List of Current Seasteading Projects

(Wilfried Ellmer) #144


• It is about ocean colonization technology and the key player network who drives it…
• it is about the foundation of New Venice and New Atlantis…
• It is about a “fundamental real estate paradigm shift”.
• It is about a new age of enlightenment…

@tamenta - can you please follow trough with your thoughtline…and not attend the interruptions…


One relatively new term is “Speculative Architecture”… Building entire cities on speculation. China and Spain have Ghost Cities than are either nearly complete, or even complete, which are almost entirely empty. All built on speculation, but few, if any, have bought into them.

If you build it, WILL they come?

Seasteading is of that speculative nature. So far, very few bother with the necessary infrastructure. I’m working and living on a set of properties that are privately referred to as ‘the lifeboat’. The goal is to be off-grid and self-sufficient, in disaster preparedness.

If they come, what will they eat? Who will be raising that food, and where is that part of the infrastructure? Shipping everything in gets expensive, fast.

If they come, there will be a need for sanitation, including water and sewage treatment. What facilities are part of the plan, and how does it get treated? Once treated, what will be done with the wastes?

There are more issues facing these concepts than tying a new high-rise into an existing grid, then upgrading the grid.

Building on spec is one thing, but, more than locations have to be factored in.

(Theodore M. Amenta) #146

I want to respond to JL who has enthusiasm — and to Ellmer who has (possibly) wisdom — and I find Bob, Octavian, Matias, Larry G — et al. — same old - same old. I see you all have communicated for years!— I am the new kid on the block — I am stalled. I mean to say, I think I have solved all the feasibility issues — please accept this a true for the moment: — I am reminded here:

People from Crete always lie.
I know this to be true.
I am from Crete.

A small joke - but I think I know everything about this and I offer to share “open book” if you ask. But the “loss of the nail…”

I have come to conclude the sea stead proposition is not fundamentally a question of “feasibility, as I understand it” It is a concept driven by a political philosophy. Dahhh! - I agree I should have understood this earlier. I get it now.

I believe people can move on the the water. I have confirmed with Ellmer that Cartagena is a highly probable location and he has confirmed platform costs that are feasible. My funding sources (I am a consultant) is seeking the north coast of Bahrain as the first sea stead location. — One might add to the “Current Seasteading Projects.” ---- big thanks to all. Ted


@tamenta. I wish you luck.

There’s a much older saying:
Caveat Emptor

… or, as the late, great American Author, Samuel Langhorne Clemens wrote:

You pays yer mon-ey and you takes yer choice.

Good short read on it…

(.) #148

Good luck Ted! Fair winds and following seas! Again.

(.) #149

Post withdrawn by blabla…

(Matias Volco) #150

No it’s not! It’s a matter of development beyond Brunnel’s great Orient and today’s Oasis of the seas.

The elevator allowed for high rises in every ‘ideological’ system.

With that in mind QE2 is in time to be saved from the scrapyard.

(Wilfried Ellmer) #151

In the “oceanic business alliance” - project we are basicly developing the technology (in a series of pilots performed during the last 30 years) that allows to build New Venice and New Atlantis, doing what the elevator did for New York - allowing the “airspace” to be made available for human housing. The concept of settling airspace in land cities has reached its limit - the next big thing to come is settling the waterspace in front of the shoreline …

We are not looking for politics. We are not looking for a repeat of the TANKA experiment. We are not looking for ship, oilrig, or any standard application of “off the shelf marine technology” that is here today. Neither are we looking for sandbank building .

We are going for solving the technology bottleneck of ocean colonization.

And we believe that we have “just invented and successfully tested - the elevator” … it comes to a price that allows to compete comfortably with any land real estate in USD per square foot .

• It is about “making a point” and opening a path - not about “floating out something somehow”.

opening new settlement spaces for humanity

Brunel´s technology has reached its maximum potential it drives global container trade already, sandbank building has reached its potential in Singapore and Dubai, but there is “something new” on the ocean colonization horizon…that can drive the development of New Venice and New Atlantis everywhere in and on the watermantle of the planet (which counts for 99% of the planetary space reserve developable for human activity)… and it is hot in visionary developers boardroom…because it has POTENTIAL to be big in a near future.

(Larry G) #152

It’s a bit of chicken and egg problem. Personally, I don’t think it’s a matter of feasibility question. There’s a certain practicality to be demonstrated that normal people without a great deal of maritime training and experience, can move to oceanic living on a permanent or long term basis.

Once you demonstrate that, as a matter of practical convenience and safety, then the oceanic real estate development industry can boom. Once that happens, the political ramifications of jurisdictional arbitrage can be expressed, if you choose to do so.

But most people’s primary direction is chosen by inertia and social expectations. Always has been, always will be.


That’s how America’s “western frontier” was always developed … early adopters moving into new places and developing practical ways of living in that new environment.

