| Prev | Table of Contents | Next |
| Introduction | Recent comments: day, week, month (about commenting) | Why Seasteading? |
In order to set the stage, we'll discuss some of the
previous projects and schemes for living on the water. This will
include the real, the attempted, and the merely imagined.
Living on water is a concept that has been around for
centuries. One of the earliest seastead-like structures of which
we're aware is the Aztec Chinampas raft:
The floating gardens of the Aztecs of Central America, a nomadic tribe, they were driven onto the marshy shore of Lake Tenochtitlan, located in the great central valley of what is now Mexico. Roughly treated by their more powerful neighbors, denied any arable land, the Aztecs survived by exercising remarkable powers of invention. Since they had no land on which to grow crops, they determined to manufacture it from the materials at hand.
![]()
In what must have been a long process of trial and error, they learned how to build rafts of rushes and reeds, lashing the stalks together with tough roots. Then they dredged up soil from the shallow bottom of the lake, piling it on the rafts. Because the soil came from the lake bottom, it was rich in a variety of organic debris, decomposing material that released large amounts of nutrients. These rafts, called Chinampas, had abundant crops of vegetables, flowers, and even trees planted on them. The roots of these plants, pushing down towards a source of water, would grow though the floor of the raft and down into the water.
![]()
These rafts, which never sank, were sometimes joined together to form floating islands as much as two hundred feet long. Some Chinampas even had a hut for a resident gardener. On market days, the gardener might pole his raft close to a market place, picking and handing over vegetables or flowers as shoppers purchased them.
![]()
By force of arms, the Aztecs defeated and conquered the peoples who had once oppressed them. Despite the great size their empire finally assumed, they never abondoned the site on the lake. Their once crude village became a huge, magnificent city and the rafts, invented in a gamble to stave off poverty, proliferated to keep pace with the demands of the capital city of Central Mexico.
![]()
Upon arriving to the New World in search of gold, the sight of these islands astonished the conquering Spainards. Indeed, the spectacle of an entire grove of trees seemingly suspended on the water must have been perplexing, even frightening in those 16th century days of the Spanish conquest.
![]()
William Prescott, the historian who chronicled the destruction of the Aztec empire by the Spaniards, described the Chinampas as "Wondering Islands of Verdure, teeming with flowers and vegetables and moving like rafts over the water". Chinampas continued in use on the lake well into the nineteenth century, though in greatly diminished numbers.
[HydroHistory]![]()
This design is echoed in the artificial island called Los
Uros, made from marsh reeds, which floats on Lake Titicaca in
Peru. Its two thousand residents are mostly fishermen.
Current aquatic lifestyles can be placed into the following
rough categories:
A floating home is exactly what its name implies -- a
house built on a floating platform. There are many growing
floating home communities in places like Sausalito's Richardson
Bay [FloatingHomes] (just
north of San Francisco on the other side of the Golden Gate
Bridge.) Patri has pictures and a report from a tour of this
community [FloatingHomesTour].
The Netherlands, a country which is 50% below sea level, also
has a large number of floating homes. This lifestyle typically
start out as a clever technique for avoiding the high cost and
restrictive codes of some housing markets, but inevitably the
various government agencies figure out what is going on and
start to enforce building codes, property taxes and the
like. Eventually, the floating homes cost just as much as any
other form of real estate in the area.
Typically these structures don't have any on-board
propulsion. Also, floating homes are designed for sheltered
waters, so they don't need to worry about big waves. They can
be considered the floating equivalent of trailer homes. While
many floating homes are built in conventional fashion by
companies like [IMF], there are
plenty of unique and interesting exceptions.
In his original seasteading paper, Wayne Gramlich suggested
building floating homes using two-liter bottles for flotation
[Gramlich1999]. This
would provide a very cheap foundation, although its suitable
only for calm waters. It turns out that Rich Sowa had already
used this method to build a small island off the coast of
Mexico which he operates as a tourist attraction [MotherEarth2001], [Sowa].
Artist Andrea Zittel built a
concrete island home called the Pocket Property, and anchored
it off the coast of Denmark. She describes the experiment in
an interview: "When I was looking for a house, it was much
more important - the plot of land, and how big it was, and how
it was situated - than the actual house itself. And I've also
been really interested in how we create these little private
universes...It's a prototype for a particular type of
lifestyle. But if I were to extend that vision I would say
that it's possible that some day something like this might
exist, and that people would live in these community
spreads...So it's an experimental living situation, but it's
not utopian , or quite as idealistic as other ones that it
might relate to historically...It's like I have this fantasy
of being completely autonomous and independent and at peace,
not having any of the day to day problems, but then there's
also this sense of isolation that comes along with it."
