My grandparents use this little boiling device. May not be fancy looking but it's does the job, it's cheap and portable.
http://imgur.com/gallery/Yk23aAl/new
I feel really sad about this as well. I actually happened to have published a few articles in Elsevier journals. I wish what I published is available for everyones eyes. The point of publishing it was to share my findings with the world not only with those who pay.
To make more a available and searchable I actually uploaded everything to academia.edu. I hope they don't get sued by Wiley and/or Elsevier for what the service they offer. If anyone wants to check out some chemistry you can check out what I have here http://unlv.academia.edu/AlexiNedeltchev
Few side thoughts: I think there are many things that can be improved in the science publishing:
1. Articles could be more interactive by providing discussion /commenting section.
2. Currently, if you want to see if the article you are checking out is worth reading you have to refer to the overall rating of the journal (this is known was impact factor). I think every article should have separate ratings. That way you can tell which are high impact articles and which are not. Btw the impact factors is calculated based on how many articles referred the article in hand. Does that sound familiar? It's the same concept as a webpage SEO. The more links pointing in the higher the rank.
3. Publishing process is every inefficient. It takes months to get something published since it was to be peer-reviewed. This obsolete approach that begs to be improved. Any ideas?