So what do think? Do you think floating cities are still a sci-fi future like Waterworld? Or do you think we might get something out of this? And if you liked this video, be sure to check out this one on Mycelium Fungus the Future of Plastic? ua-cam.com/video/cApVVuuqLFY/v-deo.html
As someone who owned a sailboat for 10 years, I can say maintenance of anything on the water will be a bee-yatch. It's even worse if you can't pull it from the water. I can imagine vast swaths of sea growth hanging from the underside, probing and widening microscopic cracks. So for example that illustration of neatly hanging lines of kelp will either require regular undersea pruning by divers, or it will look like a complete mess. Also, universally articles like this never present realistic reviewed projections of anticipated costs. For example, would electrochemically generated sea-ment cost less per pound than using more conventional options, or is the assumption that the ecofriendly electricty would be so plentiful, that it would not bet better used for another purpose, like desalination? I'm not against this idea, I'm just pointing out questions that any savvy investor would ask.
Ok....I only got to the desalination part. What is the plan with the byproduct of desalination? If the dump it, you might killing the sea life that might want to live near these settlements.
Sounds interesting I think this is a very interesting Ted talk ua-cam.com/video/ieSV8-isy3M/v-deo.html I think the video is probably based on this Ted talk
And Bioshock couldn't have possibly worked because they had no way to produce new steel or glass. Hell they didn't have any way to produce electricity in sufficient quantities, let alone food or any other good.
“The 21st Century… Mankind has colonized the last frontier on earth: The Ocean. As captain of the Seaquest and her crew, We are its guardians. For beneath the surface lies the future.”
As an islander, I think the design and concept is beautiful, awesome and inspiring but VERY IMPRACTICAL.. The problems we often had: 1. Medical Emergencies- Hospitals are not that reliable. We had to take a boat in order to get to somewhere else and people often die on transit. 2. Cost of living- basic goods are way expensive because you literally need to import it from somewhere else. Supplies are limited and delays in shipments. 3. Isolation- the feeling that you are left-out from the rest of the world. 4. Maintenance of Structure- sea-salt is very good at rotting away stuff.. 5. Economy- no good paying jobs because there are no big companies around due to limited space and low population. And many more.. Proposal- Japanese strategy, they cut half top of a mountain and turned it into a city. The rest of the soil used to extend elevate the flood-prone shores. It's way more sufficient, practical, feasible and less cost than floating island. The floating island idea is already hostorically ancient.
1) I think we have to realize that in certain ways, people are less likely to be ill there. I mean they could get sea sick, etc. - but overall they're isolated and immune. 2) if cargo ships pass by you all the time - it's going to be the cheapest place to ship - not to mention eco-friendly! 3) yes, that's true - but I don't see them in the middle of the ocean, but by shore. I mean if they're large enough - I don't see that happening - it's as isolating as living in a city - as we live on Earth - which is the most isolated planet from life of anything. With the pandemic and the internet - people are either used to it or can find ways to stay connected anywhere. 4) well maybe there's a way to avoid that by storing fresh water around it - and having a coating. I mean salt is great for electrolysis - I bet it's going to lead to salt crystals keepng the place intact - not to mention a lack of maintenance if it's a self-healing structure. I feel if it's made with materials taht're of the ocean - like kelp - and these don't degrade from salt - why would your structure? 5) it's very likely the large companies would be able to afford a place like this - like dubai did - so I bet high paying, remote work jobs would be here. I highly believe top workers who are used to remote work would live here. Of course if you're moving a city with average citizens - it's the opposite That makes sense if you have a mountain to begin iwth - but most places flooded out don't have those. Also you don't have to cut a mountain in half - you can just live on top or the side of it - like I do! Poor mountain.
@@Ilyak1986 But it is a fallacy to think all technology will eventually be affordable. Floating domiciles, even if one thinks of the buoyant garbage heaps of Waterworld, will never be anything other than for the rich. It will always cost less, and be less trouble, to live on land. Just not on the best bits.
Living with salt water is a challenge. Salt water wreaks havoc on everything. Also, if you want to see what a floating city would be like in a storm, watch YT videos on cruise ships in storms. It's horrible. I would like to live in a city like this, but not during a storm. They'd need to engineer something to at least dissipate the waves headed towards the city. Once they do that, winds and rain will be a minor inconvenience.
I was thinking the same thing. Waves can get massive... being able to survive a hurricane doesn't mean that anyone will want to stay out there during one. I predict they would strongly recommend or even require evacuation during a hurricane.
The cool thing is the structures are inherently movable if they float. These current floating cities are a bad idea. Literally stone age type structures floating.
With the internet full of reasons to be pessimistic about climate change, im grateful your content is always optimistic, creative and encouraging. Great work Matt!
pessimism isn't always a bad thing - it some leads to the right direction - and at least tells us what not to do. I watch good, but I don't knock the bad lol
@@julianshepherd2038 You know I'm really tired of these stupid comments. It has nothing to do with me or any other "average" American hating things that make sense. Or common sense units of measure. It is literally just what I and most every other American was taught and are comfortable with, and the average humans unwillingness to step outside of their comfort zone. Absolutely nothing else. 😐
@@TheZodiac31 ""any other average American " there is you're problem. You aren't speaking to America when you talk to the Internet so step out your comfort zone. I'm British and can work in metric , imperial and the American version of imperial but sports pitches is not a unit. Basic manners nevermind the desire for thumbs would suggest you make things comprehensible to one and all. If you dont want comments then up your game . Up yours.
Wouldnt "football pitch" be referring to a soccer field and not an american football field? I have never heard of an American calling a football field a pitch before and almost no american would call soccer football which leads to some confusion.
Floating cities could even help increase biodiversity, reduce ocean water acidity, and increase oxygen content if we cultivated the area with the right species. Around 70% of the ocean is watery desert currently. Figuring out the waves part for taller buildings, especially during storms, is a big challenge though.
@@extropiantranshuman As Humans we have the arrogance of over doing/using everything. That is the fear. A example is over using plastic. Over crowding earth, and now going deep into forests etc... etc... etc...
I'm not sure I understand the concern. The only reason this is a problem is because people have some overblown ideal of being coastal. Distribution of people throughout the country is the solution, not increasing the capacity to concentrate at the coast. Wyoming, Montana, the dakotas, new mexico, Idaho, etc. all have 10x less people per square mile than California, who already has an amazing amount of unused inland. The best part of this solution is its completely free, and would even benefit the usa and each state that got more population boost from this strategy. Not to mention we wouldn't have to build any of these complicated water harvesting systems or engineer around storms. Or we can concentrate at the coasts and spend $400 billion on building walls (walls we cant even manage to build on solid land at the border)
I know you can build a hurricane proof house with concrete and building it in the shape of a dome. Not sure how much of that is transferable to floating
@@M33f3r Well technically it’s all about buoyancy right?. The problems, these designs are not incorporating anything that would be hurricanes proof. They are all futuristic and modern with angles and glass.
@@jeremiah6462 There is more to it than that. The waves a hurrican can produce can get poerful enough to slam holes into solid steel ships. You can look that up. It is actually quite frightening in my opinion. (also check out freak waves if you need even more terror) A floating city could be built to withstand such forces maybe, since oil rigs are pretty tough and exist already. But nothing just shrugs off a a hurricane at sea. Even the most modern ships can sink in bad weather conditions. Oh and conditions are getting worse since we heat everything up and put more energy into the system. Getting the frack out before a hurricane strikes will always be the best option.
Instead of just having floating cities, couldn't we use this to increase the amount of biomass in the ocean? We could grow and harvest useful algae and even krill. This would allow for more sustainable aquaculture for fish and human consumption.
@@alexsanchez7076 I'm not talking about ocean farming for a floating city. I'm talking about large scale aqua culture and farming bringing cold water and nutrients from the deep. Surrounding platforms could also be used to create electricity. Imagine hundreds of these farms operating in the largely lifeless deep water zones of the Pacific. We could grow algae, krill, and fish a various sizes saving a tire species, while also providing protein and omega-3s for the entire planet. It's not just about saving species and providing food for up to 10 billion people. If every pregnant woman and child had access to iodine and DHA, we could decrease the number of people with low IQ in an ethical manner, increasing gross world the product and quality of life.
@@ronmaximilian6953 YES! Ocean regenerative aquaculture! The 3-D ocean farming is something I’m really interested in! I believe we could use it to regenerate our coastlines. Grow algae in areas of high nutrient run off near any waste water dumping. This can be used to make diesel, plastics, food and fertiliser. Then grow filter feeders like scallops mussels and oysters. This will improve the water quality and feed people, provide habitat for other marine species and be a bloody good place to drop a line in and fish!
@@ohfudgecicles I prefer to deal with river nutrients higher upstream, because dead zones already exist. However, I haven't thought of the positive benefits of this type of farming in reducing the spread of dead zones. Thank you
@@UndecidedMF I still argue that if permaculture was adopted worldwide, we could stop and reverse a lot of them. We need to respond to climate change like the ww3 level threat it is.
How would you immediately fix the problem? Even if we not push very agressively to be co2 neutral, it would still take a very long time in which sea levels will still be rising. It's inevitable in the short term.
Well the problem has also to do that the solution is very hard at least for some countries. Because a lot of countries are above the limit where you can use 100% regenerative energies even with sufficient energy storage. Countries like Germany are in this list but refuse to use/add the only alternative nuclear energy and when you want to have the more safer and cleaner variant like molten-salt reactors . You would have needed to start with the development 20 years ago. On top of that in most countries the power grid isn't able to resist this much energy when you use everything 100% electric. The real core problem is people are living in absolute denial of reality and when you mentioned e.g in Germany that they need nuclear energy you get stoned
I often dream about a floating home, like a house boat, but built for the ocean, using renewable energies rather than sails to move around. Preferably very large with underwater windows or a glass bottom
Have you ever lived on the water? I would love to here for them. As a person that has been on the water for only a short time. It would seem to be very expensive as well as uncomfortable at times. Most people that I have talked to like to have something solid below them. As most people live on land for comfort and cost. But it is interesting to see if we could convert to that kind of life.
Large countries like the USA, Brazil, Russia and Canada have a lot of space in the more rural areas; in China, India and European countries, this sea solution can be useful
I have been on a houseboat in Hamburg in 2010. It was absolutely solid and had nothing in common with a boat. 2 story built on concrete floting dock. Similar to the pickture from Holland.
Maintaining anything on the ocean will be a nightmare. Everything degrades much faster on the open ocean. Sounds nice, but full of risk. Possibly select places will be able to permanently house something like this, but I doubt it would become the norm.
But what if we make it out of the ocean? I feel like we should just do the stuff they're trying to do out there, but not live out there. Sure, have farms, desal, aquaculture, waste recycling and such offshore.
@@imightbebiased9311 agreed. We can create useful space like this and for this reason I'm looking forward to seeing things develop despite their seemingly unrealistic hopes.
While I find the concept intriguing, as a naval architect with more than 45 years of experience designing things to survive whatever the ocean can throw at them, I strongly urge people not to underestimate the power of the sea. And remember, there is no such thing as an unsinkable ship, so I suspect there is no such thing as an unsinkable (part) of a floating city. One thing I am concerned about is that any structure moored to the bottom with a fixed-length system, like the one illustrated for seacrete, would be unable to move in response to wave action and could be subject to what we call "green water" - waves sweeping across the "deck" which looks to me like "ground level". The forces are enormous, and non of the structures shown in the artist's conception would be likely to survive. Could this work? Absolutely, if enough proper engineering talent - and money is applied.
for the last part, yes, this would likely require sturdy walls, more similar to the sides of cargo ships than the utopia shown in the renderings on the sides exposed to the outside. sides only exposed to water between the islands could work similar to what"s shown as long as the mooring is fixed length and the structures act sufficiently as wave breakers. as for taking up the forces, that would obviously be easier with looser moorings, but then the wave breaking effect would mostly be gone
7:34 a vertical axis wind blade can generate electricity and at the same time canalize air to extract water from moisture, into an underwater structure similar to a bulb, also taking advantage of the natural temperature difference to the surface. Kepping in mind the cost, the low production and the space required; such a wind turbine could provide many benefits with fewer problems.
This idea was covered very extensively in a book I am reading called the Millenial project. The concept there was more about creating more habitable space along the most habitable part of the most habitable planet that we know of. Since Earth is 3/4 water, it makes sense to move from land to water to create more places for people to live. Certainly floating cities would be less likely to flood then ones that don't. The Ocean Thermal energy plan is fantastic, I love it.
maybe buildings on stilts on floodplains and wetlands would be a better idea that building literally on the ocean. new orleans was a bayou, then return it to one. it's not that hard or that expensive (per capita) compared to these projects from bourgeois architects.
Yeah, these types of projects are never financially viable, it's like building a colony on mars; I think we should try both, but they are never going to make sense by themselves, it's the technologies we invent while trying to build them that make it sensible.
a bayou is not a healthy environment to live in. The incidence of tropical diseases will be rising in the developed world, because of climate change, even without living in a swamp lol.
