Slashdot Mirror


China Plans To Mine the Yellow Sea Floor

eldavojohn writes "Details are limited but state media is reporting on $75 million being put into a new research facility in Qingdao, Shandong Province that will conduct research into mining the sea floor. From the article: 'Scientists believe sea beds at a depth of 4,000 to 6,000 meters hold abundant deposits of rare metals and methane hydrate, a solidified form of natural gas bound into ice that can serve as a new energy source.' The research center's first goal is to do surveying and exploration with a new submersible named 'Jiaolong' (a mythical aquatic Chinese dragon). Hopefully these quests yield energy resources to meet growing demand for resources like liquefied coal in China."

5 of 223 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Unfortunately, this is what we do by dbIII · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Chindia

    Take that word and burn it. It escaped from the mouth of an idiot that pretended to be an economist and makes as little sense in terms of similarities of nations as "Cangintina", "Morrobabwe" or "Alaskcraine". Deserts and the tallest mountains on earth mean the two nations are about as seperate as they can get. The difference in politics between the two nations is about as different as you can get - near anarchy where nearly anything is allowed to a loosening grip on tight control.

  2. mod 0p by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    many users of BSD users of #BSD/OS. A

  3. Re:Unfortunately, this is what we do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    200 million can't sustain modern civilization unless they're all fairly close together geographically, and even then it's a stretch. A collapse of civilization is a failure mode in your plan, since the survivors are free of (or forgot, or are ignoring) the population capping plan and will restart the growth cycle.

    > Remember that every time you use the word "sustainable" you are referencing an environment where there are 200 million people on the planet living at level of around 1750 or so. Anything beyond that is "unsustainable" over a long term.

    Citations for any of those numerical assumptions? Modern civilization with modern farming using renewable energy sources and natural fertilizers should be sustainable if it's only needing to support 200m people. (This would require getting off oil, of course, but that IS possible for small numbers in ways that would be impossible for 7 billion).

  4. Re:Religious Propaganda by krapski · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    geek humour is fucking retarded