looks good right. but images always do. just a shame the image and reality are not equal
elwar you still never learn
1. drawings of floating islands with grass roofs are not going to be a reality
the amount of solar requirement just for a normal home fills up most of the roof space of a normal home.
now add to that all the new tech features you want thse homes to have adds more electric demand.
then add the tech needed just for sustainability, such as the water treatment. and guess what. no room for grass roof
2. self governance sounds goof right?
but french polynesia requires people to register every 6-12 months their intent to stay for more than 3 month
then after 5 years of doing so then can then apply for a 10 year permit.
emphasis permit. (which can get revoked)
3. nice images of Eco waste management right?
but it doesnt show the reality of where the waste goes after.
look at point 1. there wont be much room to shovel your fertiliser (decomposed toilet waste) )on the roof to grow plants.
because those plants would then shadow the solar panels.and limited grass
and if all the cardboard boxes from computr equipmnt. plastic wrap, food packaging, plastic bottles could be eco disposible
then strangely why havnt you sold your eco patents as licences to on-land waste management companies to make it all just vanish
4. nice buzzwording of innovative new tech
but if all this new tech was so great as highlighted in final sentance of point 3. you wouldnt need to fundraise under $800k (3k ether)
dont get me wrong. i am very positive about sustainable eco-homes. sea steading, self governance. but after the initial promotional hype of emotions everyone gets from a first read. and then devling into the deeper research. i just see a big money grab and lots of glossy images, but all the flaws beyond the glossy images.
its like your trying to do a 'sharks tank' 'dragons den' pitch based purely on what you seen on TV about how to spew out a sales pitch. but you do not relise what happens after the camera switches off when the actual due dilegance on the pitch really begins and the dvelopment really begins.
elwar, your team are good PR/finance grabbing guys. but take away the glossy images and all the half researched stuff to create lots of snazzy buzzwords. leaves very little actual content of a proper business/development plan people will get to see in their lifetime
(many people in their 20's can become grandparents by the time the concept is complete)
i wrote all of the above from just viewing the infrographic link. and then. reading the pdf of the research the flaws start showing
"The group acknowledges that this conceptualization was created with great care and thought, and we agree with many of
the concepts that it embodies. At the same time, we suggest some revisions. One of the most common has been the suggestion that
the green roof should include food plants.
Others suggest that we should use the surface to capture rainwater, and that a green roof is not the most effective way to do
this. It may be that we do not have enough space on the roof both for the amount of solar panels and rainwater collection
needed. The group is committed to working with Blue21 to continue refining these"
its kinda good to see that some people can be honest that the BLUE21 concept has flaws where not every PR'd gimmick can fit on the roof. and its something i have mentioned time and time before.
the infographic is a illusionary illustration and not a illustration based on deep insight. many business plans would have thought about the details of space required and everything included and then made drawings around that. .. rather than make the drawings grab money and then pray to god it all works out.
you admit although you googled some idea's you still lack the skillset
"we will need someone skilled at designing microgrids to determine whether this would be enough to ensure power stays on 24/7" thus it appears most of the concept is just done with a random team of unskilled people sat at a bar drinking cocktails trying to make a glossy image for PR purposes of money grabbing. rather than spending time actually asking people with skillsets to volunteer a bit of their time to give you measurements and details you really require.
self governance.
self sustainability falls flat in many places. your pdf starts revealing these. like suddenly needing an elected board (like a town hall) where they set prices of sharing electric, the cost of internt access. and even funnier. it then becomes tyranical.
"the Seasteading principle of 'vote with your house' applies here. If people think they are being cheated, they will just leave and go back to where ever they came from. "
thats the same kind of crap as
the core roadmap. follow cores elected plan or F**K off..
trump. if you dont like trump F**k off to mexico/canada
a real consensus self governance is. if you feel like you are being cheated. reselect a new board to moderate the network which you want to remain on.
seems blue21 concept is not decentralised, self governed. but actually very governed concept. follow their rules of sell your island at a discount and go back to mainland
other points about population. there is a cap. the PDF mentions it. blue21 seems to be topping off at around a 200 population cap. but this will not be a 200 average free world ccitizen richman cap. it would end up being about 100 richguy resident cap and just as many. 'workers' maintaining the 50-150 floats
yep. this seastead projct has a 20 year goal requiring multimillions of dollars. for..... 200 people
other things too..
biogas. do you (well probably not by the looks of things) know how many times people need to go to the toilet to be able to produce enough gas to cook a meal in gas powered kitchen oven...
how much algae needs to be grown/taken from the sea to supliment the shortfall.
wheres the ecological study on taking out algea from a ocean area. or introducing new algea farms into a ocean area
blackwater. (toilet flush waste) having to separate, dry, gather the gas, and then compost the solids. takes up space.
gotta love the picture of the 20foot cargo container.. its hinting something to you that your team are not seeing in all your designs and snazzy glossy pics.
also if you watched the matt damon movie about mars. the compost from excrement needed to be mixed with mars dirt. and even that was not enough to grow enough potato for matt deman to be self sustaining.. and that biomass included waste from not just him but his team that left him behind.
you have also wasted YEARS on PR but yet to see much beyond a google/youtube search of 'idea's'
if you realised there are already many think-tank teams that give thier time for free. and have an ethos and motivation of a better world, you would have already got all your answers years ago and had sponsors of science and eco warriors funding prototypes already.
but all it seems is that you want money grabs from thousands of random people. for a empty plan that is going to scale as long as 20 years that will only benefit 200 people.
you still have not really got a grip of the whole concept. not even enough to really be in a developing state.
im still laughing that you wasted a year trying to fundraise millions for a 32bed boat to be used purely for you and your buddies to have meetings. now that was truly an eye opener to where i seen your motives. wasting millions on 'meetings'.. facepalm
that definetly was the pinnicle point of seeing that your tam was not economical or ecological minded.
i could go on. but feel the more flaws i reveal. the less you actually put into a dvelopment plan and the more you just buword using google into a new glossy fundraiser pitch
