Earths Oceans Explored - but why not colonized

John Creighton · 2007-07-28 14:04:27

Why build underwater and deal with the issues of pressure, light, transportation, leaks, etc. when you could live on the surface (artificial islands)?
Just a thought.

Because the resources are underwater.

Mark Friedenbach · 2007-07-28 19:12:52

Yes and sometimes those little islands are in the wake of such things as huricanes, cyclones and just down right nasty weather...

As are oil rigs, existing islands, ... and well, just about every piece of coastal land. Surface weather is hardly a show-stopper.

Because the resources are underwater.

Which resources?

Fish, animals, and plants grow better on the surface than they do in deep water. The nutrients may be at the bottom, but that water can easily be pumped up.

Mineral, methane, and oil resources need some humans on the bottom of course, but the oil industry has shown that it's more economical to separate resource acquisition (which requires just a few people on the bottom) from processing and use which can be done more cheaply on the surface.

John Creighton · 2007-07-29 13:11:55

I don't think colonizing the ocean, despite its vast space, would be particularly wise.
It is the biggest, most interconnected, and least-studied enviorment on the planet. Consider where we live now, on continients and even cities on the fringes of desserts can contribute runoff that already off-balances lord knows what in terra aqua.
...and you're talking about floating cities of a few thousand easy directly out there? Think of the phrase "poop deck" and conceptulaize how the sewer system would work. Then add in oil leakage, garbage, paper wrappers wafting in the breeze and six-pack-rings floating toward breeding grounds of otters and endangered sea birds. The urge to dump all our waste into something seemingly vast would be too easy and powerful for an ocean city. Within fifty years given a few dozen floating New New Yorks and New Londons you'll have the Ocean Thames reaking of dead fish.
Don't count on harvesting the Ocean either - it is NOT as fruitful as people think. Areas the size of the United States are already being swept to the ocean bedrock every year; the ocean's equivellant of the Amazon's hack-and-slash burnings.
May as well suggest Antarctica - fresh penguin eggs and meat waiting to turn giant colonies of those cute lil butlers into colonies of the next dodo bird. (cue the screams of a thousand 'March of the Penguin' and 'Happy Feet' fans imaging penguins getting clubbed like baby seals). And with the ice thawing and sun half the year oooh...sun worshippers and resorts.

They would need to recycle their wast and have anti-littering laws as harsh as Singapore's.

John Creighton · 2007-07-29 13:15:24

Yes and sometimes those little islands are in the wake of such things as huricanes, cyclones and just down right nasty weather...
As are oil rigs, existing islands, ... and well, just about every piece of coastal land. Surface weather is hardly a show-stopper.
Because the resources are underwater.
Which resources?
Fish, animals, and plants grow better on the surface than they do in deep water. The nutrients may be at the bottom, but that water can easily be pumped up.
Mineral, methane, and oil resources need some humans on the bottom of course, but the oil industry has shown that it's more economical to separate resource acquisition (which requires just a few people on the bottom) from processing and use which can be done more cheaply on the surface.

I'm not sure if oil rigs are really floating cities. Aren't they anchored to the ground. Considering the amount of material required to build an oil rig, I'm not sure it is the engineering model we want to look at at overcoming the harsh ocean enviornment.

If everyone lives at the surface I'm concerned that they will block a lot of the light that my be required for the lower eco system. Also it just doesn't appeal to my imagination as much as an underwater city.

Mark Friedenbach · 2007-07-29 22:39:29

Some oil rigs are anchored with pylons, others are free floating or tethered. The tethered route is probably the way to go for an artificial island. If it turns out that tethered structures don't scale well, it could always be built in multiple loosely-coupled sections.

The light blockage wouldn't be an issue. In the open ocean there is no life on or near the surface. In fact the open ocean cannot support surface life because the resources are non-renewable: when life dies, it sinks to the bottom, taking it's nutrients with it. There is some life at much deeper depths, but it's based on a food chain that starts with geothermal heat, not the light of the sun.

The surface of the open ocean is a very dead environment, but one with ready access to power and life supporting nutrients (via a well to the bottom water), and where humans can live without too much life support. For these reasons it'd be just as ripe for settlement as the moon, mars, or asteroids... except that there's no exportable resources in the ocean which couldn't otherwise be exploited.