@@hemiedwards217 i mean, fair point, but we'll need wetlands and peatlands to mitigate effects of climate change anyways. new orleans will be flooded, there's no mitigating that, might as well return it to a wet land
@@em-jd4do Sure they're already talking about managed retreat in Florida, and their politicians are idiots lol. I don't expect that Louisiana will be far behind, but that doesn't answer, where all those people will go. People are just hand waving it away and hoping they don't live long enough that they will have to do something about it.
ngl, even tho this is a typical very comman song, u kinda make it your own for an intro. feels so at home considering your channel content. little things like that make you seem very professional. great job man!
I lived on the water for a couple of years. In 1991 I lived in Richardson Bay, off the shore of Sausalito , Ca. I was part of a anchor-out community that lived in boats tied to a abandoned dry dock. I had a 25' sailboat, it's the Last Free Ride. One of the people made a movie of the same name.
And now there trying to get ride if that whole community. Waiting for people to leave there boat/homes so they can crush it calling it marine debris, and leaving an already low income individuals homless. The media and other videos that show the anchor out community only show the worst of the worst out there.
@@abigailgenrty5135 Oh wow. I never thought I would meet someone who knows about the Sausalito anchor-outs. 30 years; wonder if we knew the same people ?
Alas, the "seacrete" idea that they're relying on turns out to be a simple miscalculation. People got really excited when a paper claimed that a small current running thru seagoing wires would cause limestone to form around the wires quickly, but on inspection it was a miscalculation and is off by several orders of magnitude.
Shoker. Also "will be creating rest of it fresh water supply by collecting water from air" so another Fontus scam. Utterly inefficient and produces tiny amount of water that is not usable as drinking water and consumes huge amounts of energy even on optimal condition. They would be far better off by processing seawater into fresh water via reverse osmosis, but that is not green and hippy enough to sell this whole project that i'm guessing comes from everyones pockets since they will be asking government funding, wasting peoples money on this. Yet another climate hysteri....crisis scam to steal peoples funds to elites pockets just like emission taxes. For instance Finland should be receiving shit ton on money for being Europes lungs with amount of forest, but no we need to keep paying and be taxed hell and back to point where its very difficult to even go to work due gas prices and taxes added to that. And no EV's are not solution even though those are forced upon us since costs of electricity transfer have gone to moon after government sold the grid and created monopolies, flooding the funds to foreign corporations.
This all sounds extremely expensive compared to just building and especially farming on land. The only advantage I can see is for floating cities that can actually move, to evade storms and bad weather. Like, a place that's always sunny. That'd be something people might want to pay a premium for their real estate for.
Definitely one of the more pie in the sky climate solutions you’ve presented on this channel. You glossed over it, but the Netherlands is a country which has been built below sea level for decades. Clearly, humanity has the ability to build near the coast with reasonable factors of safety, even in the face of rising sea levels (please note that a couple foot rise over decades is really not the environmental disaster that alarmists like to present it as)
I remember seeing the first OTEC (off the coast of Hawaii) in early 1970's and the first story about Seament around the same time which included an idea to build complete buildings that are then pulled up on shore (they did a sand castle like object), glad to see a return of the ideas
This is all very well presuming that water remains smooth. Alas it undulates as much as 80 feet. Then there is also the problem that all vessels eventually leak.
My first thought is that the very human tendency to defer minor maintenance tasks until they become major disasters will not mix well with platforms that will likely require constant maintenance, and that'll lead to some tragedy. My second thought is, seems like a nightmare to keep rambunctious children from falling off the edges. Kids are really good at getting around safety measures.
How would they even maintain these structures? Seems like they would a constant influx of manufactured goods from the continent they are next to which completely negates the intended purpose.
Current biggest cruise ship(s) can hold up to 6700 people onboard, but even with refitting for permanent settlement and higher capacity, it take more than 150 cruise ships to hold the population of one major city. Each of these ships cost few billions of dollars to build. And not to mention the sustainability and energy, comfortable, luxury, etc..
I know this is off-topic but... I think we can use ram pumps to solve the energy crisis. First we build a hollow cylindrical tower out at sea, to a depth of say 1100m. The tower is open to the air at the top and has a sealed base at the bottom. We drill a hole about 20m below the surface and feed water into the tower. The water falls down a pipe for about 200m where it powers a turbine that is connected to an electricity generator. We collect the water and drop it down a pipe for another 200m to another turbine. We do this twice more until we are getting electricity from four generators. We then drop the water another 200m to power a turbine which drives a cog that is geared to turn a disc at the base of the tower. The waste water from the last turbine starts to collect at the bottom of the tower creating a shallow reservoir that we need to pump out. The rotating disc at the base of the tower has cams along its edge. These cams are used to push pistons outwards. These pistons are in cylinders built into the wall in a circular formation. The cylinders are sealed at the interior side apart from where a piston rod enters to push the piston outward. The outside of the piston head is exposed to the deep sea water. The cam will push the piston outward against the high pressure deep sea water. An inlet pipe will take water from our shallow reservoir which will be pulled into the space created in the cylinder, behind the piston head. When the cam releases the piston, the low pressure water inside the cylinder will be the only thing pushing the piston out against the high pressure deep sea water. This is when the system acts as a ram pump. The piston will be forced inward and will force the low pressure water back out through the inlet pipe toward the reservoir. The inlet pipe will now act the same as a waste pipe in a ram pump and the flowing water will shut a waste valve. The remaining water in the cylinder will be forced through a check valve into a pipe and upwards to the surface. The larger the diameter of the tower, the more cylinders that can be built into the wall at the base of the tower. I realise that the ram pump cylinder will pump more of its water back into the reservoir than it sends to the surface but we can always add more cylinders to the system. We can even put another layer of cylinders above the original ones as ram pumps still work underneath shallow water. I think we should be able to pump water upwards at the same rate that it falls into the bottom of the tower and so keep the reservoir nice and shallow. Now, if I understand the maths correctly, we might only be able to pump the water near to the surface. In that case, we can pump the water into a reservoir tank (inside the tower) and use the electricity generated by the first turbine to pump out the tank. This will leave us with 3 generators worth of electricity for every tower built. Would this work? Everyone, please comment.
So far away from the coast means that everony living there must also work there. I doubt there would be enough jobs on a project like this, assuming there's no plans for an exporting industry on site..
The current pandemic has shown just how much of the working world functions just fine working remotely. Now whether it would be affordable is another question.
@@bobjob3632 But these can't export power or clean water so they already aren't able to produce enough for themselves. And how would it be economically viable for them to produce enough on their tiny surface area compared to the more massive surface area of a desert? Especially to provide enough income for 10,000+ people from such a tiny surface area when a normal solar power facility produces far more power using far fewer employees? Sorry but this isn't a realistic project.
Seasteading all the way! I think offshore wind developers should be the the first to explore this because for them, offshore offtakers of their power would be a massive force in reducing interconnection costs
Matt, you do a fantastic job as always and I'm a dedicated viewer and love your videos...and I'm not arguing the fact that some areas of the world may be seeing actual sea level change. Fact is, we've had a home on the water in South West Florida for 45 years and the water level hasn't risen at all. We have a sea wall so it's very easy to measure. Many islands in the South West Florida area have gotten smaller due to erosion and people may attribute this to sea level rise. Unfortunately people who don't live near the coast who see this kind of content blindly believe that we're going to sink into the sea in 50 years. The fact is it's just not true in many areas so it makes me wonder HOW levels could be rising in other parts of the world and not everywhere? Keep up the great content.
I did come across the explanation for this, but iv forgotten the deets cos brain inflammation back then n currently on painkillers xD From a diff source, diff era n diff platform, i am aware that in uk, scotland is rising n southern coast is sinking. This was explained as relating to when the ice sheets covered the north n weighed it down. I say this to show that all coastlines are not equal. Youd have to watch climate change seminars n university lecture vids to find out what iv forgotten, which is why its not well known xD
1) sea level changes are weird and some areas have actually seen small decreases because of weirdness in things like currents changing. 2) however this isn't the case in southern Florida and sea levels around the tip of Florida have actually gone up by around ~4 inches since 1992. But as a normal person and not a data logging machine this kind of base level change is easily obscured by the hourly, daily, weekly, etc. variations in the sea level that exist on top of that.
Another possibility is to recycle old ships and put together a flotilla. Power and agriculture could be put on old cargo ships, retired cruise liners could be apartment blocks and office buildings. Being boats, they could move the fleet around extreme weather. There could be many advantages to a nomadic city.
The problem with Source is, while it does produce water... its production level is less than... well... Just for example, Ben Sullins consults in Silicon Valley, and the average rainfall per year in San Francisco is about 24.6 inches. 24.6 inches times the area of a Source solar panel (4 feet by 8 feet) is approximately 1858 litres of water - or, averaging over that course of a year, about 5 litres of water per day. Two 4 foot by 8 foot buckets and a water purifier is much cheaper than the $5,500-6,500 they recommend for the shipping, installation and tax on their recommended _two_ panel minimum. Admittedly, no solar panels in a bucket but... less carbon footprint in a bucket. You could theoretically just... buy actual regular solar panels and put large water storage reservoirs under them to catch the run-off from the panel to get exactly the same effect but with better energy production.
The people designing these things have engineers in their teams and the islands are big buildings ancored to the sea floor, not free floating. So I guess they know more about the subject than you do...
Forcibly extracting water from the atmosphere will reduce rainfall on land. For freshwater in a floating city simply couple ancient American windpumps to a shaft sealed with a reverse osmosis membrane. As the windpump lowers the freshwater pressure in the shaft, the pressure difference at the bottom draws freshwater through the membrane out of the seawater and the salt is dispersed by the ocean current.
This seems like a gimmick. We're not running out of room to build a city in general and those places where more land would be helpful are near existing cities in which case land reclamation is probably a better solution. If for whateve reason they go ahead with this I have no idea why they wouldn't start with building this on a lake rather than the ocean
@@hawk7825 No scenario has water drying up. Though some areas will become drier and others wetter. But the total amount of water will remain consistent. having said that, wet lands vs. deserts is more of a function of geography not climate.
Fascinating ideas. I imagine a broad mix of these and other ideas are going to be used in the future to help mitigate the issues humanity will be facing. Great presentation.
@@afabuloussentientbeing8112 yes. But not skyscrapers and shit. Build smaller buildings that you can detach and relocate further back, it's much more realistic and far less expensive, both in the short and long term. I can't even imagine the kind of money that would go into building and maintaining such a city, what it would take to keep it anchored and what'd happen to it when storms hit. Not to mention the amount of people it'd fit is rather low, again, for a ludicrous price... But hey, it seems to be a trend with all global warming/climate change related shit - extreme costs without any practicality or promises of anything sustainable nor working, if working at all. But don't worry, the people 'working' on all those projects are getting paid well with our money.
Interesting concept. I really hope it gets built. Reminds me of the floating villages of Lake Titicaca. Great video as always! Interested if you've heard of biotekt homes? My father in law is a homebuilder and is building a few of them, super cool stuff!
Thinking about calcium carbonate matrix ie: oyster and clam shells. Hexagonal sections of various size and density can form honeycomb grid layers that can be built up to raise out of the water in a gentle sloping mound to almost any height presuming a suitable submerged, not anchored base is built up...think about how the greater mass of a stable iceberg is submerged. These floating islands can be as small as a few acres and scale up to 100's of acres. The calcium carbonate is derived from sea water through electro induced accretion onto lattice/substrate and "grown" into shape. The energy needed to grow the foundational structure starts with a floating barge upon which an O.T.E.C unit is set up. Think about how a simple Sterling engine derives its power from interfacing 2 different temperatures. OTEC essentially draws up cold water from the depths and warm water from the surface thus providing a temp differential to run the water based Stirling engine as an unlimited power source. Ideally these accreted platforms would be based within 5 degrees of the equator as its virtually storm free and waves never exceed 4 feet. The unlimited power generation potential of the OTEC technology allows surplus power from which to conduct electrolysis of ocean water for every trace metal from Gold to iron to copper ,zinc and essentially the whole range of metals and trace elements found in seawater. Heat is produced in abundance with OTEC which can be used to create lagoon pools on the outer edges of the structure from which you can farm aquatic life at the water temperature they require such as all manner of shellfish.Traditional agriculture and aquaculture can be practiced as well. All manner of structural elements right down to furniture can be accreted from the minerals found in unlimited abundance within sea water. Excess power can also be "exported" from the floating base by means of microwave power transmission, this power along with minerals and metals and seafood would be exported to land based populations. It would be economically self supporting as any community must. The residents could also have other means of income by working in the information and service sectors via the net and satellite communications. All manner of commerce and society can be supported by these floating communities all powered by the temperature differential of seawater. Conversion of energy into every conceivable material need decentralizes power structures and gives autonomy to these communities as they will be beholden to no country. Through decentralization mankind can advance to a level one society.
It'll be a huge exercise in modularity and independence. City modules will need a standardized connector to move clean water, sewage, and power, because not every single module could produce enough of its own power/water. It'll also need standardized road and rail connections for public transport. Can't assume everyone is in good health and can walk everywhere...
