Slashdot Mirror


China Plans To Build A Deep-Sea 'Space Station' In South China Sea (huffingtonpost.co.uk)

China is ramping up its space efforts, it appears. A Chinese company named KuangChi Science plans to launch balloons from Hangzhou, in eastern China. HuffingtonPost reports: China is stepping up efforts to build a deep-sea underwater 'space station' in the South China Sea. If the plans go ahead, the station would be located 3000 metres below the surface, inhabited by humans, and would be used to hunt for minerals. There are also concerns that it would be used for military purposes in territories that are hotly contested between China and other nations, including the Philippines, Vietnam and Japan. The news comes from a Science Ministry presentation that revealed China's current five-year economic plan (till 2020). Despite no further details or blueprints being made public, the presentation ranked this project as second in a list of 100 science and technology priorities according to Bloomberg.

73 comments

  1. sealab 2020 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    sealab 2020

    1. Re:sealab 2020 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kung Pow Lab.

    2. Re:sealab 2020 by sycodon · · Score: 1

      Sooner or later there will be a typhoon in the South China Sea and all of China's shiny new islands will be washed away.

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    3. Re:sealab 2020 by ffkom · · Score: 1

      You did notice they place a lot of concrete there to make those artificial islands durable? And that doesn't even require advanced technology.

    4. Re: sealab 2020 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SOMA.

    5. Re:sealab 2020 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You did notice they place a lot of concrete there to make those artificial islands durable? And that doesn't even require advanced technology.

      Concrete that holds together a couple of years and doesn't fall apart is "advanced technology" if you are chinese.

    6. Re:sealab 2020 by DreamMaster · · Score: 1

      I was thinking more Seaquest DSV

  2. Civilization: Beyond Earth by Dust038 · · Score: 1

    Here we go! Hope China is focusing on the right Tech Tree with the right Leader!

  3. Diffe rent engineering reqs by wierd_w · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A permanent sea habitat, and a space station, have vastly different engineering requirements.

    For starters, a sea habitat has to withstand positive pressures, and ocean current flows. (At the depth specified, a strong storm swell will shake the habitat pretty good.)

    Meanwhile a space habitat needs to be lightweight for launch cost reasons, needs to protect against radiation, and withstand negative pressures well. The sanitation and sleeping arrangements need to consider microgravity.

    About the only things the two will have in common are airlocks, power generation, and air reprocessing.

    Sealab 2020, China Edition looks like it is just another lame excuse for actions in the contested south china sea.

    1. Re:Diffe rent engineering reqs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How the hell does a "strong storm" couple through 3km of fluid in any meaningful way?

    2. Re:Diffe rent engineering reqs by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Insightful

      At the depth specified, a strong storm swell will shake the habitat pretty good.

      You need to read more carefully. It will be at a depth of 3000 meters, not 3000 millimeters.

      3000 meters is about 2 miles beneath the surface. No storm will be felt that deep.

    3. Re:Diffe rent engineering reqs by ffkom · · Score: 1

      No storm will be felt that deep.

      Certainly not felt, but one might hear some faint rumbling noises.

    4. Re:Diffe rent engineering reqs by Yvan256 · · Score: 2

      That's not the storm, that's Jim's stomach. He skipped breakfast so he's pretty hungry right now.

    5. Re:Diffe rent engineering reqs by wierd_w · · Score: 1

      I misread it as 300M, (which if you ask me, is vastly more plausible than the 3000 they cite.)

    6. Re:Diffe rent engineering reqs by ewanm89 · · Score: 1

      I guess it's time to send in SeaQuest.

    7. Re:Diffe rent engineering reqs by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      I think the power generation might be slightly different as well. Most space habitats have been solar powered, and under the sea, I just don't see solar working terribly well.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  4. Lots of skepticism over this one by jandrese · · Score: 3, Informative

    On other parts of the internet there is a lot of skepticism about China's stated goals for this facility. It smells strongly of manganese nodule harvesting and many analysts think it has a military or intelligence purpose instead. The details that have been released are so sketchy it's hard to believe that it's a legitimate scientific facility, but I guess it's not impossible.

    --

    I read the internet for the articles.
    1. Re:Lots of skepticism over this one by NotInHere · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This thing is not a legitimate scientific facility, but a legitimacy facility. Its signal is simple: we build it there, because its part of our country. We claim the natural resources of this area.

