Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

itsgoingtobeebanned t1_j6uvif6 wrote

Reply to comment by Infernalism in Would you live in a "Floating City"? by jfd0037

Good insulation against cataclysmic events. A floating city on the other side of the world would be least impacted by a meteor strike.

2

Synaps4 t1_j6vm11a wrote

makes no sense. If a tidal wave has just swamped denver at 1mile elevation, your floating city has been demolished by that same wave.

1

itsgoingtobeebanned t1_j6vm6ra wrote

floating city?

1

Synaps4 t1_j6vtt1a wrote

a mile high tidal wave?

Even a city is capable of capsizing.

If mountains are going underwater, the world has ended, and no amount of floating is going to save you. Civilization ended and with it all the arable land and all the production facilities on which your city depends.

1

itsgoingtobeebanned t1_j6vutvr wrote

Imagine its built of warertight compartments that when broken apart by said initial wave they have inflatable buffers that keep them afloat but also buffered from each other. A skyscraper made of lifeboats fastened together basically but a lot more complex. If you know ots gonna happen you could build a house of cards designed to topple as softly as possible.

We don't need arable land if we can harness ocean power properly. Seaweed farms, seafood = basic food requirements met.

I agree we are probably fucked but what if it's a puny meteor that only takes out Europe and the dust cloud goes away in 6 months?

1

Synaps4 t1_j6w0na1 wrote

A) the actual complexities of a city made out of separable bulkheads all watertight and self sufficient is far beyond anything humanity has ever built, and things 1/1000th as complicated (like the soviet moon rocket) exploded when we tried.

B) Small scale seaweed farms are not going to feed 200,000 people and if they could the people would be hugely nutrition deficient and anyway the ecological collapse caused by such an event might ensure the seaweed doesn't even grow, with the nutrients in the water being eaten by massive algal blooms or worse

C) Major industries like metal smelting, plastics manufacturing, oil refining, chip fabrication, etc do not function on small scales and eat enormous amounts of power which you would not get from floating solar

D) We're talking about a 6 month dust cloud so the seaweed doesnt grow and the solar panels barely make any power for 6 months...everyone dies.

Just move to Kathmandu above the water line instead. It's cheaper and far less likely to fail

1

Surur t1_j6wdkd4 wrote

The plot of 2012 the movie.

1

NovelStyleCode t1_j6vsoky wrote

a floating city gets to deal with full force tsunamis and hurricanes, land helps shield a lot of that energy during natural disasters but on water? goodluck.

1

JeremiahBoogle t1_j70arfh wrote

Hurricanes are a problem, tsunamis not so much. At sea a Tsunami is basically almost imperceptible, the wave only builds to dangerous heights when it reaches land and the water depth shallows.

1