Danish Supermarket Chain Is Setting Up "emergency Stores"
Posted4 months agoActive4 months ago
swiss.socialOtherstoryHigh profile
skepticalmixed
Debate
80/100
Emergency PreparednessRetailResilience
Key topics
Emergency Preparedness
Retail
Resilience
A Danish supermarket chain is setting up 'Emergency Stores' to remain operational during crises, sparking discussion on their feasibility and potential impact.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Very active discussionFirst comment
30m
Peak period
69
0-6h
Avg / period
13.3
Comment distribution160 data points
Loading chart...
Based on 160 loaded comments
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Sep 11, 2025 at 6:35 PM EDT
4 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Sep 11, 2025 at 7:05 PM EDT
30m after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
69 comments in 0-6h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Sep 15, 2025 at 2:21 AM EDT
4 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
ID: 45216805Type: storyLast synced: 11/20/2025, 8:14:16 PM
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
They are meant to be available as reliable and functioning stores throughout a crisis period. Your go-to destination for purchasing vital goods during the crisis.
If you've only got two days supply, you may not be so generous.
[1] My elementary schools had a good program of bring in canned food at the start of the school year in case of emergency, have a picnic to eat it in the last month of school. I also did have a disaster can when I lived in California; I'm less prepared at the moment.
If power goes out really bad, there's some kind of major weather event in some part of the country etc 3 days is a reasonable time frame for emergency measures to be put in place
I dont think that is how it works? That is assuming people wont flock out to buy everything in the emergency store. And do people visit it every day or are these "Emergency Stores". After all they need to replenish stock.
Or are these simply some form of marketing play?
Off-Topic: Its been while since I last visited a The Mastodon site and it seems a lot faster than before.
Well, you could make everything really expensive in these emergency stores during an emergency.
But in practice Uber does face at least public scrutiny. Eg when there was a hostage situation in the Sydney city centre a few years ago, everyone wanted to leave and Uber's surge pricing kicked in automatically (no human at Uber even knew about the hostage situation, at least there was no human in the loop).
Of course, this was exactly working as intended, but it was a bad look, so Uber retroactively made all the fares out of the city centre free that day.
(Yes, the US has silly laws there, too.)
So if an event happened that even slightly appeared to suggest things might get tough for a while people will always panic buy. Without limits those with money will buy it up.
I did the same thing like a couple years after initial Covid when we had massive flooding in Abbotsford. I heard on the news something like an estimated 100,000 chickens were killed in the flood. I stood up, grabbed my keys and got into my car. I went and bought like a few hundred dollars in chicken. 2 days later facebook was full of posts about how all the chicken is gone and none on the shelves. Luckily it didn't last long and I believe they managed to get a bunch from Washington state but it was all at an increased cost.
I am not rich but I am thankful that I am in enough of a position that I can load up if I feel there might be a need to. A few people said I was part of the problem buying lots like that buy I always did it preemptively before the surge started. And in my defense when you literally could not buy toilet paper, I kept a bunch in my car. I work as a health care working visiting people at home. I gave out dozens of rolls so elderly could have it meaning I would at times run out. I also have helped out countless clients with no food out of my own pocket. But I am the provider for my family so I need to ensure they are okay.
It sounds like you’re trying to clear your conscious from panic buying. However, some people went to the store to find nothing because they weren’t able to go at the same time as you.
I am not trying to clear my conscious. I know I am a good person and literally would give the shirt off my back. But I had a hint things might get bad and as a father of young children above all and everything in this world I had to make sure I had at least a bit or reserves if things got bad. I am not rich at all so when I say I did a costco run I am not talking like thousands of dollars. More like an $800 run which is nothing, but I know how to make that much last a long time. I got a bunch of flour and rice. Some meats and tomato sauce. I would not be eating in luxury had their been a long term shortage but I would at least be able to make some bread and basic foods to keep my family feed even if poorly.
action speak louder than words I'm afraid
The government announced that there was plenty of stock, but panic buying would mean it couldn't be brought onto the shelves in time, so please don't. People didn't.
I didn't rush off to panic buy, but when I first heard about it happening, I did go to do a normal grocery run in case things later ran out. There was nothing on my list. Also, there was almost nothing on the shelves. It was like the supermarket had been looted. Well, of everything edible or useful anyway. Probably high-value, non-essentials were still there, unlike in real looting.