@@eclecticcyclist But we're not. Countries in the Third World are even now building hundreds of coal-fired power plants, which also require tonnes of concrete. Whether we like it or not, we're going to have to suffer global warming and sea level rise.
-first the cultist said : 800 million people will be effected by rising sea levels by 2040. Then the cultist shill let slip : "by a 2 inch sea level rise". *facepalm* Of course the rational response would be: Just how many predictions have these cultists actually gotten right over the last 40 years?
@@TheBelrick a 2 inch sea level rise is the average value across the entire oceans, you dingus... That's like saying "oh, 3°C temperature rise due to climate change isn't that bad" and completely ignoring that the continents we live on will become much much warmer than that, while the 71% ocean will stay a lot cooler than x+3°C. 2 inches means that the entire surface of the ocean attracted by the moon has 2 inches more water on it. What do you think happens, when you pull that much more to shore during the tides? That high tide is accumulating 2 inches of water over an area of miles squared additionally to the water that's normally there. Go figure.
@@midnight8341 I get that you plebs have been protected from free thought by zealous overlords isolating you from intelligent people through censorship but that is no excuse for your stupidity. Ready for context and perspective? The current AVERAGE ocean depth is 12100' . In 20 years years time they predict that it will be 12100'2" GET REKT And FYI for those willing to learn, should EVERY single drop of ice on land melt average sea levels will rise 1.5% or from 12100 feet to 12280 feet because 98.5% of all water that can be in the oceans is already in the oceans or trapped as fresh water lakes. And no one is predicting 100% land ice melt.
@@midnight8341 Here is another fun fact. 2" ocean level rise equivalent in bath water 20" depth bath faced by the same increase in water level will result in a bath filled to 20.00028" Ohhh scary. Permanently surrender your liberty and fortunes now.
@@TheBelrick "protected from intelligent people"... Yeah, right... It's not like I have two university degrees and am doing my PhD currently, but go on and say that I was protected from intelligent people all my life... 🤦♂️ You really don't get it, right? Ever had 6 inches of rain in a night? What about 8 inches? That's a pretty big difference, right? That's 25.4 additional liters per m² (0.62 gallons per ft² in stupid measurements). For a strip of coast just 20 km long and 1km into the ocean, that's an _additional_ 508,000 metric tons of water being pulled to land during high tide. If you can't see the problems here, you're truly far beyond reasoning... 2in doesn't sound like a lot in total numbers, but so is CO2 concentration that rose from 340ppm to 400ppm. But look what a difference that made to your country. I'm guessing you're from the US, so just look at how often your country has been on fire lately. For a comparison: think about what a difference 2 inches would make for your own life.
I how you are undecided about sea level rise. They have been threatening this for decades, but this who have been measuring the sea levels state that the rise is sooooo low as to not be worth calling sea rise. Still, I like the idea of a floating city, as long as they solve the problems of storms
Or you could just build inland a bit. We can leverage our entire history of experience of building on land, and all our existing infrastructure. This is wasteful, utterly indulgent fantasy.
@@em-jd4do The concept is a closed loop system where the residents can supply food and potable water for the community. Floating agriculture is not new. The Aztecs had floating food plots in Mexico.
@@rogerstarkey5390 you seem to be suggesting that all land is "taken". People sell their land and low density places become more densely populated. Like, you know, what has been happening for the last few hundred years. I'm currently living in Hong Kong. If people lived as densely everywhere as they do here you could probably put the entire world into somewhere like California. There is PLENTY of space left. There is PLENTY of water left. It's all about using it frugally and equitably. Which we most certainly aren't at the moment...
@@gryph01 not sure where you are getting the potable water from that adds any value... You have to pipe it less? And the added cost and complexity of sewerage and electricity, etc just seems silly. Really, this is a rich man's playground, nice for the Bezoses and Musks but of little interest for the rest of us. There are lots more pressing ways to spend our money...
@@transcrobesproject3625 If the community is out on the ocean, you need to create fresh water for the residents and food production. I agree that a project like this is not feasible. Too expensive and too many engineering challenges to maintain it.
My house in Cambodia has been floating on the water for many years now, way before I was born. The best part is when the water rise during monsoon/heavy rain season, we can swim inside our house on the lower level area XD
Considering time restraints I've not read all of the comments. I know I'm not the first to think of this but I just read an article the other day on the offshore oil rigs that are obsolete and beyond repair. There you go. There's the basis of a platform for a new community. In fact the article I was reading was talking about putting up wind turbines in those areas. The oil under the platforms are of course depleted. A lot of our waste can be dumped in the ocean with ocean life benefiting. Like on our most expensive yachts they have a furnace specifically used for burning human wastes. After it's burnt then it can be emptied into the ocean. I'd love to live another 100 years. Maybe I could do something in that span to be productive for humankind. The article went on to read how in the near future we will be dealing with many obsolete oil rigs that will be declared unusable . If you look out into the Gulf of Mexico there are hundreds upon hundreds of oil rigs. Most of us can't afford a luxury yacht but that doesn't keep us from living on an old ocean oil rig. Good day everyone.
I love this idea, because it feels so much like a video game. But at the same time it's clear that it's _very_ early days for floating cities, and there's an awful lot of problems that will need to be solved before they could work as true cities. No doubt that's why the SeaSteading guys are only talking about building expensive single "pods" and not whole communities. I'm really interested in the Oceanix project and hope they actually build it. In Southeast Asia they've had floating villages and neighborhoods for centuries. For instance lake Tonle Sap in Cambodia has hundreds of little floating fishing villages. But these places tend to be inhabited by the poorest of the poor who depend upon resource extraction to survive. Or in the case of floating neighborhoods, they tend to be the poorest and most desperate parts of the slums, were people locate because their semi legal-status means residents don't have to pay property taxes. If an American city that's threatened by climate change - like say, Miami - was able to transform itself using this technology and became partially floating and partially on land, how would the floating sections avoid the long term pressures that tend to turn floating neighborhoods into slums? Would people with money want to live on the floating parts, or would everybody be competing to live on land?
I was thinking the project looks like a big collectivist study in a closed environment, literally 5 seconds before Matt mentioned the first one was going to be in China.
@@BenFrankarts Nah, they have plenty of land, but because of centralized decisions resources and space are misused. They've built whole cities for millions which are empty, and it's logical since settlements, villages, cities are built around free market, free enterprise, where there is a resource to benefit from, farmland, a river, a mine, or natural beauty, for commerce, for industry or just for leisure.
@@Gastyz those cities are ghost cities. Built for propping up a failing economy. Not for people to live. I mean useful land, not space to build pretend towns.
About ocean thermal energy conversion, the difference between 25 C and 5 C makes the theoretically possible maximum efficiency less than 7%, that means it's not even theoretically possible to extract 7% of that moderate amount of energy. Also, it's difficult to use so small temperature differences, you'd need gigantic heat exchangers to reach even 2% efficiency. Not completely impossible to extract more energy than needed for the pumping, but at sea there's usually plenty of wind and or sunshine. For floating cities even wave power might be viable, there's no actual need for unproved [commercially] technologies that are highly unlikely to provide a cost efficient contribution to a combination of solar, wind and batteries, and possibly wave power, like OTEC. When you extract energy from a temperature difference between ambient temperature and a lower than ambient temperature, you don't produce higher than ambient temperature waste heat, reality just doesn't work that way. When ambient temperature is higher than your waste heat, that waste heat is completely useless for providing extra heat to anything. An endless supply of 5 C water can have more relevant use, producing freshwater from air humidity is useful, but there are other good ways to produce freshwater from sea water, such as reverse osmosis. Refrigeration and air conditioning is far more helped by 5 C water than your examples, in air conditioning not only to lower the temperature, but also the humidity. If it is possible to harvest a few liters of water and a few kWh while saving thousands of kWh on refrigeration and air conditioning that's nice, but those few liters and kWh doesn't make much of a difference. About seament, extracting enormous amounts of alkalinity from seawater, which we already are acidifying with CO2 is not a great idea. If the goal was to mess up the global ecosystem with as little "effort" as possible I would have been very impressed by that idea. Sure there are a lot of organisms that extract calcium from the water, but that has "always" happened, and seament would come on top of that, at worst time imaginable. Anchoring one or a couple of small cities would probably not be very problematic. But used on larger scale, as a common alternative to cement would be catastrophic. Source "hydropanels", yeah, 5 liters a day, that would be possible at sea. Again, reverse osmosis with solar panels for as much money and similar space requirement could probably produce about 5000 liters of fresh water a day from sea water. Source being "cheaper than buying water bottles, in the [very very] long run", doesn't make it a good alternative, to anything else than maybe bottled water. It's not like you will depend on those for anything else than very small needs, USD2.500 for 5 liters a day, if you set the value of that water at 20 cents per litre it would take almost 7 years for it to pay off, assuming no cost for maintenance, and they work that long. And, air conditioning for a home could produce similar amounts as one of those hydropanels when it's sunny, as a pure byproduct. Even simple distillation, with resistive heating can be done with less than 1 kWh per litre, for 2.500 dollars you can buy solar panels and a distiller that can produce many times more than 5 liters a day, or choose to use most of that power in a better way. Also, at sea, at/near the equator, collecting rain typically takes as little as 2 m² or less to collect an average of 5 liters a day. That's the problem with all those gadgets that is meant to produce water from air humidity, if the air is humid enough to have meaningful production, there's typically plenty of liquid water that easily can be purified, and where there's an severe shortage of water, so bad that one is actually willing to pay 2.500 dollars for something that under the right conditions can produce 5 liters a day, there will probably not be enough air humidity to come anything close to the advertised production, if any is possible. Floating cities is a very interesting idea, but I can't predict the future, so I can't tell you if they will "happen". I can tell you it is unlikely some architect and a minister of tourism(?) that throws together a lot of ideas that might seem great, together with fancy illustrations that is stupid in oh so many ways, will actually make it happen. Like, come on, growing plants including food crops a few feet, if that, over the water line at sea, what are they planning to grow for food, mangroves? You talked about a mile of the coast almost as if it was on Mars, it is not. Although most boats has far lower top speed than most cars, one mile is not much of an issue. If you can build a floating city you're probably able to set up a speed boat transport service. Candela electric boats can travel a mile in less than 2 minutes, and at slightly lower speed, 22 knots, ~25 mph it can do 50 nautical miles, ~57 "land" miles on a charge, and they exist today. So, no, that mile off the coast doesn't have to be a problem at all, it might make logistics a lot easier compared to one mile from the coast inland, in the middle of a city with heavy traffic congestions. If you even grow land plants for food, why not have other types of enterprises? If you have a population of 100.000 people or more, it only makes sense to have engineers have their work bases there, either commuting, or even living there. Also, the fact that coastal cities will be flooded doesn't actually mean you have to move out to sea to manage, you can move inland. It's not living space we're running out of, we don't need many m² building footprint per person to live, it's cheap food production, the way we are currently producing food that is the problem. And, you're talking about the issue with rising sea as the level at calm weather was the problem, as most people seems to do, it is not. The issue is higher sea level, when extreme weather happens. It's during extreme weather events almost all damage will happen. Those floating devices in the fancy illustrations are not designed to withstand a category 5 hurricane, just claiming something doesn't make it so. As illustrated they would suffer substantial damage even below hurricane wind speeds offshore. A level 5 Tsunami is higher than their 7 stories max. Most, if not all people on those floating saucers would die if a level 5 tsunami hit them.
I need to add this, get feedback: Before trying to get capital for floating cities, start with floating platforms connected to shore and raise $$ by selling/leasing real estate, a scarce and valueable commodity. Research, refine technology (with modified marinas) as platforms are expanded, replicated in more cities. Include verticle, hydroponic & other farming techniques in research. By the time floating condos, offices are optimised, there should be enough capital to begin independent ocean settlements. What do you think?
Without some kind of industry to drive Support Services any kind of attempt will fail. You can't just put up a bunch of people together and think they can support themselves like Frontier settlers.
Fresh seafood grown in industrial quantities, pearl farms, lithium, and other mineral mining from seawater, many economic products were mentioned in the video and they can be done nearly anywhere.
I think that BIG's floating city idea is insanely innovative, and I'm very inspired. It's definitely futuristic and scifi-ish too, but It's one of the more realistic sci-fi ideas out there
I noticed a lot, A LOT, of missing infrastructure. The big three: Police, Fire, and EMT. will all these services be provided by the mainland? As was mentioned, in any kind of emergency, it would take a long time for anyone to respond from the mainland. And especially in the case of a medical emergency, a medflight system would be a practical necessity, given that the difference in so many medical emergencies, from allergic reaction to poisoning and overdose, to heart attack and stroke, is mere minutes. That being said, if all those services are provided on sight, then a significant portion of the population of the floating city would be dedicated to the operation and dispensation of those services. Another glaring absence I noticed is any kind of bureaucratic infrastructure. Centralized bureaucracy would also be necessary for the smooth operation of the different services provided on the island, as well as for enforcing the consequences for violating the laws and ordinances of the city, such as willful, repeated violations of the energy allotment. Anyway, reminds me of the same Libertarian pipedream Peter Thiel wanted to invest in a decade ago.
