| just a short reality check …
Revisiting some questionable paradigms floated out on forums …
| seasteading is about government | seasteading is impractical | using an old cruise ship is the way to go | building on land is vastly cheaper | create a successful long-term seaworthy platform/seacraft is extremly difficult | it is all about project x or project y and nothing else | there is only one right design for doing it | there is only one right place to do it | some remote island is the best way | it needs to be out of the 12 mile zone | seasteading will be “kicked off” in a specific project in the near future |
› many base paradigms postulated , are completly wrong…
› ocean colonization is up and running already…
› it is not feasible on base of old ships…and
› it is NOT about politics…
The feasible and proven business model is:
create-real-estate-where-there-was-none
The emerging technology that enables it is:
advanced cement composite technology
The reason why it did not happen when Jules Verne postulated it first 1895 inspired by a voyage on Isambard Brunel’s Great Eastern - the mother of all modern steel ships - is the
ocean colonization technology bottleneck
which was only solved recently
This was celebrated when Katie Melua held a concert 303 m below the watersurface in a 1.2 million ton floating city in the North Sea 80 kilometers offshore from Bergen in front of 200 of its inhabitants.
The year was 2006 so a while back already…it was the 10th anniversary of the floating city…which is a bit short of being 17 years permanently at sea by now…
Its service life expectancy is 70 years
Its deterioriation curve might be similar to the roman concrete structures in cesarea harbor ( 2000 years ) exceeding VENICE “the floating city” - which lasted 1500 years before sinking - by far…but that is a “ongoing experiment” and only future generations will see the outcome…