I walked and walked the aisles, and the only thing I could find that we might eat were black olives. I disliked black olives (as apparently did everyone else), but I bought (and later ate) them anyway. That wasn't the only thing edible in the supermarket - it was a while ago, so I forget what was still there. Perhaps condiments, and obscure baking ingredients.
I held out from panic buying right through, but once the shelves were restocked I started buying a couple extra of everything each time, as long as there were lots on the shelf. I gradually filled one cupboard shelf with 6-7 of every canned and jarred food we eat. Later on, there were a few more instances of people panic buying at the slightest provocation (1), and I now assume people will do it if allowed.
1) https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/473591/you-don-t-need-to...
I get you were anxious about what was going to happen and I hope that you now have emergency supplies that you regularly stock. That way it won't damage the normal supply chain.
This is a common way people get their current accounts into debt without authorising an overdraught.
Im not that familiar with the protocol, but i could see there being a special clause to allow larger off-grid payments in emergency situations.
I misunderstood the nature of the book, assuming it was a list of valid card numbers. It was, of course, the opposite, so when I said to my mom “I hope they find your number in there” she replied “I hope they don’t!”
10kg bags of rice is not a common supermarket item in Denmark.
The participating commenter base on this site has been much wider than could be described that way for many years.
- 2018, https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/feb/15/why-silicon-val...
- 2022, https://www.theguardian.com/news/2022/sep/04/super-rich-prep...
It’s tougher to quantify and building a connected community than just profiting off users, though.
Businesses try to keep minimum stock. Single disruption in integrated circuit supply disables whole industries. And so on.
Capitalism is incompatible with resiliency.
The climate is changing. Natural disasters are going to be more common. It's prudent to prepare for it.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/22/us/texas-heb-winter-storm...
https://youtu.be/23sehACMR6s
Preparedness is vital!
[1] https://www.dr.dk/drn-video/67b5f9f966d82a0507aeda6a
[2] https://www.berlingske.dk/politik/mette-frederiksen-vil-slaa...
[3] https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/denmark-boost-2025-26-d...
We are thankfully on quite the shopping spree, we have also decided to include women into conscription (and that conscripts can be used for real missions, iirc) and we are financing and building Ukrainian weapons like the Flamingo.
Also, Scandinavia has pooled our airforces into one airforce, surpassing the UK, France etc. in size.
As for the army vacation camp, I think it's good experience (same with scouting for example), although there's probably a huge recruitment angle there.
Personally I wouldn't mind a stint in the military, but at the same time I'm nearly 40 and not exactly fit if you catch my drift. That said, the military is also looking for a lot of reservists, people who do some jobs outside of their day job, some in IT security, base guarding, that kind of thing.
I tried to sign up as a reservist - civil personell - because I feel like my logistic expertise could come in handy but sadly I passed 40 a few years ago and I'm deemed to old for service, even as a reservist.
Credit card bills, notices, etc. I don't want to have to log in every time I want to check a bill / notification, only to have to pull out my Yubikey or phone.
Not to mention having to click 'no' to all the popups about new credit cards or subscription upgrades.
The main one is a private company that provides an authentication system using private certificates. When you try to login to an authenticated website your phone pops up a message asking you to verify the login and enter your PIN. That signs the request with your private certificate and sends it back to the provider. Other actions such as transfering money or signing contracts require you to authenticate using a different certificate, with a different PIN. The private certificate stays on your device (there are mechanisms to generate a new one if you lose your device).
The other options are ID cards with a USB card reader or a mobile signature in the SIM card of your phone. For government website and utility companies you can usually authenticate with your bank as another option.
I prefer it to username/password as all I need is my ID number (which unlike the US doesn't need to be private) and my phone. And basically everything you need to use to adult uses this system.
I don't think the system you explain is bad. It's essentially PKI.
My issues are deliverability: what if I get the email and never open it? What if it gets marked as spam?
And it requires me to read emails, something I've actually tried to reduce because every subject is screaming for attention.
But Eboks is not holding all digital post of all our citizens, it's one of at least 3 services who we can choose from to read our mail from the governmental organizations. It's a freemarket compromise with multiple private and public solutions the public can choose from.
Also while yes the private company that did deliver physical mail no longer will, another have taken its place for physical letter... Isn't that freemarket capitalism? Why should one private entity have the contract for all time?
Your post does read like the old "Denmark is a specialist hellhole" posts from the conservatives when Bernie Sanders dared using the country as an example of doing Social Wellfare + Free market right.
They could have started some kind of certification thing for email providers and even funded a couple of certified email providers much more effectively than the digital post monstrosity.