@@UndecidedMF Not enough puns. I can't wave for another video! I'm getting seasick of waiting for the next one! You must hurrycane, my patience is swimming out.
@@UndecidedMF I absolutely love the puns. I like when you are not being so obvious about them. It becomes a bit of a game, listening for them. I will often re-watch to see if I missed any. Love you videos. I'm hooked.
Unfortunately, that's what most of these "green projects" really are. They're mostly a way for the ultra wealthy to masturbate about how progressive they are. Any real solution has to be something widespread and affordable.
It's not like this is gonna work any better. A 20° temperature gradient is laughable for a steam power process, you'll lose almost all of it in the heat exchanger. Geothermal power is already barely worth it, and they work with much higher temperature gradients than that.
It was not really his idea. Humanity does that even before Jesus.. Is not enough to "uh something like this would be cool", you really need to proof how it would work with all the luxury of details, something that Jack Fresco always try to ignore. I liked the man, as everyone who tries to innovate, but he loved to lie to him self for not seeing the obvious errors for some of their ideas. Like his "no money" idea. These guys right here seem to have the same issue, those city graphics does not look nothing similar to oil rigs, so their point that "oil rigs" can survive ocean, it does not proof that their cities also can, because those cities are super low and they do not enter in detail on how they will deal with waves or the extra cost of all the structure or objects in order to deal with the constant movement, of course there are ways to solve all that, but not at low cost. Their idea to extract energy from the water gradient is also silly, the gradient is so low that it would take a huge investment to extract very little power, when solar panels and wind turbines (or kites) would be close to one order of magnitude cheaper, using hydrogen as the main energy storage to solve power intermittence.
Jules Verne came up with this closer to the 1870's He wrote 2 books: 1871 A Floating City (A trip on the Great Eastern large steamer) and 1895 THE Floating City (Or Propeller Island) ( A moveable inhabited island that toured the oceans.)
I suggest that we need to start small; start with one pod that sustains the people living on it. Too many people wish to start with the village size products; more is more complications. Once a module exist, that would all knowledgeable people to address any variations needed. I see this as a start for a whole new life style of minimal possessions, etc, as well as smaller living quarters. Kind of like living on a cruise ship without the rich food. Good article.
I agree with the approach as in Holland. Services are umbilical and new lift and stabilise rams allow water height change without side movement. Not feasable for open sea but on land subject to flooding over time. A bit like living on an Ark. The very best design to prevent corrosion is concrete cassions like the Mullberry Harbour.
You should make a video about how we can drastically improove the waste plastic storage space by cutting the plastic ourselfs in bits and pieces before throwing it in the bin.This would lead to a huge increase in recycling and and far less garbage trucks trips.
Building large scale carbon capture plants seems way more feasible than this. Floating islands would be so expensive that only billionaires would be able to afford it.
I appreciate your positive, informative approach to such patently lunatic proposals. “Obviously, there are challenges,” as you said a couple of times. Is a floating village anchored to the seabed a sort of island? If I build one and put it, say, in the South China Sea, can I claim the waters around it for fishing and so on? Asking for a Chinese friend.
Good city planners learn from history. Not one designer in there said they studied life on actual remote islands/actual oil rigs/actual ships/Venice/Singapore to come up with a reasonable design. It's a scam, folks. Any average firm can make a fancy free floating city last one year. Where are the people saying that they can make an ok, slightly crappy, floating structure survive 25 years (including financially)?
I assume you mean Bjarke Ingels. I followed his work years before he came up with this design. He has a great architectural firm, but this is their first try and they are out of their depth here. Now, if Alejandro Aravena's firm ELEMENTAL were to send a design entry for this (so far as I know, he is not making any plans), I would pay attention.
@@alexsanchez7076 No, Aravena does not have a floating city plan. So far as I know, no one has even asked him for one (at least not in English). But Aravena, as an architect, talks about the value of making buildings that are built to last the environmental forces. This is only my personal opinion about Aravena: If Aravena tries to design a floating city and finds that it doesn't work, I believe that he will call it out and say that. He will give you reasons why it won't work. Aravena is an honest and humble guy. Get Aravena (or some other Architect with a similar practice/philosophy) to design the floating city. Then I will take this concept seriously.
@@dyslectische And they look nothing like those tiny low islands. Look for some videos of ships in rough seas then imagine those floating homes there. It's beyond a joke to suggest that as a solution.
@@alterego157 if a home is stuck on the sea ground like bridge. By the sea line Or like we in the dutch have wind energie from the sea. Those windmill are on our sea line about 10 miles . And are stuck on the ground. So yes we can beuld homes like that if we whant to.
Great video as always. I'm all for future technology and changing the way we do things, but living on water is an asinine idea. Even if all the ice on Earth melted, it would only cause sea levels to rise
"Let's put a bunch of mega-tons of steel on the ocean and call it trade." "Man-made global warm... climate change is raising sea levels." "Let's put a bunch of mega-tons of steel on the ocean and call it seasteading."
@@maserdaser9654 Regardless of intent, mega-tons of mass displacing water is still mega-tons of mass displacing water. The sea rises regardless; it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. Just where do you think that displaced water goes? The Moon? Mars? Easy science, take a bath. Measure the water line before you get in, and then measure it after you're in. The water is still there, PLUS you! Unlike your tub, the ocean doesn't have an over-flow drain built in.
It's amazing how many people have discovered condenser dehumidifiers and think they have a totally revolutionary and unique product to solve water supply needs...
Well there are a few people/companies that are building floating islands based on seeing floating trash for all purposes islands. They collected used plastic bottles and containers using recycled nets (old/damaged that were slated for the dump) modified to hold the plastic containers/bottles using drit wood, and wood from torn down or abandoned buildings they even reused nails if possible. Looking for old discarded junk and trash, free items on curbside, and only buying things if no other option. This is then turned into a floating island secured or movable by boat motor. Build a house or other buildings. They are not very big and I have seen a few different groups of people do similar things but that was a couple of years ago so I don't know if anyone is still doing it. It was not only to clean up areas like beaches the ocean, and other water ways and purposely find a usefulness for plastic bottles as in reality recycling them is a huge lie as not only is it more expensive to recycle them, you get little usable material from the plastic, it from the carbon emissions to even recycle defeats the purposes of trying to be environmentally conscious. Afterwards the plastic is brittle and will have limited use and will not be able to be recycled again. It would be better to reuse your bottles a couple of times for the same item such as refilling plastic water bottles repeatedly or making your laundry detergent plastic container cut the top off rinse it out and make it ina pot for planting instead of buying a plant pot made of plastic and sold in stores.
Simple. Look at climate data within geologic time and you come to realize that things were very different in the past and life did quite well during those time periods. A storm, heatwave, cold snap is a mere blip in global history and things will be just fine now too.
you dont. which is why you were told stories about this summer. give up now or at least surrender all earnings and liberties to those sharing these tales.
@@alterego157 Heat waves in the Pacific Northwest that had temperatures comparable to death valley, rainstorms in both China and Europe causing unprecedented, deadly flooding, and so on. We're getting a lot of weather events we've never seen in all of recorded history, and all of them causing significant damage. There's also the snow events in Brazil where they never get snow, and last year we had the catastrophic flooding in the midwest. What's really frightening about it is this kind of shit was expected with climate change, but not for a few more decades down the road. Hence my question.
@@sunsparkda All combined on entire planet a few hundred people died. Now let me bring you back to the reality. Around 1.3 million people die in car accidents every year.
Using a paving of the hexagonal aquatic plan makes it possible to create a very modular and scalable floating village ! I would love to work on this topic
So what do think? Do you think floating cities are still a sci-fi future like Waterworld? Or do you think we might get something out of this? And if you liked this video, be sure to check out this one on Mycelium Fungus the Future of Plastic? ua-cam.com/video/cApVVuuqLFY/v-deo.html
you give me hope, and not just like a small little nightlight, but real hope for the first time in a long time, thank you
As someone who owned a sailboat for 10 years, I can say maintenance of anything on the water will be a bee-yatch. It's even worse if you can't pull it from the water. I can imagine vast swaths of sea growth hanging from the underside, probing and widening microscopic cracks. So for example that illustration of neatly hanging lines of kelp will either require regular undersea pruning by divers, or it will look like a complete mess.
Also, universally articles like this never present realistic reviewed projections of anticipated costs. For example, would electrochemically generated sea-ment cost less per pound than using more conventional options, or is the assumption that the ecofriendly electricty would be so plentiful, that it would not bet better used for another purpose, like desalination?
I'm not against this idea, I'm just pointing out questions that any savvy investor would ask.
Ok....I only got to the desalination part. What is the plan with the byproduct of desalination?
If the dump it, you might killing the sea life that might want to live near these settlements.
Who's knows this will be suck or not but I love....
Sounds interesting I think this is a very interesting Ted talk
ua-cam.com/video/ieSV8-isy3M/v-deo.html
I think the video is probably based on this Ted talk
Ah yes, the setting of Bioshock 4.
Ha! I hadn't thought of that.
Bishock is a waring of what could go wrong, not of what will. Dare to dream circa everyone that ever worked for NASA.
Heh, just wanted to add comment about Bioshock ;)
@@liggel04 that gives me an idea!
Bioshock space colony 1980's theme!
And Bioshock couldn't have possibly worked because they had no way to produce new steel or glass. Hell they didn't have any way to produce electricity in sufficient quantities, let alone food or any other good.
“The 21st Century… Mankind has colonized the last frontier on earth: The Ocean. As captain of the Seaquest and her crew, We are its guardians. For beneath the surface lies the future.”
🤣 Loved your work in Babylon 5. Kindly give my regards to the Minbari….👍
depressing
Ahhh Roy Schneider as a submarine captain. ☺️ Show had promise… then bombed like D-Day. 😓
This is what happens when architects don’t talk to civil engineers
😂
😂👍
@Madlum Sibul Why don't you try solving the stuff you're accusing other people of not solving
@@DWCmoose it's one thing not trying to solve a problem, and an entirely different one to pretend to.
@@DWCmoose Why don't you? Seems like a self-answering question for most.
As an islander, I think the design and concept is beautiful, awesome and inspiring but VERY IMPRACTICAL..
The problems we often had:
1. Medical Emergencies- Hospitals are not that reliable. We had to take a boat in order to get to somewhere else and people often die on transit.
2. Cost of living- basic goods are way expensive because you literally need to import it from somewhere else. Supplies are limited and delays in shipments.
3. Isolation- the feeling that you are left-out from the rest of the world.
4. Maintenance of Structure- sea-salt is very good at rotting away stuff..
5. Economy- no good paying jobs because there are no big companies around due to limited space and low population.
And many more..
Proposal- Japanese strategy, they cut half top of a mountain and turned it into a city. The rest of the soil used to extend elevate the flood-prone shores. It's way more sufficient, practical, feasible and less cost than floating island. The floating island idea is already hostorically ancient.
1) I think we have to realize that in certain ways, people are less likely to be ill there. I mean they could get sea sick, etc. - but overall they're isolated and immune.
2) if cargo ships pass by you all the time - it's going to be the cheapest place to ship - not to mention eco-friendly!
3) yes, that's true - but I don't see them in the middle of the ocean, but by shore. I mean if they're large enough - I don't see that happening - it's as isolating as living in a city - as we live on Earth - which is the most isolated planet from life of anything. With the pandemic and the internet - people are either used to it or can find ways to stay connected anywhere.
4) well maybe there's a way to avoid that by storing fresh water around it - and having a coating. I mean salt is great for electrolysis - I bet it's going to lead to salt crystals keepng the place intact - not to mention a lack of maintenance if it's a self-healing structure. I feel if it's made with materials taht're of the ocean - like kelp - and these don't degrade from salt - why would your structure?
5) it's very likely the large companies would be able to afford a place like this - like dubai did - so I bet high paying, remote work jobs would be here. I highly believe top workers who are used to remote work would live here. Of course if you're moving a city with average citizens - it's the opposite
That makes sense if you have a mountain to begin iwth - but most places flooded out don't have those. Also you don't have to cut a mountain in half - you can just live on top or the side of it - like I do! Poor mountain.
Kudos to Matt for actually recognising the most of these "solutions" as for rich people.
Just like any coastal property..
Onshore real estate prices are now only for rich people.
Yes but as technology improves the cost will go down and most people will be able to afford it.
That's how a lot of technology starts off, yes.
@@Ilyak1986 But it is a fallacy to think all technology will eventually be affordable. Floating domiciles, even if one thinks of the buoyant garbage heaps of Waterworld, will never be anything other than for the rich. It will always cost less, and be less trouble, to live on land. Just not on the best bits.