Deep water methane or oil rigs? Sure. But deep-water cities? Not a chance. I could see artificial islands happening (maybe). But there's no return on investment for building a city above or below the sea, and in the not-so-distant future it may be cheaper to build on the moon than in the water, if the current cost of building oil rigs is anything to go by.

alin · 2007-08-01 12:04:24

I think people are by nature very curious and that's why they seek the unimaginable and try to push the limits. Marine Engineers Beneficial Association should be built in order to administrate this potential.

Grypd · 2007-08-07 08:14:03

One place that minerals have been found to concentrate is at the sites of what are Hydro thermal vents the so called Black Smokers. (There are also white smokers but they are a lot less mineral rich).

But these vents are abodes of very specialised life and are protected. But these black smokers eventually die and they leave soft rock formations rich in minerals and the plan is these can be mined.

Wired Magazine: Race to the bottom

This will be done by the use of telerobotic robots operating from moored barges or ships.

publiusr · 2007-11-09 14:11:57

Such facilities and resorts might be a good base for a space elevator. Use the profits from one to help build the others...

Terraformer · 2007-11-10 15:17:11

I would like to start an organisation called the Atlantis Project to colonise the bottom of lakes, rivers, and the ocean. People living down there would be at a much lower risk of cancer and would live longer (less radiation to cause cancer and aging.) Underwater domes in the shallow areas to grow food. In a really deep lab experiments could be done with less risk of pollution.

Grypd · 2007-11-12 11:32:35

I would like to start an organisation called the Atlantis Project to colonise the bottom of lakes, rivers, and the ocean. People living down there would be at a much lower risk of cancer and would live longer (less radiation to cause cancer and aging.) Underwater domes in the shallow areas to grow food. In a really deep lab experiments could be done with less risk of pollution.

One of the greatest problems is that living under water you are in an enviroment that will give the aquanaut long term medical problems. The first is that there will be no access to sunlight and this is essential for long term health. Sunlight breaks down essential vitamins so that we can use them. Damp dark conditions are not good for th lungs and lung diseases as well as colds etc are a real problem for people staying in these colonies.

Still there is no need for any underwater colony as long as land above is cheaper and there are no real economic, political or other similar reason to invest millions in building such a colony.

Terraformer · 2007-11-16 06:18:05

Who said it would cost millions and who said it would be really deep down in the ocean? Who said it would be in the ocean anyway? You could colonise rivers and have tunnels leading to them.

Grypd · 2007-11-21 05:37:46

Who said it would cost millions and who said it would be really deep down in the ocean? Who said it would be in the ocean anyway? You could colonise rivers and have tunnels leading to them.

Then it comes down to the simple question. Why would we want to go to that expense and effort for what is no practical purpose or gain in understanding.

Terraformer · 2007-11-22 09:01:43

What about the gain in land?

Grypd · 2007-11-22 12:19:29

What about the gain in land?

Cheaper just to use land reclamation techniques, safer too.

John Creighton · 2007-11-22 13:10:36

Who said it would cost millions and who said it would be really deep down in the ocean? Who said it would be in the ocean anyway? You could colonise rivers and have tunnels leading to them.

Why not just live underground?

Terraformer · 2007-11-23 12:25:05

No light? And land reclamation must have its limits. You also lose that river or lake.

Grypd · 2007-11-23 16:20:22

No light? And land reclamation must have its limits. You also lose that river or lake.

Build upwards then

John Creighton · 2007-11-24 00:12:31

No light? And land reclamation must have its limits. You also lose that river or lake.
Build upwards then

Actually that will probably be what will happen. Did you know in Japan that they are building a building that is almost a completely contained city. I still think though that the idea of living under water with the fishes is somewhat romantic even if it isn't good for the health.

Terraformer · 2007-11-24 06:10:17

Isn't good for whose health? All that water above you would filter out the remaining radiation. People wouldn't age as quick. Cancer would be reduced.

Grypd · 2007-11-24 15:24:31

Isn't good for whose health? All that water above you would filter out the remaining radiation. People wouldn't age as quick. Cancer would be reduced.

