A city (according to the Venus Project) like that would take about 10 years to construct and 20 to make it (mostly) self sustaining. I still think its a good price for something that will de-enslave humanity.
Alright, let's see what roadblocks we have to overcome before we can set up a self-sustaining resource based "nation":
- Getting the necessary supplies to even START building this theoretical city
- Enough people to fill the city and make it self sustaining by contributing to it
- Enough land to build farms to feed these people
- Enough land to BUILD it
- Avoid attracting attention from major superpowers who could easily wipe you out at a moment's notice in any number of ways
- A constant source of electricity large enough to power this city
- Transportation for citizens
- Transportation for goods to come from other hypothetical cities that agree with your way of life
I don't see how this could happen anytime soon. You're talking about how this would work if there were multiple cities like this, but they won't get built just because of all the obstacles in the way.
- Avoid attracting attention from major superpowers who could easily wipe you out at a moment's notice in any number of ways
Multiple powers investing into shares of the city worked multi-laterally through institutions such as the UN with supplimentary funding provided via donation or the petitioning of a select number of larger multi-national companies/funds that speak to a uniform interest in seeing it done.
With everyone chippin' in, there's no reason to bomb it.
- A constant source of electricity large enough to power this city
An emphasis on an organized system of public transport, and/or the organization of the city to put everyone within walking distance of what they need/where they work could hypothetically cut down on pedestrian and motorized traffic.
- Transportation for goods to come from other hypothetical cities that agree with your way of life
In a self-sustainable city there would be no need for import or export cutting down on the relevance of commercial transportation. The goods needed to run it and feed it would be predominately carried out within the city limits. Only a few select goods may have to leave/exit, but stuff to run food supplies or anything else in or out could be avoided in such a construction.
Verticle farming, my friend. It will at the least suit the needs of a block of a city if organized on that basis, which might also cut down the transport need between a dedicated farming block when all residents need to do is visit the local dedicated building.
We don't even have this technology in WIDESPREAD use today, let alone creating a whole city with it.
I don't think we have a single metropolis today that's self sustaining, so why do you think that it's suddenly possible with less than an exorbitant amount of money?
We don't even have this technology in WIDESPREAD use today, let alone creating a whole city with it.
I don't think we have a single metropolis today that's self sustaining, so why do you think that it's suddenly possible with less than an exorbitant amount of money?
Because the meme is there and all we need to do is give it time to dig in and spread out. It's like if Inception was a brick to the face, but somehow still being subtle.
Besides, the "urban sustainability" movement is already a thing as much as the "green" movement is. Which implies that we'll have a building social pressure to develop a society with increased self dependence and inevitably the movement and desire for the means for a full communal self-sufficiency.
The idea is there and it will likely foster a new revolution of thought. As society seems to be looking now, we're growing more aware of our detachment from our actual food roots, at least in the big cities.
And if the dreams of Japanese engineers come to fruition in the Tokyo bay comes to fruition we may as well have the tools and means to construct strong-rooted cities with self-sustainability from very little. Because carbon fiber and nanonmachines, son.
I didn't read the all of the thread, just the first page, but this is my thought. The world isn't close to being overpopulated. We have a enough food for everyone to be feed, enough resources for everyone. It's just that the distribution of those resources makes the difference. I'm not saying equal for everyone, but if more resources were put towards 3rd world countries, there wouldn't be as many people that are hungry. And saying people don't matter is the stupidest thing I have heard. Mostly everyone matters in someway to keep everything flowing and to make lives better.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Never had to think twice, always knew my home was in paradise!
Because the meme is there and all we need to do is give it time to dig in and spread out. It's like if Inception was a brick to the face, but somehow still being subtle.
Besides, the "urban sustainability" movement is already a thing as much as the "green" movement is. Which implies that we'll have a building social pressure to develop a society with increased self dependence and inevitably the movement and desire for the means for a full communal self-sufficiency.
The idea is there and it will likely foster a new revolution of thought. As society seems to be looking now, we're growing more aware of our detachment from our actual food roots, at least in the big cities.
And if the dreams of Japanese engineers come to fruition in the Tokyo bay comes to fruition we may as well have the tools and means to construct strong-rooted cities with self-sustainability from very little. Because carbon fiber and nanonmachines, son.
Don't get me wrong, I fully believe that capitalism isn't a perfect system, but I don't see how a utopian, fully self sustaining city with no crime, etc. is possible in this day and age.
Your entire plan rests on getting support from the UN. Without that I don't see how this can work in the slightest.
Don't get me wrong, I fully believe that capitalism isn't a perfect system, but I don't see how a utopian, fully self sustaining city with no crime, etc. is possible in this day and age.
Your entire plan rests on getting support from the UN. Without that I don't see how this can work in the slightest.
UN is only acting as a intermediary and not so much the sole organization. The real support comes through multilateral support, fronted through the UN to hit as many parties as possible. Not the UN itself to fund and operate the project.
It saves on postage stamps.
And I didn't say anything about crime or it being utopian. Merely it fitting the terms of a self-sustaining urban environment with many - if not all - of its resources and needs being produced on site. Neither was capitalism a big point of the post.
Autopilot + GPS + training exists. Any pilot that isnt insane would just have a reflex to drive away from buildings/objects. Accidents happen.