Living with salt water is a challenge. Salt water wreaks havoc on everything. Also, if you want to see what a floating city would be like in a storm, watch YT videos on cruise ships in storms. It's horrible. I would like to live in a city like this, but not during a storm. They'd need to engineer something to at least dissipate the waves headed towards the city. Once they do that, winds and rain will be a minor inconvenience.
I was thinking the same thing. Waves can get massive... being able to survive a hurricane doesn't mean that anyone will want to stay out there during one. I predict they would strongly recommend or even require evacuation during a hurricane.
The cool thing is the structures are inherently movable if they float. These current floating cities are a bad idea. Literally stone age type structures floating.
You ever seen offshore oil rigs? It’s very possible to build a steady structure offshore
@@23StudiosSports Yes, I've seen them, and they don't look anything like the artwork for this.
Exactly ! People underestimate the strength of a sea storm! Unless this city is half sunken of somewhat singable, get ready for some nasty waves!!!!
With the internet full of reasons to be pessimistic about climate change, im grateful your content is always optimistic, creative and encouraging. Great work Matt!
pessimism isn't always a bad thing - it some leads to the right direction - and at least tells us what not to do. I watch good, but I don't knock the bad lol
@@extropiantranshuman yea but the internet lacks optimism aswell, leading to an imbalance
5:20 Ah yes, the common imperial unit of football pitches.
Americans hate units that make sense footballs and football fields are use.
... and Blue Whales when you need to weigh something heavy. lol
@@julianshepherd2038 You know I'm really tired of these stupid comments. It has nothing to do with me or any other "average" American hating things that make sense. Or common sense units of measure. It is literally just what I and most every other American was taught and are comfortable with, and the average humans unwillingness to step outside of their comfort zone. Absolutely nothing else. 😐
@@TheZodiac31 ""any other average American " there is you're problem. You aren't speaking to America when you talk to the Internet so step out your comfort zone.
I'm British and can work in metric , imperial and the American version of imperial but sports pitches is not a unit.
Basic manners nevermind the desire for thumbs would suggest you make things comprehensible to one and all.
If you dont want comments then up your game .
Up yours.
Wouldnt "football pitch" be referring to a soccer field and not an american football field? I have never heard of an American calling a football field a pitch before and almost no american would call soccer football which leads to some confusion.
Floating cities could even help increase biodiversity, reduce ocean water acidity, and increase oxygen content if we cultivated the area with the right species. Around 70% of the ocean is watery desert currently. Figuring out the waves part for taller buildings, especially during storms, is a big challenge though.
you could even I bet grow coral on it
Studies should be done on side-effects. How much is too much too.
@@Endangereds side effects of? the thing is a floating city is a point on a big ocean.
@@extropiantranshuman As Humans we have the arrogance of over doing/using everything. That is the fear. A example is over using plastic. Over crowding earth, and now going deep into forests etc... etc... etc...
do you think this is for you or for the top 1%??
you ain;t never EVER setting foot in that, no matter how real.
you are too poor to float.
I'm not sure I understand the concern. The only reason this is a problem is because people have some overblown ideal of being coastal. Distribution of people throughout the country is the solution, not increasing the capacity to concentrate at the coast. Wyoming, Montana, the dakotas, new mexico, Idaho, etc. all have 10x less people per square mile than California, who already has an amazing amount of unused inland.
The best part of this solution is its completely free, and would even benefit the usa and each state that got more population boost from this strategy. Not to mention we wouldn't have to build any of these complicated water harvesting systems or engineer around storms.
Or we can concentrate at the coasts and spend $400 billion on building walls (walls we cant even manage to build on solid land at the border)
built to withstand a cat 5 hurricane, but it would be one hell of a ride. Make sure to take some anti-nausea medicine or flee town for about a week
Yeah id like to see that simulation....
I know you can build a hurricane proof house with concrete and building it in the shape of a dome. Not sure how much of that is transferable to floating
@@M33f3r
Well technically it’s all about buoyancy right?. The problems, these designs are not incorporating anything that would be hurricanes proof. They are all futuristic and modern with angles and glass.
One of the pluses I actually thought about floating cities that it could avoid storms seasonally.
@@jeremiah6462 There is more to it than that. The waves a hurrican can produce can get poerful enough to slam holes into solid steel ships.
You can look that up. It is actually quite frightening in my opinion. (also check out freak waves if you need even more terror)
A floating city could be built to withstand such forces maybe, since oil rigs are pretty tough and exist already.
But nothing just shrugs off a a hurricane at sea. Even the most modern ships can sink in bad weather conditions.
Oh and conditions are getting worse since we heat everything up and put more energy into the system.
Getting the frack out before a hurricane strikes will always be the best option.
Instead of just having floating cities, couldn't we use this to increase the amount of biomass in the ocean? We could grow and harvest useful algae and even krill. This would allow for more sustainable aquaculture for fish and human consumption.
The video mentions ocean farming
@@alexsanchez7076 I'm not talking about ocean farming for a floating city. I'm talking about large scale aqua culture and farming bringing cold water and nutrients from the deep. Surrounding platforms could also be used to create electricity. Imagine hundreds of these farms operating in the largely lifeless deep water zones of the Pacific. We could grow algae, krill, and fish a various sizes saving a tire species, while also providing protein and omega-3s for the entire planet. It's not just about saving species and providing food for up to 10 billion people. If every pregnant woman and child had access to iodine and DHA, we could decrease the number of people with low IQ in an ethical manner, increasing gross world the product and quality of life.
@@ronmaximilian6953 YES! Ocean regenerative aquaculture! The 3-D ocean farming is something I’m really interested in! I believe we could use it to regenerate our coastlines. Grow algae in areas of high nutrient run off near any waste water dumping. This can be used to make diesel, plastics, food and fertiliser. Then grow filter feeders like scallops mussels and oysters. This will improve the water quality and feed people, provide habitat for other marine species and be a bloody good place to drop a line in and fish!
@@ohfudgecicles I prefer to deal with river nutrients higher upstream, because dead zones already exist. However, I haven't thought of the positive benefits of this type of farming in reducing the spread of dead zones. Thank you
@@ronmaximilian6953 Sounds like ocean farming only bigger
It's crazy what we'll do just to treat the symptom just to avoid dealing with the cause.
Because there's no money to be made in fixing the problem, but there is with fleecing people with hair brained schemes.
Sadly we need to do both. We're not going to be able to stop and reverse some of the effects.
@@UndecidedMF I still argue that if permaculture was adopted worldwide, we could stop and reverse a lot of them. We need to respond to climate change like the ww3 level threat it is.
How would you immediately fix the problem?
Even if we not push very agressively to be co2 neutral, it would still take a very long time in which sea levels will still be rising. It's inevitable in the short term.
Well the problem has also to do that the solution is very hard at least for some countries. Because a lot of countries are above the limit where you can use 100% regenerative energies even with sufficient energy storage. Countries like Germany are in this list but refuse to use/add the only alternative nuclear energy and when you want to have the more safer and cleaner variant like molten-salt reactors . You would have needed to start with the development 20 years ago. On top of that in most countries the power grid isn't able to resist this much energy when you use everything 100% electric. The real core problem is people are living in absolute denial of reality and when you mentioned e.g in Germany that they need nuclear energy you get stoned
I often dream about a floating home, like a house boat, but built for the ocean, using renewable energies rather than sails to move around. Preferably very large with underwater windows or a glass bottom
I've always wanted to build my own island like that guy in Mexico.
All you need is water bottles and pallets
Hexagonal units making a village that interlocks with other hexagonal units? Someone plays Settlers of Catan.
It's because hexagons are bestagons!
@@midnight8341 XD it allways comes back to bees
@@midnight8341 Please tell me that was a CGP Grey reference.
I drew up a hexagonal plan for a floating cities in 2006. I'd never heard of Katan at that point.
Have you ever lived on the water? I would love to here for them. As a person that has been on the water for only a short time. It would seem to be very expensive as well as uncomfortable at times. Most people that I have talked to like to have something solid below them. As most people live on land for comfort and cost. But it is interesting to see if we could convert to that kind of life.
We can very easily, we just need more creative, open minds.. this world rlly seems to be lacking them right now.
I’ve lived on a houseboat for a few weeks. I know people who did it for years. You adapt
Large countries like the USA, Brazil, Russia and Canada have a lot of space in the more rural areas; in China, India and European countries, this sea solution can be useful
I have been on a houseboat in Hamburg in 2010. It was absolutely solid and had nothing in common with a boat. 2 story built on concrete floting dock.
Similar to the pickture from Holland.
Aren't cruiseships kind of a floating village that people love to be on?
Maintaining anything on the ocean will be a nightmare. Everything degrades much faster on the open ocean. Sounds nice, but full of risk. Possibly select places will be able to permanently house something like this, but I doubt it would become the norm.
But what if we make it out of the ocean?
I feel like we should just do the stuff they're trying to do out there, but not live out there. Sure, have farms, desal, aquaculture, waste recycling and such offshore.
@@imightbebiased9311 agreed. We can create useful space like this and for this reason I'm looking forward to seeing things develop despite their seemingly unrealistic hopes.
While I find the concept intriguing, as a naval architect with more than 45 years of experience designing things to survive whatever the ocean can throw at them, I strongly urge people not to underestimate the power of the sea. And remember, there is no such thing as an unsinkable ship, so I suspect there is no such thing as an unsinkable (part) of a floating city. One thing I am concerned about is that any structure moored to the bottom with a fixed-length system, like the one illustrated for seacrete, would be unable to move in response to wave action and could be subject to what we call "green water" - waves sweeping across the "deck" which looks to me like "ground level". The forces are enormous, and non of the structures shown in the artist's conception would be likely to survive. Could this work? Absolutely, if enough proper engineering talent - and money is applied.
for the last part, yes, this would likely require sturdy walls, more similar to the sides of cargo ships than the utopia shown in the renderings on the sides exposed to the outside.
sides only exposed to water between the islands could work similar to what"s shown as long as the mooring is fixed length and the structures act sufficiently as wave breakers.
as for taking up the forces, that would obviously be easier with looser moorings, but then the wave breaking effect would mostly be gone
7:34 a vertical axis wind blade can generate electricity and at the same time canalize air to extract water from moisture, into an underwater structure similar to a bulb, also taking advantage of the natural temperature difference to the surface. Kepping in mind the cost, the low production and the space required; such a wind turbine could provide many benefits with fewer problems.
This idea was covered very extensively in a book I am reading called the Millenial project. The concept there was more about creating more habitable space along the most habitable part of the most habitable planet that we know of. Since Earth is 3/4 water, it makes sense to move from land to water to create more places for people to live. Certainly floating cities would be less likely to flood then ones that don't. The Ocean Thermal energy plan is fantastic, I love it.
maybe buildings on stilts on floodplains and wetlands would be a better idea that building literally on the ocean. new orleans was a bayou, then return it to one. it's not that hard or that expensive (per capita) compared to these projects from bourgeois architects.
using "bourgeois" unironically, damn
Yeah, these types of projects are never financially viable, it's like building a colony on mars; I think we should try both, but they are never going to make sense by themselves, it's the technologies we invent while trying to build them that make it sensible.
a bayou is not a healthy environment to live in. The incidence of tropical diseases will be rising in the developed world, because of climate change, even without living in a swamp lol.
@@hemiedwards217 i mean, fair point, but we'll need wetlands and peatlands to mitigate effects of climate change anyways. new orleans will be flooded, there's no mitigating that, might as well return it to a wet land
@@em-jd4do Sure they're already talking about managed retreat in Florida, and their politicians are idiots lol. I don't expect that Louisiana will be far behind, but that doesn't answer, where all those people will go. People are just hand waving it away and hoping they don't live long enough that they will have to do something about it.
This is an awesome idea for a videogame. Like Surviving Mars but on water.
I started building my own floating city in minecraft after watching this lol
BioShock?
ngl, even tho this is a typical very comman song, u kinda make it your own for an intro. feels so at home considering your channel content. little things like that make you seem very professional. great job man!
I lived on the water for a couple of years. In 1991 I lived in Richardson Bay, off the shore of Sausalito , Ca. I was part of a anchor-out community that lived in boats tied to a abandoned dry dock. I had a 25' sailboat, it's the Last Free Ride. One of the people made a movie of the same name.
And now there trying to get ride if that whole community. Waiting for people to leave there boat/homes so they can crush it calling it marine debris, and leaving an already low income individuals homless.
The media and other videos that show the anchor out community only show the worst of the worst out there.
@@abigailgenrty5135 Oh wow. I never thought I would meet someone who knows about the Sausalito anchor-outs. 30 years; wonder if we knew the same people ?
Alas, the "seacrete" idea that they're relying on turns out to be a simple miscalculation. People got really excited when a paper claimed that a small current running thru seagoing wires would cause limestone to form around the wires quickly, but on inspection it was a miscalculation and is off by several orders of magnitude.
