Slashdot Mirror


The UN Wants To Build Floating Cities To Save Us From Climate Change (wired.com)

dmoberhaus writes: On Wednesday, the United Nations convened its first ever round table on floating cities. WIRED was in attendance to hear about one specific proposal -- Oceanix City -- the creation of a co-founder of Blue Frontiers, the for-profit wing of the Thiel-backed Seasteading Institute. This project, he says, is less about libertarianism and more about survival. It sounds like paradise, but many technological, economic, and political hurdles will have to be overcome before it's a reality. "Oceanix City was designed by the renowned Danish architect Bjarke Ingels, along with dozens of experts from institutions like the UN and MIT," Wired reports. "According to Ingels, who lives on a houseboat himself, residents of the floating city will use 100 percent renewable energy, eat only plant-based food, produce zero waste, and provide housing affordable to all, not just the rich."

"At the core of Oceanix City is a 4.5-acre hexagonal floating platform that is meant to host up to 300 people," the report adds. "These platforms are modular, meaning they can be linked to form larger communities as they tessellate across the surface of the ocean. Each platform will be anchored to the ocean floor using biorock, a material that is harder than concrete and can be grown using minerals found in the ocean, which could make the anchor more secure over time. These anchors might also serve as the seeds of artificial reefs to rejuvenate aquatic ecosystems around the floating city." The community's needs and city's location will determine the design of each platform. For example, some could act as barriers to limit the impact of waves; while others could be dedicated to agriculture. Wired goes on to discuss the political and technological challenges associated with these floating cities.

"The plan for the first Oceanix City is to moor it about a mile off the coast of a major city," reports Wired. "If one of these ocean-top communities were to get parked near New York City, for example, the floating community could be treated as a new borough, or a separate city under the jurisdiction of the state..."

5 of 236 comments (clear)

  1. What a nasty spin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    No, the title is a plain, outright lie. The UN does not want this. Some researchers have explored the idea. Thatâ(TM)s it.

    It makes you wander what possible motive would you need to have to fake the title like this. Like, for example, to fuel hatred of the âoeotherâ, the conspiracy theory of UN wanting to be world government and so on. Crackpot is too good a word.

  2. Please learm what "^H" means! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    It means Ctrl-H, which on terminals is "go back one letter". Aka Backspace.

    And in your case, Ctrl-W would have been better: " go back one word". Aka Ctrl-Backspace on most modern input systems.

    Please als note that the first one does not include any whitespace magic. "nope ^H^H^H^H yeah" == "n yeah"!

  3. Re:300 people? They already exist. by Doke · · Score: 4, Informative

    At least ocean cruise liners move around to give the paying guests some change of scenery. Their income is from selling scenic trips to people on vacation. These platforms would have nothing to sell, and no economic reason for anyone to visit.

  4. Flying pigs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    If we can't use 100 percent renewable energy, eat only plant-based food, produce zero waste, and provide housing affordable to all on land, WTF makes them think they will be able to do that in the sea?

  5. Re:Stop make children like rabbits by doom · · Score: 3, Informative

    I don't say how, I don't know how, but I'm pretty sure it's the best one.

    I have the answer, but I just don't know what it is.

    It's not at all clear that a massive die-back would actually solve any problems to speak of, because human beings aren't just mouths to feed, they're hands and brains--

    If you're thinking "boy we could use less resources if only we kill those poors", maybe a more effective solution would be to kill the people using the most resources, which are not the poor people...

    The Best Solution most of us have is to let the entire world turn into the "first world" (already well underway), let rising living standards and personal choice restrain birthrates (pretty much "just happens"), then we figure out how to generate a bunch of clean energy-- which we already know how to do, we just need to convince the anti-nuclear activists that they're the creationists of the left, and somehow pry the world's economy out of the grip of the fossil fuel industry--

    And there we hit another wall of practical knowledge. I'll get back to you.