[PBSZittel]
A more mobile method of water living is the houseboat [HouseBoats], which differs
from a floating home in that it contains a motor, and thus is
shaped more like a boat than a platform. Again, they are
designed to be operated in sheltered waters so that they do not
have to cope with significant waves. Most houseboats have all
of the amenities of a modest sized recreational vehicle --
kitchen, living room, bedroom, bathroom, etc. They are in fact
the aquatic equivalent of RV's.
While most houseboats are used for recreational purposes,
some people have moved into them on a permanent basis. For
example, there is a small houseboat community called Knight's
Landing on the Sacramento River. Discovery Bay and Redwood
Shores, both in Redwood City, are two more marinas where
houseboats moor in the San Francisco Bay. Europe, with its
large network of navigable waterways, is home to many
houseboats as well.
There are
parts of the world where entire villages have been built in
shallow waters. One example is the Sulu Sea, a huge shallow area
in the southwest part of the Phillipines. Around Sitangkai
Island, a community larger than the island is built on stilts.
Amusingly, the island is used for cemeteries, so only the dead
there live on land. The aquatic portion calls itself
"Little Venice of the South", although the name is
belied by its ramshackle, makeshift nature. Ron Gluckman's
article Real-Life Waterworld is an interesting discussion
of the area [Gluckman1996]
An ocean worthy sailboat is defintely large enough to
live in. Rather than buy a house on land, some people choose to
purchase a sailboat and live onboard. Thus, when you go to a
marina, there is a good chance that some of the boats in there
are being used as full time residences [Moeller1977]. In many US
marinas, live-aboards are limited to ten percent of all
berths.
When the boat owner has the time and resources, they can
undock from the marina and go sailing. Indeed, with enough
savings, they can live on the interest and spend all their time
traveling [Hill1993].
By carefully managing energy needs and using the right mix
of solar cells, trolling generators, batteries, and a backup
generator, is possible for a sailboat to be completely energy
self sufficient [Rose1979].
The next step, of self sufficiency for food, is much more
difficult for most sailboats due to limited solar
area. However, using a combination of growing small amounts of
food and scavenging local seaweeds it is possible to reduce the
amount of food you need to buy [Neumeyer1982].
While a carefully outfitted sailboat is capable of surviving
months at a time on the open ocean, eventually some consumable
resource will near depletion, and the sailboat will have to
return to land. Also the cramped spaces and human need for
social contact make most people desire periodic visits to port.
We'll discuss the pros
and cons of this method in more detail later when
considering designs.
The cruise ship industry has been growing rapidly for
decades. There are a number of different companies that provide
vacation packages for people to board a cruise ship for a week
or two. While the budget accomodations are pretty spartan, the
deluxe accomodations are luxurious. Extensive food and
entertainment are provided. Many cruise ships have on-board
casinos so that patrons may gamble, an example of profiting
from the freedom of international waters.
While cruise ships are large, ocean-worthy vehicles that can
stand some serious weather, most customers do not like rough
seas. Thus, a cruise ship will typically change its itinerary
to visit alternate ports of call in order to sail around or
entirely avoid a bad ocean storm.
Although a cruise ship can rightfully considered to be a
floating city, they are far from self-sufficient. The modern
cruise ship is typically only capable of cruising for a week or
two before its consumables need to be replenished. So while
cruise ships support a significantly larger population than a
typical sailboat, they can do so only for a limited time before
they must return to port and replenish water, food, and
fuel.
A new development in the cruise ship industry is the
idea of full time residency onboard. The ResidenSea Corporation
has built a $265M cruise ship with 110 residences and 88 guest
suites that allows wealthy patrons to live on the ship full
time as it cruises around the world [ResidenSea]. It began
cruising in March of 2002. Their waste policies are mentioned later.
Unfortunately they targeted the ultra-luxury market just as the
global recession hit, and for several years had troubles
selling units. In late 2003 the residents bought the ship from
the operating company to run it themselves. They report that
sales have been increasing (although there are still many empty
units). Still, it sounds as though the original financial
backers did not get good results. Given that its already
difficult to get funding for a new type of venture which
requires substantial capital, the ResidenSea result makes it
even harder.