Shoker. Also "will be creating rest of it fresh water supply by collecting water from air" so another Fontus scam. Utterly inefficient and produces tiny amount of water that is not usable as drinking water and consumes huge amounts of energy even on optimal condition. They would be far better off by processing seawater into fresh water via reverse osmosis, but that is not green and hippy enough to sell this whole project that i'm guessing comes from everyones pockets since they will be asking government funding, wasting peoples money on this. Yet another climate hysteri....crisis scam to steal peoples funds to elites pockets just like emission taxes. For instance Finland should be receiving shit ton on money for being Europes lungs with amount of forest, but no we need to keep paying and be taxed hell and back to point where its very difficult to even go to work due gas prices and taxes added to that. And no EV's are not solution even though those are forced upon us since costs of electricity transfer have gone to moon after government sold the grid and created monopolies, flooding the funds to foreign corporations.
This all sounds extremely expensive compared to just building and especially farming on land. The only advantage I can see is for floating cities that can actually move, to evade storms and bad weather. Like, a place that's always sunny. That'd be something people might want to pay a premium for their real estate for.
I dunno but if the future really is a portable town of rich people hiding from the rain, I hope it sinks.
Dense
@@ScratchedWinter lmao 🤣
They can't move. That would make it a boat. All the ideas given in the video, have cities that are moored to the seafloor.
@@dizzy8175I have seen similar concepts that can move.
I would rather live in the desert. I am less afraid of giant sand worms than I am of sea monsters.
Don’t worry, pirates will be everywhere in the future.
@@bobjob3632 pirates are already here. The UN stealing our money for their wet dreams. I wish i had that kind of welfare.
_Tremors_
Did you hear about platform #4? It just disappeared swolled by the sea!
Just brilliant work,,, hello from Ireland
Definitely one of the more pie in the sky climate solutions you’ve presented on this channel. You glossed over it, but the Netherlands is a country which has been built below sea level for decades. Clearly, humanity has the ability to build near the coast with reasonable factors of safety, even in the face of rising sea levels (please note that a couple foot rise over decades is really not the environmental disaster that alarmists like to present it as)
I remember seeing the first OTEC (off the coast of Hawaii) in early 1970's and the first story about Seament around the same time which included an idea to build complete buildings that are then pulled up on shore (they did a sand castle like object), glad to see a return of the ideas
This is all very well presuming that water remains smooth. Alas it undulates as much as 80 feet.
Then there is also the problem that all vessels eventually leak.
I agree. Maybe the doldrums would be a good area to test.
I also absolutely agree about leaks. The platforms will flex and fatigue over time.
Yep this is pure fantasy
Not of it’s a seacrete vessel.as long as you have power, the « concrete » repairs itself.
@@kirkc9643 you may say, I m a dreamer... 🎶
I can imagine how those floating blocks breaking apart and tumbling against each other under a hurricane. Would be an instant floating trash.
My first thought is that the very human tendency to defer minor maintenance tasks until they become major disasters will not mix well with platforms that will likely require constant maintenance, and that'll lead to some tragedy. My second thought is, seems like a nightmare to keep rambunctious children from falling off the edges. Kids are really good at getting around safety measures.
I really like the dad point of view on this one.
😂😂😂
The kids are naturally selected for a tendency to not fall off.
How would they even maintain these structures? Seems like they would a constant influx of manufactured goods from the continent they are next to which completely negates the intended purpose.
Teach them to swim.... omg some people...
Current biggest cruise ship(s) can hold up to 6700 people onboard, but even with refitting for permanent settlement and higher capacity, it take more than 150 cruise ships to hold the population of one major city. Each of these ships cost few billions of dollars to build. And not to mention the sustainability and energy, comfortable, luxury, etc..
I know this is off-topic but...
I think we can use ram pumps to solve the energy crisis. First we build a hollow cylindrical tower out at sea, to a depth of say 1100m. The tower is open to the air at the top and has a sealed base at the bottom. We drill a hole about 20m below the surface and feed water into the tower. The water falls down a pipe for about 200m where it powers a turbine that is connected to an electricity generator. We collect the water and drop it down a pipe for another 200m to another turbine. We do this twice more until we are getting electricity from four generators.
We then drop the water another 200m to power a turbine which drives a cog that is geared to turn a disc at the base of the tower. The waste water from the last turbine starts to collect at the bottom of the tower creating a shallow reservoir that we need to pump out.
The rotating disc at the base of the tower has cams along its edge. These cams are used to push pistons outwards. These pistons are in cylinders built into the wall in a circular formation. The cylinders are sealed at the interior side apart from where a piston rod enters to push the piston outward. The outside of the piston head is exposed to the deep sea water.
The cam will push the piston outward against the high pressure deep sea water. An inlet pipe will take water from our shallow reservoir which will be pulled into the space created in the cylinder, behind the piston head. When the cam releases the piston, the low pressure water inside the cylinder will be the only thing pushing the piston out against the high pressure deep sea water.
This is when the system acts as a ram pump.
The piston will be forced inward and will force the low pressure water back out through the inlet pipe toward the reservoir. The inlet pipe will now act the same as a waste pipe in a ram pump and the flowing water will shut a waste valve. The remaining water in the cylinder will be forced through a check valve into a pipe and upwards to the surface.
The larger the diameter of the tower, the more cylinders that can be built into the wall at the base of the tower.
I realise that the ram pump cylinder will pump more of its water back into the reservoir than it sends to the surface but we can always add more cylinders to the system. We can even put another layer of cylinders above the original ones as ram pumps still work underneath shallow water.
I think we should be able to pump water upwards at the same rate that it falls into the bottom of the tower and so keep the reservoir nice and shallow.
Now, if I understand the maths correctly, we might only be able to pump the water near to the surface. In that case, we can pump the water into a reservoir tank (inside the tower) and use the electricity generated by the first turbine to pump out the tank.
This will leave us with 3 generators worth of electricity for every tower built.
Would this work? Everyone, please comment.
So far away from the coast means that everony living there must also work there. I doubt there would be enough jobs on a project like this, assuming there's no plans for an exporting industry on site..
The current pandemic has shown just how much of the working world functions just fine working remotely. Now whether it would be affordable is another question.
Exporting power or clean water, hydroponic food could be a job provider.
Tourisme is an industry on its own.
@@bobjob3632 But these can't export power or clean water so they already aren't able to produce enough for themselves. And how would it be economically viable for them to produce enough on their tiny surface area compared to the more massive surface area of a desert? Especially to provide enough income for 10,000+ people from such a tiny surface area when a normal solar power facility produces far more power using far fewer employees? Sorry but this isn't a realistic project.
@@GeorgeMonet Water is 3D in the desert it can be hard to build up and to dig down.
Seasteading all the way! I think offshore wind developers should be the the first to explore this because for them, offshore offtakers of their power would be a massive force in reducing interconnection costs
Matt, you do a fantastic job as always and I'm a dedicated viewer and love your videos...and I'm not arguing the fact that some areas of the world may be seeing actual sea level change. Fact is, we've had a home on the water in South West Florida for 45 years and the water level hasn't risen at all. We have a sea wall so it's very easy to measure. Many islands in the South West Florida area have gotten smaller due to erosion and people may attribute this to sea level rise. Unfortunately people who don't live near the coast who see this kind of content blindly believe that we're going to sink into the sea in 50 years. The fact is it's just not true in many areas so it makes me wonder HOW levels could be rising in other parts of the world and not everywhere? Keep up the great content.
I did come across the explanation for this, but iv forgotten the deets cos brain inflammation back then n currently on painkillers xD
From a diff source, diff era n diff platform, i am aware that in uk, scotland is rising n southern coast is sinking. This was explained as relating to when the ice sheets covered the north n weighed it down. I say this to show that all coastlines are not equal.
Youd have to watch climate change seminars n university lecture vids to find out what iv forgotten, which is why its not well known xD
1) sea level changes are weird and some areas have actually seen small decreases because of weirdness in things like currents changing. 2) however this isn't the case in southern Florida and sea levels around the tip of Florida have actually gone up by around ~4 inches since 1992. But as a normal person and not a data logging machine this kind of base level change is easily obscured by the hourly, daily, weekly, etc. variations in the sea level that exist on top of that.
Another possibility is to recycle old ships and put together a flotilla. Power and agriculture could be put on old cargo ships, retired cruise liners could be apartment blocks and office buildings. Being boats, they could move the fleet around extreme weather. There could be many advantages to a nomadic city.
The problem with Source is, while it does produce water... its production level is less than... well...
Just for example, Ben Sullins consults in Silicon Valley, and the average rainfall per year in San Francisco is about 24.6 inches. 24.6 inches times the area of a Source solar panel (4 feet by 8 feet) is approximately 1858 litres of water - or, averaging over that course of a year, about 5 litres of water per day.
Two 4 foot by 8 foot buckets and a water purifier is much cheaper than the $5,500-6,500 they recommend for the shipping, installation and tax on their recommended _two_ panel minimum. Admittedly, no solar panels in a bucket but... less carbon footprint in a bucket. You could theoretically just... buy actual regular solar panels and put large water storage reservoirs under them to catch the run-off from the panel to get exactly the same effect but with better energy production.
Getting water from a dehumidifier. Somewhere Thunderf00t just got an itchy ear lol.
Righteous rage boiling over like a wave 😂😂😂
Ever sailed through a hurricane for 3 days straight? The city would be destroyed. You'd have to submerge the cities for them to survive
The people designing these things have engineers in their teams and the islands are big buildings ancored to the sea floor, not free floating. So I guess they know more about the subject than you do...
I like all the subtle ocean puns you've put in and you stayed very neutral and serious. Thanks for making this video :) Learn something new everyday.
This video not only satisfied my childhood fascination with Cities of the Future type projects, but also my adult appreciation of puns. Kudos.
Forcibly extracting water from the atmosphere will reduce rainfall on land.
For freshwater in a floating city simply couple ancient American windpumps to a shaft sealed with a reverse osmosis membrane. As the windpump lowers the freshwater pressure in the shaft, the pressure difference at the bottom draws freshwater through the membrane out of the seawater and the salt is dispersed by the ocean current.
This seems like a gimmick. We're not running out of room to build a city in general and those places where more land would be helpful are near existing cities in which case land reclamation is probably a better solution. If for whateve reason they go ahead with this I have no idea why they wouldn't start with building this on a lake rather than the ocean
.6% of UK land area is urban... cultists exist by generating fear and selling products to alleviate fear.
Lakes will probably dry up before the Ocean.
@@hawk7825 No scenario has water drying up. Though some areas will become drier and others wetter. But the total amount of water will remain consistent.
having said that, wet lands vs. deserts is more of a function of geography not climate.
Fascinating ideas. I imagine a broad mix of these and other ideas are going to be used in the future to help mitigate the issues humanity will be facing. Great presentation.
How about we don't build by the water as much? There, problem solved for millennia ahead (the earth is ONLY like under 10%~ populated you know)
@@mkzhero We build by the water because of ports
@@afabuloussentientbeing8112 yes. But not skyscrapers and shit. Build smaller buildings that you can detach and relocate further back, it's much more realistic and far less expensive, both in the short and long term. I can't even imagine the kind of money that would go into building and maintaining such a city, what it would take to keep it anchored and what'd happen to it when storms hit. Not to mention the amount of people it'd fit is rather low, again, for a ludicrous price... But hey, it seems to be a trend with all global warming/climate change related shit - extreme costs without any practicality or promises of anything sustainable nor working, if working at all. But don't worry, the people 'working' on all those projects are getting paid well with our money.
Interesting concept. I really hope it gets built. Reminds me of the floating villages of Lake Titicaca. Great video as always! Interested if you've heard of biotekt homes? My father in law is a homebuilder and is building a few of them, super cool stuff!
Thinking about calcium carbonate matrix ie: oyster and clam shells. Hexagonal sections of various size and density can form honeycomb grid layers that can be built up to raise out of the water in a gentle sloping mound to almost any height presuming a suitable submerged, not anchored base is built up...think about how the greater mass of a stable iceberg is submerged. These floating islands can be as small as a few acres and scale up to 100's of acres. The calcium carbonate is derived from sea water through electro induced accretion onto lattice/substrate and "grown" into shape. The energy needed to grow the foundational structure starts with a floating barge upon which an O.T.E.C unit is set up.
Think about how a simple Sterling engine derives its power from interfacing 2 different temperatures. OTEC essentially draws up cold water from the depths and warm water from the surface thus providing a temp differential to run the water based Stirling engine as an unlimited power source. Ideally these accreted platforms would be based within 5 degrees of the equator as its virtually storm free and waves never exceed 4 feet. The unlimited power generation potential of the OTEC technology allows surplus power from which to conduct electrolysis of ocean water for every trace metal from Gold to iron to copper ,zinc and essentially the whole range of metals and trace elements found in seawater. Heat is produced in abundance with OTEC which can be used to create lagoon pools on the outer edges of the structure from which you can farm aquatic life at the water temperature they require such as all manner of shellfish.Traditional agriculture and aquaculture can be practiced as well.
