richie
Supporting Member
Joined: 9 Jan 2007
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 30,142
Location: Lake Whoop-Dee-Doo, Pennsylvania
18 Jan 2011, 6:02 pm
sartresue wrote:
richie wrote:
If we are to live vertically in cities then it makes sense to farm vertically in city sized multistory green houses.
Living the High Eco-life topic
This actually could be a sensible option. There are roof top gardens already. In terms of saving space, these legal grow ops are a great experiment. Abandoned apartment buildings in Detroit might have a second life. Give it a try.
Thanks, ritchie.
I had Detroit and other blighted cities in mind when I was posting about vertical farming. In such structures both agribusinesses and small scale co-op gardens
can coexist and all livestock waste and other crop waste and biomass can be composted and/or made into bio-fuels. This type of greenhouse tech can also treat municipal waste water.
New Alchemy: http://www.thegreencenter.net/ and more can be found here.
And earlier today I saw an article about bio-tech to make bio-fuels:
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/01/biot ... directors/
John_Browning
Veteran
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,456
Location: The shooting range
18 Jan 2011, 8:06 pm
Inventor wrote:
350, million person cities, would house the US. the reduced power grid, rail lines, and high speed access to other cities would make for a rational use of resources. It would also spread water around, and sewer would become a raw material.
Siteing each on 100 square miles, uses up 35,000 square miles, and the rest can be a park.
From government to economy local choice would be like States, and none of the pork and kickbacks. What works works, and the market for better is there.
With food water, shelter, education, some will chose a minium standard life, others will want to produce and rent the better views. It will not be about hidden money, but about function and service.
Built right once, it will last for hundreds of years. By then the plains willl be covered in buffalo, the forests mature, and the fishing great.
Everything passes away except the land and sky.
Siteing each on 100 square miles, uses up 35,000 square miles, and the rest can be a park.
From government to economy local choice would be like States, and none of the pork and kickbacks. What works works, and the market for better is there.
With food water, shelter, education, some will chose a minium standard life, others will want to produce and rent the better views. It will not be about hidden money, but about function and service.
Built right once, it will last for hundreds of years. By then the plains willl be covered in buffalo, the forests mature, and the fishing great.
Everything passes away except the land and sky.
It sounds like a nightmare. I want a ranch with lots of land. Do you have any idea how crowded a million people in a 10 mile by 10 mile area would be?
19 Jan 2011, 10:48 am
19 Jan 2011, 9:41 pm
krill wrote:
Say we can move beyond money, making is obsolete... If we do this, then products can be designed to LAST and we wont be bombarded by advertising...we only have the things we need, instead of loads of waste and pollution being made by new products being consumed all the time.
We could create lots of small library style centres where people can check in and check out products such as say a football, a book, a camera etc
I really like your ideas! Maybe I'm looking in the wrong places but most people I know who advocate for a post-commercial society have agendas about their vision of community. Their ideas are designed so that to access what you need or to contribute you have to become part of a community. One size fits all.
Your vision I could live with.
We could create lots of small library style centres where people can check in and check out products such as say a football, a book, a camera etc
I really like your ideas! Maybe I'm looking in the wrong places but most people I know who advocate for a post-commercial society have agendas about their vision of community. Their ideas are designed so that to access what you need or to contribute you have to become part of a community. One size fits all.
Your vision I could live with.
Cheers. It is not essentially my idea, but an idea that i took from somewhere else and totally agree with.
This is how money works and how debt works. Any money is your hand is debt. Any money is existance is owed to somebody with an interest that is impossible to to be paid off.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltD2pAaHdJw[/youtube]
_________________
<Insert meaningful signature here>
21 Jan 2011, 11:52 pm
07 Mar 2011, 4:18 pm
07 Mar 2011, 6:09 pm
MDD123 wrote:
I like the sound of the Venus Project/Zeitgeist Movement, but it would require lot's of people in various specializations to just work together, in conjunction with the resources being available for this type of thing to work. The type of person this movement would appeal to wouldn't be the kind of person who could put this plan into motion, it would be the person who lacks the proper know how in today's economy and the entire spectrum of engineers are not in a position to want to change things.
Then you have to obtain the natural resources to sustain this city? Nobody is going to just give away raw building materials, and past that, who is going to build the factories that will mass produce this vision?
Then you have to obtain the natural resources to sustain this city? Nobody is going to just give away raw building materials, and past that, who is going to build the factories that will mass produce this vision?
I know more than a handful of scientists and engineers who help to try and promote this type of thing. Typically members of the movement aim to get people in scientific and engineering community involved. Rather than speak to several people and give them a brief outline of the concept they have in depth discussions with people who have more of a say in the way technology is put into practical purposes. Speaking to politicians also plays a significant role, as they grant the money for research and development of science and technology.
The simple fact is, the way we design cities today requires constant maintenance and huge variation in design for everything. So it takes more resources to keep doing and more planning to implement a design which will work for "situation X".
Since we can design things to be modular, we need to design less and when we assemble modular cities, we can take into account that systems within it can be removed and updated when appropriated without worrying about massive compatibly issues.
Please remember that any city design not have to look exactly like this. This is just conceptual. But It follows logical principles in the way it is structured in a circular format to make things easy to access.
Edit: Also note that Carbon nano tubes offer far superior strength and weight potential compared to steel. I am talking over 1000 times as strong and 1/300th of the weight (that is off the top of my head).
This will make designing cities which will last a lot easier and more resource friendly.
http://www.singularitysymposium.com/nanotechnology.html
_________________
<Insert meaningful signature here>
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
| Mexico City may be months away from running out of water |
25 Feb 2024, 11:55 pm |
| Uvalde city report clears local officers of wrongdoing |
08 Mar 2024, 2:53 am |