    2. Re:Lots of skepticism over this one by jandrese · · Score: 1

      If that's the case, I don't see how it is any different than just claiming you own that part of the ocean. What do you do when fishing boats start operating in the area. The presence of the "research facility" doesn't change anything unless it starts launching torpedoes or something.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    3. Re: Lots of skepticism over this one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are building an undersea Infraworld condenser. Like in Beyond Two Souls.

    4. Re:Lots of skepticism over this one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Even if it's not a legitimate scientific facility, China is planning to do something in its own backyard.
      It is no concern to the US what China does or does not in its own waters. We would go literally apeshit if some nation told us what we could and couldn't do off the coast of California, Hawaii or Florida.
      The US is always imparting moral lessons but doing the complete opposite. I think it's fair to say China has learned the game very well indeed.

    5. Re:Lots of skepticism over this one by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Informative

      What do you do when fishing boats start operating in the area?

      China can just use their gunboats to shoo them away. No other country in the area can stand up to China without American backing. Only the Philippines has a defense treaty with America, and two days ago the Philippine president called Obama a "son of a whore" so they shouldn't be expecting any help for awhile.

    6. Re:Lots of skepticism over this one by Thud457 · · Score: 3, Funny

      What do you do when fishing boats start operating in the area.

      In America, we usually send a submarine full of senators out to do an emergency breach under an encroaching fishing trawler to send a very clear message to "STAY OUT OF MY TERRITORY".

      I trust the Chinese will go about things in a more efficient manner.

      --

      the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    7. Re:Lots of skepticism over this one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It is no concern to the US what China does or does not in its own waters. We would go literally apeshit if some nation told us what we could and couldn't do off the coast of California, Hawaii or Florida.

      The catch is that the definition of "its own waters" is very controversial - most of the South China Sea is far closer to the coasts of Vietnam, Malaysia, and the Philippines than mainland China. What's been happening the last few years is more analogous to the US claiming the entire Gulf of Mexico right up to a few miles off the coast of Mexico.

    8. Re:Lots of skepticism over this one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Well, it was a Japanese vessel off the coast of Hawaii. What else were they to do?

    9. Re:Lots of skepticism over this one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So maybe you should go back to the end of WWII and let those people writing the treaties and stuff not to give that area to China.

    10. Re:Lots of skepticism over this one by jandersen · · Score: 1

      ...it's hard to believe that it's a legitimate scientific facility, but I guess it's not impossible.

      Why would there be an opposition between genuine, legitimate science, and military/commercial interests? Most science has always been in response to commercial and/or military interests, and arguably, most military action has been for what could roughly be called commercial reasons. I'd say, of course China's intentions include both commercial and military interests, same as so many America and European research projects. I also think this is really exciting in many ways; we know less about the abyss than we know about the Andromeda galaxy (maybe not factually true, but a good sound-bite, and it highlights the fact that we know embarrasingly little about what happens in our oceans). Not sure I'd like to live under two miles of water - you'd be under a lot of pressure.

    11. Re:Lots of skepticism over this one by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      He just needs to wait for Trump to get elected and then announce intentions to Make the South China Sea Great Again.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    12. Re: Lots of skepticism over this one by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      and two days ago the Philippine president called Obama a "son of a whore" so they shouldn't be expecting any help for awhile.

      Emotions and personal feelings factor into geopolitics a lot less than some have been led to believe...

    13. Re:Lots of skepticism over this one by Ogive17 · · Score: 1

      Find me a spot in the sea of China that is international recognized Chinese territory and is 3000 meter deep. They can build their lab there.

      What they will try to do is drop it in international waters, claim the lab is over 1000 years old and proof that the entire sea has always been Chinese territory.

      --
      "Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
    14. Re:Lots of skepticism over this one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He just needs to wait for Trump to get elected and then announce intentions to Make the South China Sea Great Again.

      I'm pretty sure that Trump's definition of "Make the South China Sea Great Again" would entail getting rid of all the Chinese people there.

    15. Re:Lots of skepticism over this one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah, Trump is going to Build a (Sea)Wall and make the Philippines pay for it!

    16. Re:Lots of skepticism over this one by NotInHere · · Score: 1

      And Trump called Obama "founder of isis". I'm sure they will become great friends.

      About duerte, probably he's even good for the Philippines, not permanently, but if he cleans up the country and fights crime and corruption, that's good. Maybe his means to achieve that are low by western standards, but I guess the western methods would just simply fail in a country like the Philippines.