In fact, that’s how societies always migrate and develop.

And, quite probably, the (vertical) urban environments still haven’t fully expanded into the airspace … because the space above the roads and streets remain largely unoccupied.

Imagine, for example, how NYC would look if every fifth level (above ground level) was a fully expanded pedestrian zone between two skyscrapers.

(Larry G) #154

I agree with this to an extent. I don’t think there is ONE solution. But I do think that the existing “stuff” needs a paradigm shift and modification of both techno platform and “business process” (as a shortcut for all kinds of things, not just for-profit corporations) in order to solve the bottleneck of limited space, the trade-offs of security/safety vs mobility inherent in nomadic sailing lifestyles, and major inconveniences currently involved in living on water opposed to land.

But I think that “floating out something somehow” creates a certain urgency and specific impulse to solve those problems, while the inertia of comfort, ease, and ‘degenerate city life’ works against doing unique and new, difficult things. Putting yourself deliberately into a situation where you MUST deal with things is a solid strategy for overcoming that inertia.

This is why I think used vessels can be a stepping stone. They are not, by any means, the end game solution, because they do have a limited lifespan and ever-increasing maintenance costs, as @ellmer has pointed out many times. Traditionally, the sea has been a very dangerous place to be. This is reflected in the overwhelming demographic skew towards single, younger, males, being the workforce on the water. We need platforms to be developed that have exponentially cheaper long term maintenance and safety factors.


@tamenta How do you plan to handle food and wastes? TSI apparently plans on collecting and shipping sewage, while importing food. Others plan to dump raw sewage in international waters. Collecting, transferring and shipping the problem elsewhere sounds like several disasters waiting to happen. Outright dumping is polluting the ocean. Despite @ellmer’s constant rant, calling biogas treatment vermicomposting (totally unrelated), to me, since the treated effluent can be used as a hydroponics nutrient solution, it makes more sense to me, than the options others seem to prefer. Close the nutrient and carbon cycles, reduce the potential for negative environmental impacts, accidental or even intentional ( willfully dumping raw sewage), while providing at least some of the basic food required by the occupants.

The composting toilet I am currently using requires further treatment, for acceptable sanitation. Incinerating destroys nutrients and creates ash, which will alter the pH wherever it is disposed of.

How is your concept going to handle it?

@Shiina_Ai @ForexBob

Ai and Bob, have you thought that far ahead?

(Larry G) #156

To be fair, that’s more of an engineering than architecture question.


If the architect is planning the city, he/she needs to provide the space for it, regardless of what gets done.


LOL, JL. You always had a problem with food and waste,…

You buy food from mainland.

Waste handling:

(Larry G) #159

Since they plan to recruit mostly millionaires (judging by their stated prices) they can probably afford that.

If you’ve got enough people for a tax base, you can make them connect to a central sewage treatment facility just like they do in American cities everywhere. If you don’t have that many people, the solutions get easier and cheaper.

I think that the brute force approach is wasteful, but it’s certainly effective. Not everyone is going to buy into integrated “green” approaches, no matter how much argument there is, or which TSI forum threads get derailed.



I might be wrong, but heading being current seasteading projects, with @tamenta being the current project in the discussion, perhaps asking how that’s being planned for is still appropriate. Architecturally, there has to be an accommodation for the systems, whatever they are. Bolting a toilet to the floor doesn’t allow water to flush, sewage lines, places for sewage to be collected, treatment, etc.

The devil is in the details. Leave any system unaccounted for and it has to be shoehorned in.

(Larry G) #161

True. But if they buy a passenger liner, it has all the minimum systems. If they buy an accommodation barge, likewise.

It’s really the same issue for all systems, not just waste treatment.


Yes, I have an issue with the lack of intelligent design. Suppose you waste tank is full, sudden storm develops and you pump sewage out… I don’t want to breathe it, don’t want it in my water, don’t want my AO polluted, if I have IMTA, I don’t want my crops poisoned, etc.

(Bob LLewellyn) #163

[quote=“JL_Frusha, post:155, topic:2107”]
Ai and Bob, have you thought that far ahead?[/quote]
Of course I have. Recall I mentioned that I worked for a city waste treatment plant one summer while I was in collage.

I thought I covered this already but marinas have pump-out stations. Ours will have a boat that goes to the customer and pumps the tanks. the small tanker boat will pump the sewage into a double lined barge with a clear cover. The sun will evaporate the water while good bacteria is added as a digester. The wave motion will stir the sluge until there is nothing but solid cake left.

Now the stupid part. People don’t understand the cycle of life, how one entity’s waste is something else’s food. Plants need that waste to grow, so what will we do? Burn the nutrients out of the cake and dump the ash to make people that don’t know shit, happy. This is so stupid - and I hate being stupid - but I will be when the time comes.
Bob- the ‘Marinea Project’