Buy the Pitcairn Islands From British? Probably Cheaper. Safer


(Tom Schaefer) #21

No, the Pitcairn Islands do not have any active volcanos. Anyway, that would be an opportunity for geothermal. I wonder if the issue of fresh water, either rain catchment or desalinization has been thought through - another reason to have a few extra mega watts around.


(Tom Schaefer) #22

JL_Frusha, Did you read the Toshiba page on S4?


(Tom Schaefer) #23

Blank_Name: So you want to choose from any number of “ocracy”? Do tell what would form of government suits your taste and watch those seeking power over others morph it into oligarchy over time.


#24

Don’t need to. I studied nuclear reactors before telling the US Navy I didn’t want to be a Nuclear Operations Officer on a Nuclear Submarine, as well as studying NBC in the Army. I KNOW what RADIATION is, and I KNOW what shielding is. That thick shell they show? 1st level of shielding. What they DO NOT show are the subsequent layers of safety shielding, in case the primary shielding fails.


(George Spencer) #25

Perhaps we should ask if a nuclear reactor is necessary?

Considering the large amounts of sun/wind/wave/etc i would hope it would be along time before we would need anything like the energy capability of a nuclear power plant.

Plus there is the logistical end of things:

  • the start up and day to day maintenance cost of a small nuke compared to some solar panels and wind farm that you could build incrementally
  • convincing the specialized man power (nuclear engineers vs some electricians) to move to our sea stead
  • nuclear waste disposal
  • convincing the IAEA to let us have it in the first place

#26

Off topic from this thread’s new nuclear theme, but doesn’t buying island to live on basically defeat the entire point of living in a floating community? Just saying…

And if you will argue that we can use it as a base for construction, picking somewhere remote without much in the way of resources or construction facilities is a pretty stupid idea for a construction base.

The one thing I could see it purchasing it so that you can settle in it’s EEZ area as your own section of sea.


(Blank Name) #27

I think the island of Pitcairn is. The others arent. (By active i mean its erupted in the last 10,000 yrs)


(George Spencer) #28

Excellent point.

Is it better to have a ‘seastead’ that doesn’t sink but is isolated, or to anchored just offshore of LA or Hong Kong and move if it is needed? I’m leaning towards the floating option.


#29

Personal choices differ across the spectrum. My own pref. is to build for my wife and I, moor in the GoMex several miles offshore, with relatively easy access to shore-based supply, medical care, etc.

I still don’t see nuclear energy as a viable ‘option’ for power. Too much that can go wrong, in too many ways, not to mention extra space and expence involved.


(George Spencer) #30

Yes. And even if nothing ever goes wrong, you still have an expensive disposal problem at the end of the reactors life.

I doubt the residents would tolerate either dumping at sea or burring on shore.


#31

wow, yeah I just came across that Pitcairn was giving away free land [1].

But now that you say that seems it would be better to let those pedophiles die off before moving there.
Also apparently you have to have at least 30 thousand dollars to move there, but it’s recommended to have at least 200 thousand. Also people that move there don’t get benefits, and can get kicked off the island after they build their house and invest their money. Which could easily explain why nobody is going for it.

Honestly I’m thinking the best approach may be to have a mobile submarine robot factory, and affix it to various uninhabited islands. Pitcairin island may be a viable option also.

There is 0 need of a nuclear power plant, because it seems there is a hydrothermal vent right there
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0016703794902283

Can simply put a turbine and-or stirling engines on the black smoker, and you’ll be pumping the megawatts.
Then release the mining bots to harvest all that precious booty, er metalliferous sediments https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrothermal_vent#/media/File:Deep_sea_vent_chemistry_diagram.jpg

Can even get Helium3 folks! for nuclear fusion and it’s $2k per litre!

But yeah, that stuff is later. first need to make the robot submarine factories.

[1]


#32

Pitcairn doesn’t have a harbor or nice beaches and is a rugged inhospitable piece of land.

Let me repeat, it doesn’t have a harbor, or airstrip, or undersea cable internet connection. In short it is cut off from the world and trade and quickly becoming uninhabited. There is an important lesson here for SeaSteaders, it needs a compelling economic reason or it won’t happen.

The secret to success is to copy successful similar examples, like Hong Kong, Singapore, the birth of nations and generally prosperous places.

Capitalism, the free exchange of goods, ideas and services, is the solution.


#33

Go for it. You’ll find out pretty fast how good of a solution capitalism is 1500 nm offshore.


#34

I do it all the time. How do you think I get to live on a sailboat? Come to think of it between lowering my expenses and increasing my income living on a boat has worked out very well.

Capitalism is the engine that powers everything in our modern world. A SeaStead that increases everyones wealth will be a success, while one that is just an expense will never be built.

What is fun is that there are literally dozens of ways that living at sea can be extremely profitable and rewarding. Am I the only one who knows why many of the wealthiest people in the world own mega yachts? Hint, it isn’t because they like to spend money.


(.) #35

Technology will supersede politics.


#36

It already did a while ago, at least for people who are paying attention.


(.) #37

I am glad you are paying attention. Good for you.


(Chad Elwartowski) #38

I think technology gives little boosts in freedom throughout history until it is adopted and corrupted by governments (or just outlawed). Fortunately governments are slow to adapt. But it tends to leave the early adopters (and those rich enough to afford the early technology) to experience more freedom than the rest of the population.


#39

Everyone is as free as they want to be, the thing is freedom in isolation, is more of a punishment than anything else, it is called ostracism. An individual in isolation is less than nothing, our value and happiness is determined by our relationships.

Capitalism, is the free EXCHANGE of ideas, goods and services. It takes a group or community to work. When it does work it is extremely powerful.


(Tom Schaefer) #40

“…the thing is freedom in isolation, is more of a punishment than anything else, it is called ostracism.” Maybe for some, not for me and mine. With my family (goddess wife and 4 awesome kids), and a handful of friends, a few utilities, and a restrained Government, I’d be happy to be “ostracized” to another planet or even system. My ancestral people lived on isolated spits and islands of northwest Europe. That part of the world is falling to savages. I’d be happy in the middle of the Pacific. I’m sure many lovers of power, dependency, and control would gladly write my name on a shard of pottery to be rid of my desire for freedom.

I will continue to watch the Picairn situation, and if an angel organizer or compatible group with a feasible critical mass starts organizing, I’d love to sign up.