Yet what in a crowded city with thousands of people flying around willy-nilly? This way a car accident wouldn't be "oh whoops. 2 cars damaged.", it would be a car goes flying and potentially blows up a large portion of a tower if they were going fast enough. Also, I don't think the U.S. would be willing to go "Here, tiny nation! Have Kansas!"
And then everything was through-the-roof expensive.
But a massive Kowloon does have its attractive benefits for the mad and those who wish to RP in RL living in a future despotic world.
My DeviantArt, so sexy
Alright, let's see what roadblocks we have to overcome before we can set up a self-sustaining resource based "nation":
- Getting the necessary supplies to even START building this theoretical city
- Enough people to fill the city and make it self sustaining by contributing to it
- Enough land to build farms to feed these people
- Enough land to BUILD it
- Avoid attracting attention from major superpowers who could easily wipe you out at a moment's notice in any number of ways
- A constant source of electricity large enough to power this city
- Transportation for citizens
- Transportation for goods to come from other hypothetical cities that agree with your way of life
I don't see how this could happen anytime soon. You're talking about how this would work if there were multiple cities like this, but they won't get built just because of all the obstacles in the way.
For the sake of the argument I could see this being an issue. However: recycling has its perks in that regard.
Offer rent rates lower than that of Hong Kong and New York. We'll watch immigration work magic.
[img]http://www.roadtripamerica.com/routes/2010/kansaswelcomesign-590.jpg[/img]
Multiple powers investing into shares of the city worked multi-laterally through institutions such as the UN with supplimentary funding provided via donation or the petitioning of a select number of larger multi-national companies/funds that speak to a uniform interest in seeing it done.
With everyone chippin' in, there's no reason to bomb it.
[img]http://lunar.thegamez.net/greenenergyimage/sources-of-nuclear-energy/factor-nuclear-power-plants-provide-an-alternative-source-of-energy-550x412.jpg[/img]
It looks pretty too.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a6/390029_'City_of_Stoke-on-Trent'_at_Birmingham_New_Street.JPG
An emphasis on an organized system of public transport, and/or the organization of the city to put everyone within walking distance of what they need/where they work could hypothetically cut down on pedestrian and motorized traffic.
In a self-sustainable city there would be no need for import or export cutting down on the relevance of commercial transportation. The goods needed to run it and feed it would be predominately carried out within the city limits. Only a few select goods may have to leave/exit, but stuff to run food supplies or anything else in or out could be avoided in such a construction.
Also, let's put these onto the table:
Urban farm of today:
[img]http://urbdp598.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/urban_agriculture1.jpg[/img]
http://konodesigns.com/media/files/01-urban-farm.jpg?w=750&h=600&c=false[/img]http://konodesigns.com/media/files/01-urban-farm.jpg?w=750&h=600&c=false
Urban farm of tomorrow:
[img]http://assets.dornob.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/urban-farm-design-competition-entries.jpg[/img]
[img]http://www.inspirationgreen.com/assets/images/Vertical farms/urban farm.jpg[/img]
Verticle farming, my friend. It will at the least suit the needs of a block of a city if organized on that basis, which might also cut down the transport need between a dedicated farming block when all residents need to do is visit the local dedicated building.
My DeviantArt, so sexy
I don't think we have a single metropolis today that's self sustaining, so why do you think that it's suddenly possible with less than an exorbitant amount of money?
Because the meme is there and all we need to do is give it time to dig in and spread out. It's like if Inception was a brick to the face, but somehow still being subtle.
Besides, the "urban sustainability" movement is already a thing as much as the "green" movement is. Which implies that we'll have a building social pressure to develop a society with increased self dependence and inevitably the movement and desire for the means for a full communal self-sufficiency.
The idea is there and it will likely foster a new revolution of thought. As society seems to be looking now, we're growing more aware of our detachment from our actual food roots, at least in the big cities.
And if the dreams of Japanese engineers come to fruition in the Tokyo bay comes to fruition we may as well have the tools and means to construct strong-rooted cities with self-sustainability from very little. Because carbon fiber and nanonmachines, son.
My DeviantArt, so sexy
Don't get me wrong, I fully believe that capitalism isn't a perfect system, but I don't see how a utopian, fully self sustaining city with no crime, etc. is possible in this day and age.
Your entire plan rests on getting support from the UN. Without that I don't see how this can work in the slightest.
COMPLETE. GLOBAL.
SATURATION.
It's funny how Im the only one who is getting Rochambo's references here.
UN is only acting as a intermediary and not so much the sole organization. The real support comes through multilateral support, fronted through the UN to hit as many parties as possible. Not the UN itself to fund and operate the project.
It saves on postage stamps.
And I didn't say anything about crime or it being utopian. Merely it fitting the terms of a self-sustaining urban environment with many - if not all - of its resources and needs being produced on site. Neither was capitalism a big point of the post.
My DeviantArt, so sexy
with me, gravvykins.
who is this
help
I'll leave this to you.
Helloooooooo
big boyyyyyyy
Yet what in a crowded city with thousands of people flying around willy-nilly? This way a car accident wouldn't be "oh whoops. 2 cars damaged.", it would be a car goes flying and potentially blows up a large portion of a tower if they were going fast enough. Also, I don't think the U.S. would be willing to go "Here, tiny nation! Have Kansas!"
Do you really believe the world is WORTH saving?
I think that EVERYONE wants to LIVE so they can DO crap they like to DO.
Therefore, everyone who is not SUICIDAL or immaturely ANGSTY would agree that the WORLD is WORTH savING.