    17. Re:Lots of skepticism over this one by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Because of course the Hague and all international agreements are nothing compared to historic claims of ownership. We should all bow down and accept that China illegally annexed that territory.

      http://www.aljazeera.com/news/...

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  5. Space? by orlanz · · Score: 1

    Even the article says it. Isn't "space" in space station referencing outside Earth? Not having "room"? Is the title what we would call an oxymoron?

    1. Re:Space? by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      There is a moron involved, but it is not of the oxy type.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  6. A 3000m deep habitat - a bold experiment... by ffkom · · Score: 1

    Political circumstances aside, if someone actually plans to build a habitat for humans 3000m deep into the ocean that would be a pretty difficult, dangerous and expensive operation, which on the other hand is much more likely to find new exiting stuff than any of the "manned space exploration tours" to rocky deserts above. Building structures that withstand such pressure reliably is much more difficult than building structures to survive a vacuum. If anything goes slightly wrong in that depth, death is also more sudden and certain than in space.

    1. Re:A 3000m deep habitat - a bold experiment... by wierd_w · · Score: 1

      Also means different long term health effects than found in space.

      Tri-mix will let you dive that deep, but is not meant for long term use. Substitution of the nitrogen with inert gasses like helium or argon are untested for long term use.

      Unless this habitat is designed to not only NOT crush like a ball of aluminum foil, but to also have sealevel cabin pressures, the health implications are poignant.

      What, is China planning on colonizing Europe or something?

    2. Re:A 3000m deep habitat - a bold experiment... by wierd_w · · Score: 1

      Europa you stupid hunk of glass. God I wish I could turn this auto correcting bullshit off!

    3. Re: A 3000m deep habitat - a bold experiment... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Exactly, as a scuba diver I always found it fascinating that regular sea level air is lethal (oxygen toxicity), if you manage to get that deep without nitrogen narcosis kicking in first. Hence the more fancy air mixtures. But as you point out those have many problems too. You'd almost have no choice but to keep the cabin within a few atmospheres of sea level and build it to withstand enormous pressure. In space we pop, under water we get crushed. Scientifically I'd love to see them try it. But as a Murican, I say stop trying to claim the South China Sea.

    4. Re:A 3000m deep habitat - a bold experiment... by ffkom · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There is no gas humans can breath and survive on at 30 MPa pressure. Hydrox was barely survived (in COMEX experiments) at 7 MPa pressure. No, a deep-ocean habitat at 3000m would certainly contain ordinary "1 bar air", and need to have very very strong casing and very very dependable sealing.

    5. Re:A 3000m deep habitat - a bold experiment... by hackwrench · · Score: 1

      Why? Which OS are you using? I thought the Google keyboard could turn off autocorrection.

    6. Re:A 3000m deep habitat - a bold experiment... by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

      Death is also more sudden and certain because I've never heard of space sharks.

    7. Re:A 3000m deep habitat - a bold experiment... by ffkom · · Score: 1

      Then you obviously missed https://www.youtube.com/watch?... - which is not even much less credible than the usual press coverage on "blood thirsty sharks hunting men". But jokes aside, creatures are posing the very least risk to you, down there.

    8. Re:A 3000m deep habitat - a bold experiment... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, a deep-ocean habitat at 3000m would certainly contain ordinary "1 bar air", and need to have very very strong casing and very very dependable sealing.

      From a military standpoint, this is completely useless. The habitat has to withstand 4,325 pounds per square inch of pressure at a depth of 9,843 feet (or 3000 meters) and its location is fixed which means that it's easy both to detect and target. Imagine if you will the effect of several large depth charges dropped on the habitat and exploding in close proximity to its walls or dome or whatever. It would crack like an eggshell struck with a sledge hammer. What military advantage does a base like this offer? You have to fire weapons through 3000 meters of water to reach anything on the surface or near it and whatever you launch has to withstand that crushing 4,000+ PSI pressure on the way up. Meanwhile, the station would have to be resupplied from the surface or by submarine, again easily tracked, with every consumable including food, fuel and air. An undersea base like this has basically zero military value due to it's extremely high vulnerability and inability to offer any significant advantages over the many alternatives.

    9. Re: A 3000m deep habitat - a bold experiment... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good post. The only thing I would add is you don't have to be Murican to have concerns. In fact I would add to that list essentially all countries that aren't China.

