Don't buy an island, build your own!

[Raymond]

Along with micronatioons, I have also had a long-time interest in building an artificial, floating island that could move through the ocean. This is called seasteading. As I see it, this could be a huge oppertunity to those who want to start their own nations. Check the links below for more info:
 
http://www.gramlich.net/projects/oceania/seastead1.html

http://seastead.org/

Please, discuss this. It should develop into a very interesting topic

[Rex TorHavn]

Sir:

You are correct; it should prove interesting.  But it is my understanding that the UNO will never accept or consider sovereign a nation that is based on an artificial island or other such structure.

Sealand has managed to remain prominant despite this; it is, however, an obstacle that should also be addressed.

What say you on that matter?

For the Earth & Crown,

King Casimir Skyhunter
"Lykos Packleader"
The Kingdom of TorHavn
http://torhavn.proboards77.com

[J]

I ran the numbers once. It's far cheaper to buy an island than it is to construct one. Granted, building an island in international waters is probably less problematic from a Sovereignty perspective. Namely, you wouldn't be seceding from anyplace.

[Raymond]

I ran the numbers once. It's far cheaper to buy an island than it is to construct one. Granted, building an island in international waters is probably less problematic from a Sovereignty perspective. Namely, you wouldn't be seceding from anyplace.

LysanderSpooner, could you please post those numbers here? I would be very interested to see them, what materials you calculated for, prices, etc. It would be very appreciated. Thank you in advance.

[Dieter N. Vercáriâ]

I don't know. Said constructed island will have to be so far away from any existing shore that no other country will ever be able to claim that it's in their waters, and still then I'm afraid that the sovereignty will have to be proven with weapons or similar means, if those on the constructed island have found resources to live on. Let's face it, most macronations on this earth don't like the idea of idependent individuals who want to escape from their game.

Empirically, there is a way to overcome state power. Global shareholder organisations might win over nationinal and  international ways of organizing societies as we knew them, and on the day when this future has eventually begun we as individuals will feel even more like wanting to get out of oppressive structurs - with less reasons to hope that there is an exit that takes us out of this.

[J]

I'll have to search my other computer for the numbers. If I remember off hand, to put a platform on the high seas would cost close to $100,000.00 per acre. The figure would drop significantly as you built more acreage. Part of the problem is on the high seas, say in Pacific Ocean for example, the transportation of materials is one issue, but you also need to build the platform high enough, as waves can get very tall. But the most expensive part is anchoring the platforms, most of these locations in the high seas are in some cases MILES deep.

The real trick is to find a location like an underwater seamount that isn't in very deep waters and happens to be in international waters. The problem is most of these "banks" are in EEZ areas. This is the problem that Lazarus Long has encountered. We've talked on the phone about this before and he contends that he doesn't need permission. His words were essentially, "to hell with the government of Honduras or Jamaica." Not exactly a good neighbor policy.

Back to the point, you can still buy islands for under $1million easy. Heck, there are still some for under $100,000.00. The problem is political sovereignty.

[Raymond]

I do realise the problems of building the island (protection, stability, etc.) However, I like to look at it's benefits. Since it's floating, such advantages can include:

1) Flooding form rising waters is almost nonexistent, since it can just rise with the water level.

2) Hurricanes and storms aren't too troublesome. With a real island, I couldn't do anything but wait and hope I don't die. With a floating island, I can just move to an area that is calm.

3) Climate is less of an issue. If the temperature gets too cold or hot for my taste, I can move it to a warmer/colder area.

4) Land preservation. I create more land for living on, planting things, etc. This preserves real land for other purposes.

5) A sense of accomplishment. I acknowledge a real island may be cheaper. However, anyone can purchase an island and live on it. Making a floating island and living on it successfully would be something to be proud of.

Although, I'd still like those numbers. Thanks for your assistance.

[Yan]

As it has happened before, if an artificial island is buildt, the modern conventions give the right to any nearby already recognised state to claim sovereignity over the new island.

I do not remember the name of the project, but Tonga recently has taken over such an attempt.

However, if anybody needs ideas on how to build them, check the project:

http://www.theworld.ae/

[Raymond]

As it has happened before, if an artificial island is buildt, the modern conventions give the right to any nearby already recognised state to claim sovereignity over the new island.

I do not remember the name of the project, but Tonga recently has taken over such an attempt.

Actually, the first part isn't completely true. The Tonga incident you are thinking of was for land built on another piece of land that was there, but not above water the whole time. A floating island, however, won't need to worry as much about that.

[J]

I do not remember the name of the project, but Tonga recently has taken over such an attempt.

I believe you're referring to Minerva. In some respects they've been resurrected as into a new Principality.

Dubai's "The World" project is a remarkable example. Although, I believe it cost billions of dollars.

[Aderyn Evereste]

As the structure gets larger, the strength it requires to stop it breaking up increases exponentially. It's worse when it's a single structure, but even interlinked multiple structures would encounter this problem.

What we need is a country perpetually suspended in the air by millions of helium balloons... ultimately it's about as practical.

[Liam Sinclair]

From the standpoint as an engineer, I personally wouldn't risk my life setting foot on that contraption. I highly doubt any of my Ocean and Naval Architectural Engineering colleagues would either.

But hey, it's a personal decision to build it. If you feel bold enough to risk your life on such an unstable structure, then go for it. As creative as the design is, it obviously isn't an engineered solution which is obviously what you want for this type of application.

[xon]

What we need is a country perpetually suspended in the air by millions of helium balloons... ultimately it's about as practical.

And to make defense much easier, simply have a bullet-proof shield on the bottom to protect the balloons, and have machine gun turrets hang down from it. For fuel, maybe Liam could engineer an electrolysis machine to obtain hydrogen from the water vapor in clouds.  

I like this quote on your page, Raymond:

Mark Twain, 1800's: "Buy land. They've stopped making it"

[xon]

A while ago, Lavalon actively researched land claims in the Gulf of Mexico on abandoned oil rigs, in Western Sahara, and, to a lesser extent, in Somalia. We concluded that Africa was too costly and too violent (for a small nation of our projected defenses). The oil rigs were Lavalon's best option and probably still would be. We concluded that in the Gulf of Mexico a) there are abandoned oil rigs, b) there are oil rigs out of US sovereignty, and c) there was deep sea charter boat access to oil rigs (they provided tours for sightseers). (But we could not confirm whether the charter boats went to oil rigs that were both abandoned and out of US sovereignty.)

[Raymond]

From the standpoint as an engineer, I personally wouldn't risk my life setting foot on that contraption. I highly doubt any of my Ocean and Naval Architectural Engineering colleagues would either.

But hey, it's a personal decision to build it. If you feel bold enough to risk your life on such an unstable structure, then go for it. As creative as the design is, it obviously isn't an engineered solution which is obviously what you want for this type of application.

Liam, I would like to know why you think this would be a bad idea. Why do you think this is not an "engineered solution"? What would you change to make it an engineered solution?

LysanderSpoone,r I'd still like to hear those numbers. Especially when you got numbers of $100,000.00 per square acre. My nubers were quite different.