4 ms·

Not to mention that the perspective siliconescapee boils down to "You could buy X off amazon today" which is not even possible for loads of people, as Amazon do

Not to mention that the perspective siliconescapee boils down to "You could buy X off amazon today" which is not even possible for loads of people, as Amazon doesn't operate in many countries, and there are plenty of countries where Amazon doesn't even ship to. Then we have the 10% of people who live in poverty and wouldn't be able to afford ordering it anyways. Those are the groups that would be most helped by a device with these characteristics as well (easy maintenance and low ongoing cost).

Out_of_Characte 4y ago
But this device has the exact same problem you're describing, is less efficient, costs more and requires power. Novelty is the only upside
- Xylakant 4y ago
  The only device I could find on Amazon that fits the description of an inflatable desalination device is https://www.amazon.com/Aquamate-Solar-Emergency-Purification-Inflatable/dp/B004TOAELS/ref=zg_bs_3402151_55/146-1059240-0331150?pd_rd_i=B004TOAELS&psc=1 https://www.amazon.com/Aquamate-Solar-Emergency-Purification... and it reportedly produces between 0.5 and 2 liters of water per day. That’s great if you have none, but the device being discussed here produces substantially more. So it’s not just a novelty thing.
- capableweb 4y ago
  Efficiency is less important in scenarios like tropical storms, drought, and infrastructure crises, or places where common western infrastructure is non-existent. Costs are also less important as they are cheaper over time as the costs of maintenance becomes lower. Places lacking infrastructure are also helped by outside organizations who donate knowledge and equipment. Considering that this device can be solar-powered (and these bespoke areas where infrastructure is non-existing generally are _very_ sunny), requiring power seems like a lesser problem.
andrepd 4y ago
At least 1.3 billion people live in poverty, much more than 10%.
- ben_w 4y ago
  That depends on your definition of poverty; 10% of the world is in “extreme poverty” of $1.00/day in 1996 prices ($2.29 in 2021),

Out_of_Characte 4y ago

But this device has the exact same problem you're describing, is less efficient, costs more and requires power. Novelty is the only upside

Xylakant 4y ago
The only device I could find on Amazon that fits the description of an inflatable desalination device is https://www.amazon.com/Aquamate-Solar-Emergency-Purification-Inflatable/dp/B004TOAELS/ref=zg_bs_3402151_55/146-1059240-0331150?pd_rd_i=B004TOAELS&psc=1 https://www.amazon.com/Aquamate-Solar-Emergency-Purification... and it reportedly produces between 0.5 and 2 liters of water per day. That’s great if you have none, but the device being discussed here produces substantially more. So it’s not just a novelty thing.
capableweb 4y ago
Efficiency is less important in scenarios like tropical storms, drought, and infrastructure crises, or places where common western infrastructure is non-existent. Costs are also less important as they are cheaper over time as the costs of maintenance becomes lower. Places lacking infrastructure are also helped by outside organizations who donate knowledge and equipment. Considering that this device can be solar-powered (and these bespoke areas where infrastructure is non-existing generally are _very_ sunny), requiring power seems like a lesser problem.

andrepd 4y ago

At least 1.3 billion people live in poverty, much more than 10%.

ben_w 4y ago
That depends on your definition of poverty; 10% of the world is in “extreme poverty” of $1.00/day in 1996 prices ($2.29 in 2021),