That would have been awesome and forward looking, and perhaps even helped ordinary people get better security for their personal emails.
Perhaps we'll get there some day.
In the same way, it concerns me how much Sweden relies on BankID, but that's a different thing.
One particular concern I have is whether that company will be connected to the Universal Postal Union; if they aren't, sending letters to and from foreign countries will suddenly be a minefield. I don't know and have been trying to find out.
Hopefully I'll have my new life sufficiently set up to help those I love and left behind, and even more hopefully they'll be able to get out, once the shit actually hits.
I'd like for them to come to me earlier, but I don't think I'll get more than visits until bombs start falling. If I'm lucky some of them will already be here visiting me when that happens. Then they can just stay. The rest will at least know they have a safe haven if they can just manage to get here.
It's not trouble free, not by a long shot. I have family connection to here though and I recon Mexico is not very likely to partake in WW3 in any meaningful way, so should be safe from what I worry is coming soon for Europe.
For now tho, I'm definitely less safe than my friends and family back in Sweden. In the short term at least. I don't think Putin is going to change that this year, and probably not next year either, but honestly who knows.
The lifestyle is legit. No one requires you to go to the famously sketchy parts.
Imagine leaving the US for Mexico in 1962 because the "cold war is about to go warm"
Unless you like to ski, and the long dark winters, weather in mexico is an upgrade, except for the occasional hurricane.
Gotta focus on the bright side, and I do love the climate here!
I could do with a little less cartel parties that go on through the night at the neighbours house. They're loud and it's not like I'm gonna go knock on that particular neighbours door, knowing fully well who the guests are...
Here in Germany foreigners often scoff about how prevalent cash is, but to this day nobody has yet invented a payment technology that works without electricity, without transaction costs, and without a third party. As far as I'm concerned cash is still the most futuristic technology we ever invented
1g is ~100 of money today, which would be enough for a weekly supply of groceries for a person in HCOL areas.
In fact, many retailers will tell you that cash is more expensive to handle than card, because every deposit requires staff time and often explicit bank fees. Society also pays indirectly through tax evasion and black-market activity, which cash enables far more easily than digital systems.
You’re right that cash is robust in a blackout, and there’s something elegant about a technology that works offline, peer-to-peer, and without needing servers to stay up. But the idea that it has no transaction costs is not realistic.
It's not neglible to the point that some sellers where it's legal don't take cash because credit cars fees there cost less than cash handling.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLDgLOga6oE
Having survived an above average number of these in my life myself where basic services were down for many days, I have a pretty good idea of what happens. Having cash versus digital doesn’t matter. No one is keeping track, people just take care of people. Everyone writes it off, moves on, and the community becomes stronger.
This is pretty wired into the culture. No one will accept your money in these scenarios even if you have it.
What would be a signal that you should panic buy to beat the rush? A drone shot down over Poland? Article 4 being invoked? What if a falling drone causes a casualty?
Simply having deeper stocks will let them avoid the empty shelf photos that can tip the balance into panic buying.
Denmark specifically is not a populous country. You could probably keep the entire country fed with just the capacity of e.g. the US military airlift capability, which has been used in these situations. The emergency reserves mostly only need to exist until supply chains are established. It is a balancing act.
That'll cost them Greenland.
We as a country are exposed to being attacked by Russia. Be that cyber attacks or destruction of assets by sleeper agents.
So instead of decentalizing the electrical grid and making sure it's secure someone at Dansk Supermarked thinks it will earn them money to be prepared for some future crisis.
I find the article native.. it says they trust Nets (payment company) to work offline ..
(Worth noting: Your comment sounds like “I have a feeling fixing (critical bug 1) would be a better investment than (fixing critical bug 2)”. You fix both.)
Attacking a distributed grid would probably not be cost effective.
No you are not. First - no one can find you on a map. You are so tiny. Second for a conventional warfare Russia will have to go trough many many countries to get to you, no matter which road they take (also anyone that thinks Russia is a credible threat is smoking something strong - they don't have the capacity to subdue backwater as eastern Ukraine, let alone more developed and prepared countries as Poland, Germany or Finland, Sweden). And preparedness won't help you for nuclear.
China is betting on us rather pivoting than engaging with Russian army. If we seem tough enough, we call it.
We can then also negotiate better rate for the US protection racket, becauss the US fuckers decided to more than double the rate recently and we are unhappy about that. Long term we will rearm ourselves on our own terms.
