Cheap and realistic approach?


(Marc) #1

Some ideas/plans published here are quite amazing.

But the question is how to finance development, building and maintenance of such a project from zero? From an investors point of view seasteading seemed to be a very risky investment.

Why shouldn´t seasteading projects use common technology which is already aviable and proven?

I thought about out of use freighters or offshore platforms. They can be bought for few money. If such a project fails the ship could be reused as artificial rif or simple recycled.

I guess it is not the state of the art solution many people have in mind. But a lot of open questions could be tested with such a plattform e.g. business ideas (like datacenters, …), energy support, food support, … This experiences could be used to limit future risks for “real and big” projects.

It could be the evolutional way into seasteading. What do you think?


Real Estate Paradigm Shift | oceanic business alliance | oceanic real estate | floating real estate |
(Larry G) #2

Agreed. I suggest further reading in the forum. With all respect, you are not by any means bringing up a new point. You’ll find two major philosophies:

On the one hand, are fantastical multi-million dollar “real estate development” schemes modeled after high end resorts, super-dense urban business districts, etc. Much hand-waving is done to sweep the “irrelevant” details of inputs and outputs (food, fuel, waste) behind a curtain (“nothing to see here” philosophy.) There are a couple of real life implementations which make people think this is feasible- like the Palm Islands in Dubai.

However, none of the real life solutions are actually seasteads. They mostly don’t float, (with the exception of The World, and we are often told that taking up permanent residence aboard a traditional vessel doesn’t “really count” as seasteading by the folks in this mega-complex philosophical camp) none of them are designed to be mobile (in terms of geographical arbitrage and jurisdictional choice), they have ZERO amount of political autonomy, they are owned by nation states or multinational conglomerates, do not have any permanent residents with a political or ownership stake in the administration of the platform, and are out of reach for common income levels.

This means (IMO) they are NOT a gateway to ocean colonization on any kind of mass scale. They are essentially tourist curiosities. Notice that career opportunities aboard “The World” do not include an offer to become a resident, and are described as “beyond the expectations of even the highest luxury hospitality standard” and even the bartender requires “Minimum of 3 years experience as a Bartender on an ultra luxury cruise ship, private club, boutique hotel, ultra luxury hotel or resort.” The Residents can’t be bothered by socializing with the underclass, apparently.

On the other hand, there are those of us who take the “homestead” root of seasteading seriously, and look at developing farm-scale to village-scale options for individual families and persons permanently living on the ocean, with all the details of living on the ocean full time, like jobs, wastewater systems, food production, and the myriad services expected to keep people healthy and happy, including a stakeholder role in their own political and administrative needs.

https://discuss.seasteading.org/t/experimental-small-hexagonal-platform/?source_topic_id=2590

#3

By and large, it seems to me that those wanting floating cities to live in need to be wealthy. Those of us taking the homestead-at-sea approach are more practical.

Consider: NONE of the city concepts provide for significant food production, waste treatment, or energy production. They are wholly dependent on land-based supply. Meanwhile, the homestead parses approaches tend to attempt to tackle those issues, directly, as well as tackling commercial production, in order to cover more bases.

Problem is there is nowhere anyone can simply go, live, build and float-out. TSI could have done that, several times, especially considering the donations of Peter Thiel.

The closest thing to a library for seasteading is the forum and archived old forum. There is NO access to such things as marine/naval architects, engineers, or wave tanks.

Wealthy donors have supported art and book campaigns, rather than research and development.


(Larry G) #4

At best, they wave their hands and say “aquaculture” in a dismissive tone.


(Jake Rosoman) #5

In NZ farm land sells for about 2NZD/m^2, commercial land 100NZD/m^2, and residential land 200NZD/m^2. I think most countries will have similar numbers. So it’s obviously going to be easier to compete with residential land than farm land.


#6

Hi calisto,

I 100% agreed and still agree with the idea of a Seasteading Lab, which was proposed about, hmmmm…6-7 years ago. But at the time, the seasteading cool aid du jour was big, big and in the billions. The Lab never happened. [quote=“thebastidge, post:2, topic:2590”]
On the other hand, there are those of us who take the “homestead” root of seasteading seriously, and look at developing farm-scale to village-scale options for individual families and persons permanently living on the ocean, with all the details of living on the ocean full time, like jobs, wastewater systems, food production, and the myriad services expected to keep people healthy and happy, including a stakeholder role in their own political and administrative needs.
[/quote]

A dying breed, Larry. Almost extinct.


(.) #7

I have always wondered about this wave tank.
I think, I can just build a model and take it to the beach.
Today was high surf.


#8

Wave tanks are the best controlled, repeatable simulation of expected conditions for model testing. True, a day at the beach can show some aspects of design stability, or even show design failures, however, being able to monitor the motions and duplicate the results can help more.


(Marc) #9

First of all thanks for all your responses!

Furthermore, I must appologize for (re-)opening a thread with an old topic. But all the input gives me the impression, there is still a lot to discuss.

I agree with you. I was reading this forum/website from time to time over the last years and I was fascinated by the idea of an independent and self-substaining sea colony. On the other hand I am a very realistic person and I know such an idea is an “ideal” difficult to reach (out of the box). We should not underestimate the necessary technological, political, legal challanges.

Moreover I have an additional problem with calling the “multi-million dollar” bender pics “seasteading”. Such projects are a risky business. In my view they have a good chance to fail. If they fail they will burn a lot of money and scare future investors. This could damage the idea of seasteading for decades.