All manner of structural elements right down to furniture can be accreted from the minerals found in unlimited abundance within sea water. Excess power can also be "exported" from the floating base by means of microwave power transmission, this power along with minerals and metals and seafood would be exported to land based populations. It would be economically self supporting as any community must. The residents could also have other means of income by working in the information and service sectors via the net and satellite communications. All manner of commerce and society can be supported by these floating communities all powered by the temperature differential of seawater. Conversion of energy into every conceivable material need decentralizes power structures and gives autonomy to these communities as they will be beholden to no country. Through decentralization mankind can advance to a level one society.
It'll be a huge exercise in modularity and independence. City modules will need a standardized connector to move clean water, sewage, and power, because not every single module could produce enough of its own power/water. It'll also need standardized road and rail connections for public transport. Can't assume everyone is in good health and can walk everywhere...
This is pretty cool and all but we have lots of land to fill up before it makes any sense to build on the water
It is not about the land it is about new government models and finding out what really works along the spectrum.
The cost makes the replacement of fossil fuels by renewables pale into insignificance, plus It would widen the socio/economic divide.
@@rogerstarkey5390 The sooner we can stop the use of fossil fuels the less the sea level will rise.
@@eclecticcyclist But we're not. Countries in the Third World are even now building hundreds of coal-fired power plants, which also require tonnes of concrete. Whether we like it or not, we're going to have to suffer global warming and sea level rise.
I'm interested in seeing how this goes honestly. Though I know I'll never be able to afford to neither or live in one of those floating cities.
-first the cultist said : 800 million people will be effected by rising sea levels by 2040. Then the cultist shill let slip : "by a 2 inch sea level rise". *facepalm* Of course the rational response would be: Just how many predictions have these cultists actually gotten right over the last 40 years?
@@TheBelrick a 2 inch sea level rise is the average value across the entire oceans, you dingus... That's like saying "oh, 3°C temperature rise due to climate change isn't that bad" and completely ignoring that the continents we live on will become much much warmer than that, while the 71% ocean will stay a lot cooler than x+3°C.
2 inches means that the entire surface of the ocean attracted by the moon has 2 inches more water on it. What do you think happens, when you pull that much more to shore during the tides? That high tide is accumulating 2 inches of water over an area of miles squared additionally to the water that's normally there. Go figure.
@@midnight8341 I get that you plebs have been protected from free thought by zealous overlords isolating you from intelligent people through censorship but that is no excuse for your stupidity.
Ready for context and perspective?
The current AVERAGE ocean depth is 12100' . In 20 years years time they predict that it will be 12100'2"
GET REKT
And FYI for those willing to learn, should EVERY single drop of ice on land melt average sea levels will rise 1.5% or from 12100 feet to 12280 feet because 98.5% of all water that can be in the oceans is already in the oceans or trapped as fresh water lakes.
And no one is predicting 100% land ice melt.
@@midnight8341 Here is another fun fact. 2" ocean level rise equivalent in bath water
20" depth bath faced by the same increase in water level will result in a bath filled to 20.00028"
Ohhh scary. Permanently surrender your liberty and fortunes now.
@@TheBelrick "protected from intelligent people"... Yeah, right... It's not like I have two university degrees and am doing my PhD currently, but go on and say that I was protected from intelligent people all my life... 🤦♂️
You really don't get it, right? Ever had 6 inches of rain in a night? What about 8 inches? That's a pretty big difference, right? That's 25.4 additional liters per m² (0.62 gallons per ft² in stupid measurements). For a strip of coast just 20 km long and 1km into the ocean, that's an _additional_ 508,000 metric tons of water being pulled to land during high tide. If you can't see the problems here, you're truly far beyond reasoning...
2in doesn't sound like a lot in total numbers, but so is CO2 concentration that rose from 340ppm to 400ppm. But look what a difference that made to your country. I'm guessing you're from the US, so just look at how often your country has been on fire lately. For a comparison: think about what a difference 2 inches would make for your own life.
I hope I can work on this project one day.Very nice video thanks :))
I how you are undecided about sea level rise. They have been threatening this for decades, but this who have been measuring the sea levels state that the rise is sooooo low as to not be worth calling sea rise.
Still, I like the idea of a floating city, as long as they solve the problems of storms
I had a barge home, when it became too expensive to maintain I moved inland.
You had aluminum floaters. Imagine a concrete floating house. That’s super low coat and salted water proof.
I have the feeling, floating cities are the future of the cruise industry....
Or you could just build inland a bit. We can leverage our entire history of experience of building on land, and all our existing infrastructure. This is wasteful, utterly indulgent fantasy.
i literally don't get why they want to have outdoor farms on floating platforms? for what?
@@em-jd4do The concept is a closed loop system where the residents can supply food and potable water for the community.
Floating agriculture is not new. The Aztecs had floating food plots in Mexico.
@@rogerstarkey5390 you seem to be suggesting that all land is "taken". People sell their land and low density places become more densely populated. Like, you know, what has been happening for the last few hundred years. I'm currently living in Hong Kong. If people lived as densely everywhere as they do here you could probably put the entire world into somewhere like California. There is PLENTY of space left. There is PLENTY of water left. It's all about using it frugally and equitably. Which we most certainly aren't at the moment...
@@gryph01 not sure where you are getting the potable water from that adds any value... You have to pipe it less? And the added cost and complexity of sewerage and electricity, etc just seems silly. Really, this is a rich man's playground, nice for the Bezoses and Musks but of little interest for the rest of us. There are lots more pressing ways to spend our money...
@@transcrobesproject3625 If the community is out on the ocean, you need to create fresh water for the residents and food production.
I agree that a project like this is not feasible. Too expensive and too many engineering challenges to maintain it.
My house in Cambodia has been floating on the water for many years now, way before I was born. The best part is when the water rise during monsoon/heavy rain season, we can swim inside our house on the lower level area XD
Considering time restraints I've not read all of the comments. I know I'm not the first to think of this but I just read an article the other day on the offshore oil rigs that are obsolete and beyond repair. There you go. There's the basis of a platform for a new community. In fact the article I was reading was talking about putting up wind turbines in those areas. The oil under the platforms are of course depleted. A lot of our waste can be dumped in the ocean with ocean life benefiting. Like on our most expensive yachts they have a furnace specifically used for burning human wastes. After it's burnt then it can be emptied into the ocean. I'd love to live another 100 years. Maybe I could do something in that span to be productive for humankind. The article went on to read how in the near future we will be dealing with many obsolete oil rigs that will be declared unusable . If you look out into the Gulf of Mexico there are hundreds upon hundreds of oil rigs. Most of us can't afford a luxury yacht but that doesn't keep us from living on an old ocean oil rig. Good day everyone.
There are 5.5 million square miles of uninhabited desert on earth ... but let's try to float instead.
Well, you don't get much fun in a desert tho.
I love this idea, because it feels so much like a video game. But at the same time it's clear that it's _very_ early days for floating cities, and there's an awful lot of problems that will need to be solved before they could work as true cities. No doubt that's why the SeaSteading guys are only talking about building expensive single "pods" and not whole communities. I'm really interested in the Oceanix project and hope they actually build it.
In Southeast Asia they've had floating villages and neighborhoods for centuries. For instance lake Tonle Sap in Cambodia has hundreds of little floating fishing villages. But these places tend to be inhabited by the poorest of the poor who depend upon resource extraction to survive. Or in the case of floating neighborhoods, they tend to be the poorest and most desperate parts of the slums, were people locate because their semi legal-status means residents don't have to pay property taxes.
If an American city that's threatened by climate change - like say, Miami - was able to transform itself using this technology and became partially floating and partially on land, how would the floating sections avoid the long term pressures that tend to turn floating neighborhoods into slums? Would people with money want to live on the floating parts, or would everybody be competing to live on land?
I was thinking the project looks like a big collectivist study in a closed environment, literally 5 seconds before Matt mentioned the first one was going to be in China.
The Chinese know they are running out of land. Of course they are bankrolling this.
@@BenFrankarts Nah, they have plenty of land, but because of centralized decisions resources and space are misused. They've built whole cities for millions which are empty, and it's logical since settlements, villages, cities are built around free market, free enterprise, where there is a resource to benefit from, farmland, a river, a mine, or natural beauty, for commerce, for industry or just for leisure.
@@Gastyz those cities are ghost cities. Built for propping up a failing economy. Not for people to live. I mean useful land, not space to build pretend towns.
About ocean thermal energy conversion, the difference between 25 C and 5 C makes the theoretically possible maximum efficiency less than 7%, that means it's not even theoretically possible to extract 7% of that moderate amount of energy. Also, it's difficult to use so small temperature differences, you'd need gigantic heat exchangers to reach even 2% efficiency. Not completely impossible to extract more energy than needed for the pumping, but at sea there's usually plenty of wind and or sunshine. For floating cities even wave power might be viable, there's no actual need for unproved [commercially] technologies that are highly unlikely to provide a cost efficient contribution to a combination of solar, wind and batteries, and possibly wave power, like OTEC.
When you extract energy from a temperature difference between ambient temperature and a lower than ambient temperature, you don't produce higher than ambient temperature waste heat, reality just doesn't work that way. When ambient temperature is higher than your waste heat, that waste heat is completely useless for providing extra heat to anything.
An endless supply of 5 C water can have more relevant use, producing freshwater from air humidity is useful, but there are other good ways to produce freshwater from sea water, such as reverse osmosis. Refrigeration and air conditioning is far more helped by 5 C water than your examples, in air conditioning not only to lower the temperature, but also the humidity. If it is possible to harvest a few liters of water and a few kWh while saving thousands of kWh on refrigeration and air conditioning that's nice, but those few liters and kWh doesn't make much of a difference.
About seament, extracting enormous amounts of alkalinity from seawater, which we already are acidifying with CO2 is not a great idea. If the goal was to mess up the global ecosystem with as little "effort" as possible I would have been very impressed by that idea. Sure there are a lot of organisms that extract calcium from the water, but that has "always" happened, and seament would come on top of that, at worst time imaginable. Anchoring one or a couple of small cities would probably not be very problematic. But used on larger scale, as a common alternative to cement would be catastrophic.
Source "hydropanels", yeah, 5 liters a day, that would be possible at sea. Again, reverse osmosis with solar panels for as much money and similar space requirement could probably produce about 5000 liters of fresh water a day from sea water. Source being "cheaper than buying water bottles, in the [very very] long run", doesn't make it a good alternative, to anything else than maybe bottled water. It's not like you will depend on those for anything else than very small needs, USD2.500 for 5 liters a day, if you set the value of that water at 20 cents per litre it would take almost 7 years for it to pay off, assuming no cost for maintenance, and they work that long. And, air conditioning for a home could produce similar amounts as one of those hydropanels when it's sunny, as a pure byproduct.
Even simple distillation, with resistive heating can be done with less than 1 kWh per litre, for 2.500 dollars you can buy solar panels and a distiller that can produce many times more than 5 liters a day, or choose to use most of that power in a better way. Also, at sea, at/near the equator, collecting rain typically takes as little as 2 m² or less to collect an average of 5 liters a day. That's the problem with all those gadgets that is meant to produce water from air humidity, if the air is humid enough to have meaningful production, there's typically plenty of liquid water that easily can be purified, and where there's an severe shortage of water, so bad that one is actually willing to pay 2.500 dollars for something that under the right conditions can produce 5 liters a day, there will probably not be enough air humidity to come anything close to the advertised production, if any is possible.
Floating cities is a very interesting idea, but I can't predict the future, so I can't tell you if they will "happen". I can tell you it is unlikely some architect and a minister of tourism(?) that throws together a lot of ideas that might seem great, together with fancy illustrations that is stupid in oh so many ways, will actually make it happen. Like, come on, growing plants including food crops a few feet, if that, over the water line at sea, what are they planning to grow for food, mangroves?
You talked about a mile of the coast almost as if it was on Mars, it is not. Although most boats has far lower top speed than most cars, one mile is not much of an issue. If you can build a floating city you're probably able to set up a speed boat transport service. Candela electric boats can travel a mile in less than 2 minutes, and at slightly lower speed, 22 knots, ~25 mph it can do 50 nautical miles, ~57 "land" miles on a charge, and they exist today. So, no, that mile off the coast doesn't have to be a problem at all, it might make logistics a lot easier compared to one mile from the coast inland, in the middle of a city with heavy traffic congestions. If you even grow land plants for food, why not have other types of enterprises? If you have a population of 100.000 people or more, it only makes sense to have engineers have their work bases there, either commuting, or even living there.
Also, the fact that coastal cities will be flooded doesn't actually mean you have to move out to sea to manage, you can move inland. It's not living space we're running out of, we don't need many m² building footprint per person to live, it's cheap food production, the way we are currently producing food that is the problem.
And, you're talking about the issue with rising sea as the level at calm weather was the problem, as most people seems to do, it is not. The issue is higher sea level, when extreme weather happens. It's during extreme weather events almost all damage will happen.
Those floating devices in the fancy illustrations are not designed to withstand a category 5 hurricane, just claiming something doesn't make it so. As illustrated they would suffer substantial damage even below hurricane wind speeds offshore. A level 5 Tsunami is higher than their 7 stories max. Most, if not all people on those floating saucers would die if a level 5 tsunami hit them.