      The Chinese can do this without raising the whole territorial issue of the South China Sea. The question is, will they separate the two matters, combine them, or just leave it ambiguous?

  7. Re:sealab 2021 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bizzaro!

  8. Easily handled and no one's the wiser by kheldan · · Score: 1

    There are also concerns that it would be used for military purposes

    Yeah well it's not going to be mobile like a submarine, and we all know that the seabed isn't any less subject to earthquakes and other disturbances, so wouldn't it just be a damned shame if some totally random geological event completely destroyed their undersea base, what a terrible tragedy!

    --
    Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
    1. Re:Easily handled and no one's the wiser by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, it would be a terrible tragedy. As it would be for ANY loss of life.
      Or are you just another " 'merican" that places no value on any human life outside your own borders ?
      It is way past time that man started some habitation of ocean spaces.
      Just as with the space program, their are MANY new technologies that could see the light of day BECAUSE of efforts like this.
      Despite arrogant US attitudes.

    2. Re:Easily handled and no one's the wiser by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Chinese government shill, please leave. Your Chinese masters don't give a flying fuck about human life, all they care about is maintaining and expanding their power and territory. If they gave a flying fuck about human life, they wouldn't treat their own citizens like so much dog shit like they do every single day. They'd honor human rights that pretty much any first-world country honors as a matter of course. They'd police their own members, so that government officials aren't corrupt and do shit like put vocal citizens in mental institutions because they had the almighty gall to speak up about crime and demand justice. They'd stop disenfranchsing their own citizens, throwing them off their own ancestral lands and leaving them with nowhere to live and nothing to live on, just for 'public works' projects. Most of all they'd stop military expansionism and honor other countrys' territories instead of constantly pushing, in a 'cold war' of empire-building. Your Chinese communist masters are WRONG and BAD and NEED TO BE STOPPED because all they want to do is enslave the rest of the planet, and treat human lives like they don't matter so long as they have power.

      So fuck off, China shill. There is no place in the world for pieces of crap like you, that support and defend a government that fundamentally devalues human life and basic human rights. We may not be perfect here in the U.S. and other Western countries, but at least we aren't living in an authoritarian totalitarian hell that doesn't even respect, let alone represent, it's citizens. Oh and by the way we'll fight Chinese expansionism at every turn because we respect the sovereign rights of our ally countries and will help DEFEND them against your Chinese masters' war of conquest. So go fuck yourself.

    3. Re:Easily handled and no one's the wiser by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See how the US "respected" the sovereign rights of Libya.

  9. Re:China. territory and rights by hackwrench · · Score: 1

    Too bad China isn't keen on building relations. It could accomplish most of its goals more effectively if it could have profit sharing with other governments or something. As much noise as Americans make about jobs lost to China would blue collar workers shed a tear if their corporate overlords were Chinese rather than American? Come on, China get with the program. Be a beacon of light or something, because the way you're going, whatever your endgame is, it's going to be costly.

  10. Such "harvesting" would be extremely expensive by ffkom · · Score: 1

    Various nations have considered harvesting the deep sea floor for minerals, but so far the costs outweigh the value of the material by far. Also, if this was actually meant for commercial harvesting, they would certainly not bother the difficulties to bring humans there, and to keep them alive.

  11. My guess.... by argStyopa · · Score: 1

    ...would be that it would fulfill (in China's eyes) the 'inhabited' clause of the law of the sea, thus entitling them to mineral rights.

    Or, they simply say that they're conducting 'research' and exploit local minerals/drilling anyway.

    I doubt it's a military base, it wouldn't take much at all to make who ever is inside an instant casualty in the event of conflict. A 'port' for military operations hopefully unobserved by US satellites and/or a nexus for setting up a substantial undersea surveillance network? Either one is likely.

    --
    -Styopa
    1. Re:My guess.... by guruevi · · Score: 2

      Not sure if mining minerals that deep is in any way economic, China has way easier access to minerals with full disregard about the ecological consequences. Just like mining asteroids, the deep sea is too expensive to access for the foreseeable future.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
  12. See, there are jobs for humans after all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    to all thhose people who think we'll all be out of work in the near future because there are no more jobs left. You too can train to drive a bucket excavator two miles below the surface of the earth.