Every country that has nuclear weapons has them because of the threat of using them.
If a state would say "we will never, in no circumstance, ever use these weapons" then why spend the money to have them in the first place?
USA, pakistan, russia, france, india and so on… they all have these weapons to threaten using them.
Sabotage by agents is an attack.
Russia is a terrorist state and will attack this country sooner or later. It's just a question of time.
Good work.
The reason it hasn't happened yet is that they'd either have to increase tax income greatly, or reduce public spending greatly with financial support from Denmark. As I gather, infrastructure up there is really expensive.
>The military powerhouse that is Kaliningrad
Kaliningrad actually does have a sizable (for Russia) military investment, which is why the west would expect them to defend it in that way.
I don't think Russia COULD do that anymore, unless it was entirely a Belarus operation. But if they succeed at rushing that gap, current war "meta" is extremely defensive-sided. Russia may not have a meaningful "fleet" but they certainly have enough working and pretty good submarines to make hell for anyone trying to then supply Lithuania.
Not to mention we get to deal with all the refugees from that godforsaken war.
You can be forgiven however if you're a millennial (as I am) or younger, because the long peace has been so long that it seems crazy that Russia might start dropping bombs, say, on Copenhagen or London. "They wouldn't dare attack NATO" we would have said 10 years ago. But today, NATO is at risk since too much of its credibility is tied to the US and the US is now unpredictable. With one stroke of an "executive order" pen the US could just call backsies and pull out if one man considers it politically advantageous to him to do so. That has been unthinkable for 75 years and now it's just reality.
Russia is a lot less afraid of Western Europe than they were/are of NATO. Would they win? IDK. But my perception is that the very notion of war would shock the s**t out of the 20-somethings that Western Europe would need to conscript in order to fight an all-out war. If too many refused to fight, Putin might just roll in there relatively unchallenged.
Note: US civilians are certainly not any more ready to enlist than Europe's! But the US is the only Western country with (almost) enough people already enlisted to be a credible threat in a major war.
There's no plausible world in which Russia has the strength to take on the rest of Europe, in, say, the next ten years.
(Let's assume nukes are out of the question)
No european country has actually put a lot of effort into supporting Ukraine, but if an actual EU+NATO member was attacked things would be different. Even without the US.
It's not accidental that Russia invaded Ukraine and Georgia but not the baltic states.
Sure they do. Total war + support from norks and China will do it.
If it's that costly to hold onto areas where most people actually like Putin relatively speaking, how much more expensive wouldn't it be to hold onto areas to where people hate him?
Is it true? No.
Also air force is not so useful and we are spending insane amounts into that.
I'm being cute above with the phrasing, but your attitude of "why spend on military, it's wasted money" is obsolete thinking. It's based on a world where the US was spending enough to intimidate Russia or anyone else from stepping out of line, and where the US could be relied upon to keep their commitments.
It was logical for Germany, for instance, to spend only 1.2% for the past 25 years because the NATO obligations guaranteed the US's support and the US's leaders understood the qualitative ROI of having all of Europe firmly in its own sphere of influence.
Now, regardless of how we feel about it, it's foolish to depend on the US anymore. NATO still has some value -- the US may defend parts of Europe, and under this presidency it probably depends on stupid stuff like how impressed Trump is by your head of state's handshake, how hot their wife is, whether they compliments Trump, etc. But you can't stake your safety on that silliness.
USA could not defeat afghanistan so I doubt it intimidates anyone really… if we are talking conventional warfare.
Anyway despite all of Trump's bullshit talking points, USA will do as always militarily, because it's convenient to them that EU doesn't become independent.
Rememeber also that there was a hot war in the middle of Europe (former Yugoslavia) during the 90s with the US even carrying airstrikes on an European capital (Belgrade).
Obviously this does not mean that European countries should have weak militaries or not show strength. But the threat of Russia is overblown and used to manufacture consent in public opinion for more spending and more EU integration at a time when people already suffer economically and are already squeezed, and growing disatisfied with the EU.
IMHO, the highest risk of violent instability in Western Europe now and in the coming years is not Russia but mass immigration and islamist terrorism at large. And perhaps that's also partly why governments are trying to deflect attention...
> it seems crazy that Russia might start dropping bombs, say, on Copenhagen or London.
Yes, that is totally crazy.
That's exactly why there's gonna by full scale war with russia. It's simply the best moment for it and russia showed it can't be left alone.
That's bonkers on all levels, and more.
203 more comments available on Hacker News