People will not be able to use vitamin D as well as surface dwellers due to no sunlight. Another problem is that cancer will be increased due to the difficulty in getting rid of all the chemicals in the air. There really is not a chance to open windows is there.

Still and this I believe is important find an economic reason to build underwater habitats then they will get built

Terraformer · 2007-11-25 07:06:48

Sea level rise giving Earth a practically global ocean? :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

SpaceNut · 2015-11-23 13:15:30

Fixed the shifting issue that the initial pages had as we did reference this topic and its important that all can read the topic without problems....

SpaceNut · 2017-01-25 21:12:58

Off shot thoughts from the bottle under the sea from recycled materials that are in the oceans dead zones....

What if we put the structure of a proportion to one of the ISS under the surface but functional. We would learn about self contained systems and what we do for relying on water as we have thought about using a lake on mars covered by ice and dirt to make a safe living zone for man. So we also know that its power from solar of what we have on the ISS is probably not going to to happen. So I would think nuclear would be the solution, possibly thorium based on mars surface collection to feed the reaction.

elderflower · 2017-01-26 06:26:19

Mars has lots of heavy water and, apparently, has both Uranium and Thorium, either of which will burn in a heavy water reactor. If we can come up with a method of extracting either of these we will be able to stop sending fuel rods/pellets from Earth.
The heavy water will be further concentrated by electrolysis of available water and this type of reactor generates Tritium. Maybe this would be the key to a fusion rocket and enable us to get to the outer Solar system.
As to occupying the shallow seas or the deserts or Earths icecaps, you don't solve the problem of having our rather lovely species avoid catastrophe on Earth. At the moment there is nothing to stop the same happening to us as happened to the dinosaurs, or to almost everything in earlier mass extinctions.

Last edited by elderflower (2017-01-26 06:37:27)

Tom Kalbfus · 2017-01-26 07:23:35

Seems easier to live on the surface of the ocean than underneath. You just need to get something that floats, and you have breathable air.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#51 2007-07-28 14:04:27

Re: Earths Oceans Explored - but why not colonized

#52 2007-07-28 19:12:52

Re: Earths Oceans Explored - but why not colonized

#53 2007-07-29 13:11:55

Re: Earths Oceans Explored - but why not colonized

#54 2007-07-29 13:15:24

Re: Earths Oceans Explored - but why not colonized

#55 2007-07-29 22:39:29

Re: Earths Oceans Explored - but why not colonized

#56 2007-08-01 12:04:24

Re: Earths Oceans Explored - but why not colonized

#57 2007-08-07 08:14:03

Re: Earths Oceans Explored - but why not colonized

#58 2007-11-09 14:11:57

Re: Earths Oceans Explored - but why not colonized

#59 2007-11-10 15:17:11

Re: Earths Oceans Explored - but why not colonized

#60 2007-11-12 11:32:35

Re: Earths Oceans Explored - but why not colonized

#61 2007-11-16 06:18:05

Re: Earths Oceans Explored - but why not colonized

#62 2007-11-21 05:37:46

Re: Earths Oceans Explored - but why not colonized

#63 2007-11-22 09:01:43

Re: Earths Oceans Explored - but why not colonized

#64 2007-11-22 12:19:29

Re: Earths Oceans Explored - but why not colonized

#65 2007-11-22 13:10:36

Re: Earths Oceans Explored - but why not colonized

#66 2007-11-23 12:25:05

Re: Earths Oceans Explored - but why not colonized

#67 2007-11-23 16:20:22

Re: Earths Oceans Explored - but why not colonized

#68 2007-11-24 00:12:31

Re: Earths Oceans Explored - but why not colonized

#69 2007-11-24 06:10:17

Re: Earths Oceans Explored - but why not colonized

#70 2007-11-24 15:24:31

Re: Earths Oceans Explored - but why not colonized

#71 2007-11-25 07:06:48

Re: Earths Oceans Explored - but why not colonized

#72 2015-11-23 13:15:30

Re: Earths Oceans Explored - but why not colonized

#73 2017-01-25 21:12:58

Re: Earths Oceans Explored - but why not colonized

#74 2017-01-26 06:26:19

Re: Earths Oceans Explored - but why not colonized

#75 2017-01-26 07:23:35

Re: Earths Oceans Explored - but why not colonized

Board footer