Inner cities and suburbs

[amadeus]

A sustainable aircraft carrier?

Don't you know that ships stay seaworthy forever?

 

[RalofTyr]

People want to live in LA because the weather's sunny, 200 days a year with an average temperature of 76F.

LA, Las Vegas, San Diego and Phoenix are all doomed cities. Global warming and demand for water resources will ensure those cities shrink. And when peak oil kicks in, LA's going to be a death trap. The cost to farm food will gas will increase so much, the cost to bring it into the LA area will be so great, no one will want to do it.

The basic problem with LA is that it's a parasite. It sucks the resources from the Western American continent to support it. Once there's a disruption in that, the city will fall.

 

[GoodGame]

I don't think San Diego is necessarily in danger. LV and Phoenix, surely.

Thing about rain patterns in global warming is they're supposed to actually intensify. Perhaps San Diego would end up more monsoon-like.

Fixed.

I take it you feel it's a dystopia until the monkey butlers are freed?

 

[Narz]

A sustainable aircraft carrier?

Yeah, why not? Obviously the construction of the ship wouldn't be sustainable but the ship itself could probably be made 90% so at least. Carriers are huge, you could easily grow enough food to feed 100 people are so (probably 1,000) on the decks, and that's not counting catching fish. A carrier might actually be too big. IMO, the ideal sustainable society would be around Dunbar's number (and is communication with dozens of other such cultures with some ties to the world at large).

Don't you know that ships stay seaworthy forever?

With a knowledgeable & equipped crew it could be maintained for a generation or two. Then we find land & set up our new home.

But, like I acknowledged, a carrier would probably be too large to be worth maintaining for that long.

 

[civ_king]

Yeah, why not? Obviously the construction of the ship wouldn't be sustainable but the ship itself could probably be made 90% so at least. Carriers are huge, you could easily grow enough food to feed 100 people are so (probably 1,000) on the decks, and that's not counting catching fish. A carrier might actually be too big. IMO, the ideal sustainable society would be around Dunbar's number (and is communication with dozens of other such cultures with some ties to the world at large).


With a knowledgeable & equipped crew it could be maintained for a generation or two. Then we find land & set up our new home.

But, like I acknowledged, a carrier would probably be too large to be worth maintaining for that long.

we could take a "Gerald R. Ford class aircraft carrier" which would be 1,092 ft long and 134 ft wide that would be habitable, but to make it self-propelled it would need to be able to extract uranium from the ocean and an enrichment center on it, then you would have a growing area of 90,000sqft, which could feed a bunch

 

[mrt144]

People are flocking to LA because it beats living in a shanty town in the developing world. That said LA is more dense than most people realize, it is one of the densest big cities in the country.

And that's pathetic all things considered.

 

[holy king]

we could take a "Gerald R. Ford class aircraft carrier" which would be 1,092 ft long and 134 ft wide that would be habitable, but to make it self-propelled it would need to be able to extract uranium from the ocean and an enrichment center on it, then you would have a growing area of 90,000sqft, which could feed a bunch

why propelled at all? let's just drift around the seven seas!

 

[History_Buff]

why propelled at all? let's just drift around the seven seas!

Because people don't like it when their home founders on a rock.

 

[Cutlass]

Building the suburbs in the US has been public policy, and publicly subsidized, for the past 50 years. If you want to stifle their growth, stop subsidizing them.

 

[History_Buff]

Building the suburbs in the US has been public policy, and publicly subsidized, for the past 50 years. If you want to stifle their growth, stop subsidizing them.

Indeed. And what's more, that might finally happen - the infrastructure needed to sustain far flung suburbs is starting to make cities think twice about giving developers free reign.

 

[Arwon]

"Inner city" here means posh and liberal, and quite wealthy because of property values.

 

[CaptainF]

Building the suburbs in the US has been public policy, and publicly subsidized, for the past 50 years. If you want to stifle their growth, stop subsidizing them.

Indeed. A bunch of newly wealthy white people fleeing from their black neighbors in the cities because the darkies surely would have acted up in resentment.

I look forward to it's collapse even if it seems like it's expanding here in Oregon, thanks to Californian expatriates.

 

[Camikaze]

What Arwon said. Although it's more the beach suburbs relatively near the CBD.

I thought suburbanization is exclusively a American phenomenon.

It's massive in Australia. As in, suburbanisation is the norm. Urban sprawl is easy to accomplish in Australia, due to low population and lots of land, but is becoming more straining on infrastructure 'n' stuff. The 'Australian Dream' revolves around suburbanisation, in fact.