I need to add this, get feedback:
Before trying to get capital for floating cities, start with floating platforms connected to shore and raise $$ by selling/leasing real estate, a scarce and valueable commodity. Research, refine technology (with modified marinas) as platforms are expanded, replicated in more cities. Include verticle, hydroponic & other farming techniques in research. By the time floating condos, offices are optimised, there should be enough capital to begin independent ocean settlements.
What do you think?
Without some kind of industry to drive Support Services any kind of attempt will fail. You can't just put up a bunch of people together and think they can support themselves like Frontier settlers.
Fresh seafood grown in industrial quantities, pearl farms, lithium, and other mineral mining from seawater, many economic products were mentioned in the video and they can be done nearly anywhere.
@@Barskor1 So I am correct.
I am sure that Thunderf00t can give some very valuable advice to propnents of this project ...
I was thinking the same thing when the dehumidifier was hyped up halfway into the video
And thunderf00ts expertise in this area is what, exactly?
"Get in the sea!"
Sea levels: *Rising*
Humanity: I can make this work.
Is it rising?
Some: We shall live on this water.
Others: Hey look, a hill.
2 inches in the next 20 years. maybe. tract record on predictions is of course terrible
@@BarryObaminable Yes and evidently
@Narja excellent. Time to buy cheaper land 2 feet higher than current beachfront property.
I think that BIG's floating city idea is insanely innovative, and I'm very inspired. It's definitely futuristic and scifi-ish too, but It's one of the more realistic sci-fi ideas out there
I noticed a lot, A LOT, of missing infrastructure. The big three: Police, Fire, and EMT. will all these services be provided by the mainland? As was mentioned, in any kind of emergency, it would take a long time for anyone to respond from the mainland. And especially in the case of a medical emergency, a medflight system would be a practical necessity, given that the difference in so many medical emergencies, from allergic reaction to poisoning and overdose, to heart attack and stroke, is mere minutes. That being said, if all those services are provided on sight, then a significant portion of the population of the floating city would be dedicated to the operation and dispensation of those services.
Another glaring absence I noticed is any kind of bureaucratic infrastructure. Centralized bureaucracy would also be necessary for the smooth operation of the different services provided on the island, as well as for enforcing the consequences for violating the laws and ordinances of the city, such as willful, repeated violations of the energy allotment.
Anyway, reminds me of the same Libertarian pipedream Peter Thiel wanted to invest in a decade ago.
"float the idea" ... "a wave of climate change" so many puns
Too many puns? Or just enough.
@@UndecidedMF Just enough. Love your channel.
@@UndecidedMF loved it, but don't tell Matt! 😄
@@UndecidedMF Not enough puns. I can't wave for another video! I'm getting seasick of waiting for the next one! You must hurrycane, my patience is swimming out.
@@UndecidedMF I absolutely love the puns. I like when you are not being so obvious about them. It becomes a bit of a game, listening for them. I will often re-watch to see if I missed any. Love you videos. I'm hooked.
So basically super expensive houseboat for the rich.
Unfortunately, that's what most of these "green projects" really are. They're mostly a way for the ultra wealthy to masturbate about how progressive they are. Any real solution has to be something widespread and affordable.
Taxe free of course
4:25 Ohh, i thought they are gonna use a stirling engine for sure!
It's not like this is gonna work any better. A 20° temperature gradient is laughable for a steam power process, you'll lose almost all of it in the heat exchanger. Geothermal power is already barely worth it, and they work with much higher temperature gradients than that.
In my energy systems class someone did their final project on an otec system. The final efficiency was 3% and that was optimistic…
This power generation idea makes Hyperloop sound like a viable transport solution!
I love the title and content of Undecided. So many factors to consider and so many unknowns. Very thought provoking a
One of the best channels on the tube.
I swear. There seem to be a global competition to see how many Snowpiercer spin offs they can create instead of solving climate change.
😂
Yup, Jacques Fresco came up with this idea back in the 70’s.
It was not really his idea.
Humanity does that even before Jesus..
Is not enough to "uh something like this would be cool", you really need to proof how it would work with all the luxury of details, something that Jack Fresco always try to ignore.
I liked the man, as everyone who tries to innovate, but he loved to lie to him self for not seeing the obvious errors for some of their ideas. Like his "no money" idea.
These guys right here seem to have the same issue, those city graphics does not look nothing similar to oil rigs, so their point that "oil rigs" can survive ocean, it does not proof that their cities also can, because those cities are super low and they do not enter in detail on how they will deal with waves or the extra cost of all the structure or objects in order to deal with the constant movement, of course there are ways to solve all that, but not at low cost.
Their idea to extract energy from the water gradient is also silly, the gradient is so low that it would take a huge investment to extract very little power, when solar panels and wind turbines (or kites) would be close to one order of magnitude cheaper, using hydrogen as the main energy storage to solve power intermittence.
Its older than that. Probably Biblical times or prior.
Jules Verne came up with this closer to the 1870's He wrote 2 books: 1871 A Floating City (A trip on the Great Eastern large steamer)
and 1895 THE Floating City (Or Propeller Island) ( A moveable inhabited island that toured the oceans.)
The word "seastead" isn't like "homestead" but is like "landstead," and nobody ever said that.
Was just about to comment this :)
There is an anime called "Strike the Blood" whose setting is a floating city off the coast of Japan. This is an amazing idea that needs to happen.
I suggest that we need to start small; start with one pod that sustains the people living on it. Too many people wish to start with the village size products; more is more complications. Once a module exist, that would all knowledgeable people to address any variations needed. I see this as a start for a whole new life style of minimal possessions, etc, as well as smaller living quarters. Kind of like living on a cruise ship without the rich food. Good article.
The floating containers in CPH are NOT low cost btw. There are reserved for students though
And they are docked, not out in open sea. It's dumb to even bring them up.
I love things like this. It's fascinating how the goal they were chasing may end up a failure, yet spin off some really useful tech.
Exactly! people that are dreaming that big give me hope.
Hmmm seems like another elysium style escape for the rich!
Except that you can’t take a rowboat to orbit. . .
Ye if that the case people will come with their boats and raid the shit out of them 🤣
I agree with the approach as in Holland. Services are umbilical and new lift and stabilise rams allow water height change without side movement.
Not feasable for open sea but on land subject to flooding over time. A bit like living on an Ark. The very best design to prevent corrosion is concrete cassions like the Mullberry Harbour.
You should make a video about how we can drastically improove the waste plastic storage space by cutting the plastic ourselfs in bits and pieces before throwing it in the bin.This would lead to a huge increase in recycling and and far less garbage trucks trips.
Building large scale carbon capture plants seems way more feasible than this. Floating islands would be so expensive that only billionaires would be able to afford it.
I appreciate your positive, informative approach to such patently lunatic proposals. “Obviously, there are challenges,” as you said a couple of times.
Is a floating village anchored to the seabed a sort of island? If I build one and put it, say, in the South China Sea, can I claim the waters around it for fishing and so on? Asking for a Chinese friend.
Good city planners learn from history. Not one designer in there said they studied life on actual remote islands/actual oil rigs/actual ships/Venice/Singapore to come up with a reasonable design.
It's a scam, folks. Any average firm can make a fancy free floating city last one year. Where are the people saying that they can make an ok, slightly crappy, floating structure survive 25 years (including financially)?
He said one of the designers was the guy who designed the dutch floating houses so I imagine that would be in his wheelhouse.
I assume you mean Bjarke Ingels.
I followed his work years before he came up with this design. He has a great architectural firm, but this is their first try and they are out of their depth here.
Now, if Alejandro Aravena's firm ELEMENTAL were to send a design entry for this (so far as I know, he is not making any plans), I would pay attention.
Alejandro Aravena has a floating city operational already? Do you have a link?
@@alexsanchez7076 No, Aravena does not have a floating city plan. So far as I know, no one has even asked him for one (at least not in English).
But Aravena, as an architect, talks about the value of making buildings that are built to last the environmental forces.
This is only my personal opinion about Aravena: If Aravena tries to design a floating city and finds that it doesn't work, I believe that he will call it out and say that. He will give you reasons why it won't work. Aravena is an honest and humble guy.
Get Aravena (or some other Architect with a similar practice/philosophy) to design the floating city. Then I will take this concept seriously.
@@saarangsahasrabudhe8634 That sounds like the philosophy of every architect.
Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri had this as a researchable tech. Also remembered that Nautilus Pirates started with this tech and it made them broken.
There's this amazing floating home idea I heard about using low-tech systems like wind travel. They're called 'boats', they're pretty wild.
Can anyone seriously picture any of those lightweight structures withstanding a force 5 hurricane, not to mention those destructive monster waves?
Ah, yes. When "surviving" has to only mean the legal definition. "The base part survived the hurricane, that counts!"
Oile towers in the sea do not have a problem with it
@@dyslectische And they look nothing like those tiny low islands. Look for some videos of ships in rough seas then imagine those floating homes there. It's beyond a joke to suggest that as a solution.
@@alterego157 if a home is stuck on the sea ground like bridge. By the sea line
Or like we in the dutch have wind energie from the sea.
Those windmill are on our sea line about 10 miles .
And are stuck on the ground.
So yes we can beuld homes like that if we whant to.
Great video as always.
I'm all for future technology and changing the way we do things, but living on water is an asinine idea. Even if all the ice on Earth melted, it would only cause sea levels to rise
"Let's put a bunch of mega-tons of steel on the ocean and call it trade."
"Man-made global warm... climate change is raising sea levels."
"Let's put a bunch of mega-tons of steel on the ocean and call it seasteading."
One of them is producing emissions while the other is reducing them? While also providing living areas. I dont get your argument
@@maserdaser9654 There is another point of this: Why is the test city being built in the South China sea?
@@maserdaser9654
Regardless of intent, mega-tons of mass displacing water is still mega-tons of mass displacing water. The sea rises regardless; it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. Just where do you think that displaced water goes? The Moon? Mars?
Easy science, take a bath. Measure the water line before you get in, and then measure it after you're in. The water is still there, PLUS you! Unlike your tub, the ocean doesn't have an over-flow drain built in.
It's amazing how many people have discovered condenser dehumidifiers and think they have a totally revolutionary and unique product to solve water supply needs...
Well there are a few people/companies that are building floating islands based on seeing floating trash for all purposes islands. They collected used plastic bottles and containers using recycled nets (old/damaged that were slated for the dump) modified to hold the plastic containers/bottles using drit wood, and wood from torn down or abandoned buildings they even reused nails if possible. Looking for old discarded junk and trash, free items on curbside, and only buying things if no other option. This is then turned into a floating island secured or movable by boat motor. Build a house or other buildings. They are not very big and I have seen a few different groups of people do similar things but that was a couple of years ago so I don't know if anyone is still doing it. It was not only to clean up areas like beaches the ocean, and other water ways and purposely find a usefulness for plastic bottles as in reality recycling them is a huge lie as not only is it more expensive to recycle them, you get little usable material from the plastic, it from the carbon emissions to even recycle defeats the purposes of trying to be environmentally conscious. Afterwards the plastic is brittle and will have limited use and will not be able to be recycled again. It would be better to reuse your bottles a couple of times for the same item such as refilling plastic water bottles repeatedly or making your laundry detergent plastic container cut the top off rinse it out and make it ina pot for planting instead of buying a plant pot made of plastic and sold in stores.
How do you even stay optimistic or even neutral on what the future looks like after this summer's weather events?
Simple. Look at climate data within geologic time and you come to realize that things were very different in the past and life did quite well during those time periods. A storm, heatwave, cold snap is a mere blip in global history and things will be just fine now too.
you dont. which is why you were told stories about this summer. give up now or at least surrender all earnings and liberties to those sharing these tales.
Whats so new about this summer's weather?
@@alterego157 Heat waves in the Pacific Northwest that had temperatures comparable to death valley, rainstorms in both China and Europe causing unprecedented, deadly flooding, and so on. We're getting a lot of weather events we've never seen in all of recorded history, and all of them causing significant damage. There's also the snow events in Brazil where they never get snow, and last year we had the catastrophic flooding in the midwest. What's really frightening about it is this kind of shit was expected with climate change, but not for a few more decades down the road. Hence my question.
@@sunsparkda All combined on entire planet a few hundred people died. Now let me bring you back to the reality. Around 1.3 million people die in car accidents every year.
I thought about this idea many times before and may even make it a second career as a sea property developer :)
Go for it. Start developing it as I am with mine here.
Floating countries would be way better, every island has it's own law and can grow or shrink according to the number of people who agree with them.
Libertarians would like that.
@@gryph01 oh no, here come the politics
Survival isn't a partisan thing, so please don't make it one.
@@neotozo3789 Not trying to create politics. Just stating a fact that they would like that.
@@gryph01 ah. My bad
@@neotozo3789 LOL. That's ok. I'm Canadian and politically, I'm independent.
Using a paving of the hexagonal aquatic plan makes it possible to create a very modular and scalable floating village ! I would love to work on this topic