  13. Its all peaceful, till the ships chase you off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Its all peaceful, till the Chinese coast guard comes 1000 miles from the Chinese coast, and tells you (in the middle of the ocean) that China has claimed all of the international waterway. Basically everything south, east, and west of the Chinese coast for 10,000 miles. They also want the beaches of other countries (since Chinese water is lapping on the beach). And its just a Chinese coast guard ship that's bumping into you (they carefully keep the large guns hidden till they realize that you aren't going to go away, then they try to sink you). Its been international ocean for thousands of years, but now China can afford a navy and wants to grab everything. So this 'undersea station' is just exploratory, except for the military offiicers on it, the reporting back to PLA/navy headquarters, the sensors, mines, guns, torpedoes and logos that say PLA/navy. Apart from that, its all civilian and peaceful.

    1. Re:Its all peaceful, till the ships chase you off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Chinese opinions on the Hague judgement are not something you would expect from an adult to have. Perhaps the countries involved could just divide the resources separately by type while sharing the guard duty to ensure the flow of commerce, instead of going eventually to war over total domination and disrupting international trade in the process.

    2. Re:Its all peaceful, till the ships chase you off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So China builds a military base of sorts and will patrol the area, and will gain a better negotiating position in fishing disputes.
      The US, what country does it plan to invade or destroy next?
      In fact, Kim Jong Un's go at "diplomacy" shows how you have to deal with the US. Sometimes, when you're facing a mad rabid dog, foaming at the mouth and blind from hatred, you have to put it at bay by growling too and being ready to deal it a fatal blow.
      US announced a "pivot to Asia" like a decade ago, everyone knows it's about the south China sea. So just in case China needs to build a presence there and after asserting itself will have to threaten the US Navy, perhaps with hypersonic weapons.

    3. Re:Its all peaceful, till the ships chase you off by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Sometimes, when you're facing a mad rabid dog, foaming at the mouth and blind from hatred, you have to put it at bay by growling too and being ready to deal it a fatal blow.

      So, you are suggesting that the US should growl at NK instead if the current policy of ignoring the childish idiot?

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  14. A distraction by SeattleLawGuy · · Score: 1

    On other parts of the internet there is a lot of skepticism about China's stated goals for this facility. It smells strongly of manganese nodule harvesting and many analysts think it has a military or intelligence purpose instead. The details that have been released are so sketchy it's hard to believe that it's a legitimate scientific facility, but I guess it's not impossible.

    It smells strongly of several things--Intelligence use (e.g. an undersea SOSUS-type hub), military use (becoming masters of the deep sea has massive military implications, especially in an age when satellites can see ships), anti-extinction use (create a self-contained environment in the ocean and you have a facility very well-isolated from the rest of the world), continuity-of-government use, and general distraction (nationalist militaristic projects are great at distracting your population and adversaries from whatever you are actually doing that is more important to you).

    --
    Real lawyers write in C++
  15. A bunch of cynics... by werepants · · Score: 1

    Am I the only one to think this sounds like a badass way to trial various technologies for space colonization? A substantial amount of the ECLSS tech will be transferable, for starters. I get that everyone wants to be suspicious of China all the time, but they are serious about their space program, and this gives them a chance to be the first to create a continual human presence in a deep-sea habitat. Pretty cool IMO.

    1. Re:A bunch of cynics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Am I the only one to think ...

      No, I'm sure many other clueless, uneducated and overenthuthiastic people are having the same thoughts right now.

  16. Re:...n/t by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So the guy who said "Sealab 2020" got +1, even though the show was actually called "Sealab 2021", but I got downmodded for trying to subtly reference the whole thing with a quote from good old Capt. Murphy.

    I expect nothing less from slashdotters.

  17. It's just as important as colonizing Mars... by Inyu · · Score: 2

    The thin layer of atmosphere may prove defense-less against threats like Gamma Ray Burts, and colonizing Mars won't save us from them. Learning to live under sea, and building cities deep underwater for reducing the likelihood of our extinction from some types of very low probability catastrophic events is just as important colonizing Mars.

  18. I know where by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think they're going to build it in the remains of a sunken WWII battleship.

  19. Re:...n/t by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

    Sealab 2020 is the old shit one that 2021 was based on.

    --
    Wanna buy a shirt?
    https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
  20. That's NOT a space station, China! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's NOT a space station, China!

  21. I watched this movie by RobTowne · · Score: 1

    Deep Blue Sea....

  22. innovation by micahraleigh · · Score: 1

    China knows how to efficiently sink people's earnings to the bottom of the ocean.

  23. A secret research facility by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    Otherwise known as a black lab. Let's see if this one can fetch.