Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by state_less 1821 days ago
I agree there is more complexity, but it may be worth it. Making electricity buys a good deal of versatility. If you have a bit extra, you can run an inductive burner, charge your phone/laptop or charge a house battery (if/when you can afford one).

I think in either system, teaching the locals to setup the system and maintain it themselves is important for keeping the costs down.

1 comments

But my question is, what's the cost benefit?

$1000 would buy a pretty large solar still and you can spend the extra $4000 on a solar phone charger if that's something the locals need. Meanwhile there's little that can go wrong with a solar still and if something does go wrong, they can likely fix it (even if temporarily) with duct tape. Losing their cell phone charger and cooktop to electrical failure sounds like less of a problem than losing their water source.

An inductive burner, cell phone charger, desalinator, etc all sound great on a $200,000 boat where the owner is wealthy enough to keep it maintained and probably keep spares. But putting expensive and complicated electronics in a village so remote that they don't even have reliable water seems like a mistake.

I wouldn’t discount people’s ability to do some basic electrical repair. And maybe the neighbors can lend you some water till you get back up and running.

You might be right though, if it’s remote enough and you have room, perhaps a solar still is the cheapest and simplest option. It seems like it would have to be very large to give comparable amounts of water. Do you know someone selling such kits?

In any event, maybe this gives folks some ideas for lowish cost options.