An interesting note from the video is how they said they could detect the grid frequency from the plug to detect times of over supply and (in theory) that would be the right time to absorb some of that excess.
Some other interesting benefits (mentioned in the comments) about how it can periodically cycle the heat better than traditional water tanks to kill off bacteria.
Yev from Backblaze here -> Most of our purchasing is done through distributors. We'd love to buy direct at some point, but for now we have good manufacturer/distributor relationships! We're getting there though!
There is a simple fix - become a distributor. I worked for local European distributors that moved less merchandise per year and had direct relationships with Samsung/Fujitsu/IBM/WD/Seagate (you can tell it was a long time ago :P).
Having a "dead weight" has it's advantages - passive, no bacteria, mold, flex, resistant to shock etc. Pretty sure billion dollar companies like Siemens have thought this through and came to the conclusion that concrete is best. The negative externality of a disappointed customer seems to be larger (medium term) than the damage being done by producing the concrete.
Manufacturers really don't care too much about shipping costs (and the secondary CO2 burden) once the machine leaves their loading dock. Their concern is to make the machine as cheaply as possible for the features involved and maximize the margin.
Costs are probably not that high anyway. For most logistic companies, volume determines capacity for trucks, not weight. Transporting a washing machine amongst other deliveries will not cost much more than other deliveries of that size (except for the additional fuel which is probably low). Carrying it in place can be done within minutes, not much longer than other deliveries.
That's probably also the reason why machines are cheap to buy online. If shipping was a constraint, buying at big stores would be cheaper.
Therefore, concrete can save some CO2 but probably not much cost. The cost of replacing faulty water tanks could be higher than the saved cost.
This. The problem is that the costs of transportation are externalized to a shipper, and the environmental costs the shipper incurs are externalized to ... future generations? And the cost of the eventual replacement is externalized to the consumer ten years from now. It may be wise for us as a society to find ways to fully account for all costs of products to use market forces to make better decisions for society as a whole, rather than enriching a segment at the expense of another.
Absolutely, I too think it's a matter of supply. So often shops refuse to take cards to avoid the fees. I suspect a systematic or law issue making card transactions more expensive.
Also what I thought. If this starts becoming widely used, then Google would be essentially getting a share out of the tip that readers would be giving to publishers, only for the service of "not showing ads and redistributing money".
I think sites are still free to offer "register and pay us to see no ads" model, like many already do. Implementing that will cost them money too (especially dealing with accepting payments), or they can just use Google's implementation and just give Google their bank account information, Google takes care of the rest.
But the issue is that for AdSense, Google solicits ad buyers, removes scams, and distributes traffic. If you're paying to not see ads, it's unclear what good Google is doing compared to just paying the publisher.
It's not zero-value, since the transaction costs of paying every publisher are crippling. But there's no definitive reason to look to Google for this value.
As I understood they tried to mitigate the explosion by putting sandbags and straw bales around the bomb. The burning straw is what I guess you see at the top of the explosion/fire. The straw also caused surrounding roofs to catch fire. Not sure why they didn't think of this and used fire proof stuff.
