Whilst reading the New York to London in 30 min. Thread I got to wondering about oceanic cities. Seems not wholly impossible, actually quite probable some day. I wonder how far we are.
I seem to remember a Popular Mechanics article a while back about a home that was circular built in the middle of a floating ring. Picture a sphere with a floating center-ring, where 50 percent is under water and the other 50 percent is above. Large maybe 60 feet in diameter, completely impossible to flip, with geo-synchonous rooms, staying level even in the most turbulant water. I thought the idea was pretty cool. I’d love to design a smaller version.
The possibilities are infinate. What are some short comings, what are some pros? How far off could the first mid-oceanic “colony” be? Or even omit colony and put city/town?
Well, one thing I can think of off the bat is barnacles. We still don’t have a way to keep those damn things from sticking to whatever we put in the water for any length of time. Until we figure that out, it’ll be hard to have floating cities.
There are several proposals for ship-based cities, which would be constantly sailing. Most of these proposals are in the “possible, but extremely difficult” range, and are having major problems with funding. The least ambitious similar project, the tackily-named The World Of ResidenSea, has been completed and is currently sailing, but has yet to sell enough apartments or rent out enough hotel suites to break even.
Maybe the next time we have a bubble-boom economy…
I was thinking more along the lines of a stationary, or semi-stationary structure or structures. Similar to drilling plateforms but on a musch larger scale. Some large drilling plateforms are half full of water already.
What about the weather, though? I’m no meterologist, but something tells me having a oceanic city would be far more susceptible to things like hurricanes, storms, etc.
What about a domed underwater city, powered by local geothermal vents? It could use the energy from the vents to produce oxygen and fresh water, like a nuclear submarine does.
Incubus- Why not just use a nuclear reactor? I mean if your willing to risk catastrophic dome failure what’s a little reactor mishap?
The most interesting idea I have heard is using electroaccretion to build artificial islands out of seacrete. Kind of neat I think, just grow your island or structure like a seashell.
The main question in all this is why would we need this? Other than for scientific study, many humans wouldn’t find that much enjoyment from living under water or on top of water (and being stationary). I’m sure it could be done (taken to an extreme the houses would be fully submergible to protect it from bad weather).
A stationary submarine is pretty much what we’re thinking about here. Bigger of course, but the only thing that stops a sub from staying underwater for years is food. If we devoted huge resources for hydroponic farms and energy from nuclear reactors (and one hell of a reason) I’m sure we could do it with available technology.
We don’t have these things for the same reason we don’t have cities on the Moon.
They aren’t Economically Viable.
Cities don’t exist in a vacuum. They need (fresh) water, power, supplies, food and most importantly, JOBS. If there is insufficient economic need and support, then the community cannot exist.
These big floating city deals, they’re simply expensive mobile vacation homes for the retired. They aren’t “real” towns/cities/settlements.
As far as cities on the Ocean Floor (or the surface of the Moon), what is there that we would have need of and could economically be exploited on a scale sufficient to support the city and the development thereof? Sorry, but mining just isn’t viable on a technological capability vs. Economics level to justify the huge initial startup costs. Nor are “fishing” or other Oceanic Exploitation scenarios.