the barrage, I'm keenly interested in this. I don't mean to pick it apart because I think your solution is inferior. I don't. I want to understand.

cameron_b 5y ago

I would be interested to learn more about that analysis. Responding to your other comments here, I'm given to being a data nerd, but I also think that there's little replacement for the hive inspection. I like that your system seems to be out of the way more than, say, the Flow hive super. The Flow super is a good example of something that is good for beekeepers interested in -not- scaling up. By that I mean that the cost of outfitting one hive is tenable because it offsets the infrastructure for extraction. But it doesn't offset the Flow super for the next hive. At three hives, you're better off with some supers you can lift and a two-frame extractor. A lot of the monitoring systems I've seen are similar. You spend $300 per hive to know what's going on and for N hives you spend 300*N. Broodminder lets you piecemeal that a little bit and hang "80" hives (temp/humidity sensors?) off one Cellular hub. My gut here is that the data are more valuable when you have more correlations in a similar area, so the best case for hive monitoring is when it is cost effective to outfit a whole yard, rather than just a "flagship" exemplary hive. I'm also very interested in edge-case detection like when a hive becomes honey-bound ( putting on weight, but no room for brood ). I've read up on the auditory analysis before, and the anchor seems to be with the Apidictor. Have you been able to head off swarms? What's your window for sensing that? Sorry for the barrage, I'm keenly interested in this. I don't mean to pick it apart because I think your solution is inferior. I don't. I want to understand.