Please don´t get me wrong - everybody should invest his ressources where he/she wants. But is it necessary to call that seasteading?

Thank you for this input. A “lab” is exactly pointing in the right direction. I compare seasteading with “conquest of space”. Start with a Sputnik not with an ISS. In addition I would like to know if there was ever some kind of exchange of ideas with other “micronations”? Maybe not all information must be gathered from zero.

Last but not least I am sure, the first projects will fail. That isn´t negativ - they can help to gain experience. There is no need to put all ones eggs into one (million dollar) basket.

Try to change my pink avatar now

:grinning:


(Mariusz) #10

That’s a main reason why few months ago I proposed “Seasteading Research Station”. Work on that is still ongoing although much slower than I hoped.

See:


(Bob LLewellyn) #11

[quote=“Octavian, post:6, topic:2590”]
and the myriad services expected to keep people healthy and happy, including a stakeholder role in their own political and administrative needs.

A dying breed, Larry. Almost extinct.[/quote]

Guys this describes Marinea almost perfectly, what am I missing here?


(Mariusz) #12

But if we’re ever going to colonize the oceans it will be a mix of both of these approaches.

First option - Some ‘rich dude’ builds a sizable ocean based city/hotel and after a while other companies and small seasteaders join him, slowly growing the ‘city’.

Second option - Some ‘poor dude’ builds a small seastead and after a while some other ‘poor dudes’ join him . When there is enough “market” companies will build around them and after a while we have a city.

Now, both options have their own problems.
In the first one, what if the company owning the hotel does not want some weird looking barges around them. After all a luxury hotel will not be able to sell room with a view if the view is s sea-slums.

In the second scenario, it will take long time to get enough people to build their own seasteads and join the pioneer. It’s possible that in this scenario we would never be able to reach a point where more people would be joining than leaving, and the village would never grow beyond 3-5 seasteads.

That’s why I propose a third option. Seasteading/Ocean Research Station (SRS)
The SRS could be sponsored by donation from all of the parties interested in ocean colonization (poor dudes, rich dudes, governments) . It would act as a real laboratory that tests many of the concepts proposed here, and test and relevant materials and technologies. It would also act as a safety net for all of these seasteaders that would want to try living on the ocean, but did not have enough resources to do it alone. It could start as simple ship anchored near the shore, with a small land-based support base. If the funding was stable, regular seasteaders would have a place
to gather around, and companies could establish their presence either to serve the lab and seasteaders, or build their own labs. After a while the lab could finance itself by licensing any technology it develops.

Can anyone tell me what’s wrong with that plan?


(Larry G) #13

This part:

Ok, so that’s a bit overly snarky, but we’re having fun here with the conversation, right?

Go back to the second option. Poor dude is not right. I’m looking at varieties of incomes, everything below “so rich you don’t bother to budget personal stuff at all.” Basically middle class. I think seasteading in a safe manner (other than Zombie Boaters) is probably beyond the actual poor until there is a large community that extends social safety nets and systemic ‘goverment’ services.

Research funding is difficult to get, takes lots of perseverance, re-application usually yearly, and is anything but “stable”.

Now, I have looked at something very similar to your idea in detail. Keeping Cay Sal in mind for consistency, there are a number of Bahamas Foundations that are involved in public-private partnerships with the Bahamian government for ecological stewardship of natural resources, including fisheries. Part of that role is gathering data and publishing findings.I don’t think you would find it easy to find enough money to support the effort out of pure research, but providing manpower for improving and protecting natural resources in place of government manpower and equipment might very well find some funding.


(Mariusz) #14

To be qualified as “poor dude” in my option you would need to be rich enough to afford a boat or a seastead, but not rich enough to build your own city :slight_smile:

That’s why it would need to be supported, at least at the beginning, by wannabe seasteaders, corporations and organizations interested in ocean colonization.


(Bob LLewellyn) #15

[quote=“6d6b73, post:12, topic:2590”]
It’s possible that in this scenario we would never be able to reach a point where more people would be joining than leaving[/quote]

Well, yes possible, but not very probable. Basic problem, Earth is past its optimal point of population. Earth can easily handle 4 billion, adequately care for 5 to 6 billion and poorly care for 7 billion people. We hit 7 Billion people back in 2012. Unless there is a war that kills off millions, by 2050 we will be in the 10+ billion range. Where are those 40% more people going to live? Cities are stacking people on top of each other as much as 100 floors high. Were will we get food and clothing for 40% more people? Mars and the moon is out, what’s left? Once this ocean colonization door is open, stand back because there will be a mad rush for ocean related jobs and general migration. Don’t worry about more people leaving than coming to, nature will take care of that.


#16

Nothing wrong at all. In fact, that should have been the first thing the “seasteading movement” should have done,…eons ago.

I am all for it and I was (and still am) willing to put money into it. I think a “fractional ownership” will work nice. Got to be tropical latitudes.

BUT, just try to organize such a thing… see how many taker you’ll have,…


(.) #17

The problem is the tropical attitudes.


(Mariusz) #18

I admit it’s not going to be easy, but I’m sure it will be fun… The least I can do is try:)


(George Hawirko) #19

Using proven technology is often very often wrong. Take, for instance, Wood Framed Construction, every structure is a dogs breakfast of problems, from bad workmanship to mold and rot. No one ever complains, they just purchase as-is and complain and pay for useless maintenance, because it will never end. You really don’t want this “Proven” shit out at sea.


(.) #20

Wood Framed Construction: no.
Sounds like you had a bad experience.

Termites love wood. It is interesting to see termites swarming
out of my boat. (experience)