Since an
oil platform is towed into its final locatation, it is more
like an artificial island than a boat. Oil platforms are
currently quite expensive, sometimes costing as much as a
billion dollars. This expense is reasonable since a single oil
well can generate millions of dollars of revenue in a single
day [Helvarg2001].
Since oil platforms are not permitted to move from their
location, they must be designed to withstand some incredibly
severe ocean weather. While they prove that it can be done,
cost reduction by several orders of magnitude is required to
make ocean living practical.
While not technically floating, private islands are often
considered as a potential location for founding new societies.
There is a substantial market for private islands [PrivateIslands], which can
be found throughout the world. However, all of them are claimed
by traditional jurisdictions, which have historically been
loathe to part with their political control. As island real
estate specialist Vladi Private Islands says:
There's something special about a private island. An isolated piece of paradise, its beaches and forests yours alone to enjoy. A virtual private kingdom under the sun. While this is enough for most of us, for some, only a real kingdom (or republic, or principality, or ?) will suffice. For these folks, a private island is but a means to an end - the establishment of a new, independent country. But is such a thing really possible?
The short answer is a pretty conclusive ' no'. Since the early 20th century, every square foot of dry land on Earth has been claimed by at least one country or another, which pretty much rules out discovering an unmapped tropical paradise, planting your flag, and setting yourself up as the local sovereign. Similarly, existing countries are more than a little reluctant to part with pieces of their national territory, no matter the financial incentives offered.
[PrivateIslands]
The Principality of Sealand [Sealand] is arguably the most
(perhaps the only) succesful new-country project in recent
history. It was founded in 1967, when Roy Bates, a pirate
radio operator, moved into an abandoned WWII anti-aircraft
platform called Rough's Tower. The platform was located about
7 miles off the British coast, which was then in international
waters.
Several incidents have supported the Principality's claims
of independence. Sealand fired warning shots at a nearby
repair boat, who took King Roy to court over the matter.
The ruling was that the tower was outside of the court's
jurisdiction. Later, some German men briefly seized the
platform by force, and were captured in a helicopter raid. One
was kept as a prisoner for several weeks, during which period
the German government appealed to the British government for
help. However, the British Foreign Office said that the tower
was beyond their jurisdiction [Strauss1984, p. 132-138].
More recently, Prince Roy has retired, and Sealand was
leased to a company called HavenCo [Havenco] for several years as a
data haven. Unfortunately, the experiment was ended in 2003
because of worries about the country being blamed for aiding
terrorism. There have been suggestions of expanding Sealand by
damming off and then draining an area around it. It will be
interesting to see if this upstart country can continue to
maintain its independence, and whether it can turn sovereignty
into business opportunities.
Those who do not learn from the mistakes of history are doomed
to repeat them, and so we have studied what little material
exists about attempts at seastead-like ventures. We find
some of the following quite illustrative. Note that the
distinction between "attempted" and "proposed" (the next
category) is somewhat arbitrary. Since most nation-founding
attempts don't get past the drawing board, our standards for what
constitutes an attempt are fairly low. Also, some of these
attempts are still ongoing.
The Freedom Ship [FreedomShip] is a proposal for
a mile long "City At Sea" for 40,000
people. The chief architect is an engineer named Norman Nixon.
The folks working on this one have managed to generate an
extensive amount of press coverage (including Popular Mechanics
and the Discovery Channel) and enlist dozens of volunteers.
Construction cost, unfortunately, is in the neighborhood
of ten billion dollars. While the large size makes the
idea newsworthy, it also makes financing extremely difficult.
This is especially true when ResidenSea, which was
approximately 1/40th the cost, could not sell all its units.
It seems fantastically unlikely to us that anyone will finance
such a large project until smaller ones have demonstrated that
the floating condo concept is viable.
Indeed, no signs have yet been seen of this staggering sum,
although the company has built an 11-foot long, 400 pound
model, which puts them well ahead of the average project. A
lack of transparency has been notable from the beginning, with
interested but skeptical people complaining that their
criticisms have all been deflected or ignored [Patri_FS]. However, rumour has
it that they'll soon be selling copies of the huge amount of
design work they've done. Only time will tell whether they can
raise the funds for this gigantic project. While we are rather
skeptical that it reach fruition in its current form, we would
be delighted to be proven wrong.
Another well-publicized venture during the 1990's was
the Aquarius Project, based on the book The Millenial
Project by Mashall Savage [Savage1992]. An organization
was created called the First Millenial Foundation, which later
changed its name to the Living Universe Foundation. Savage
proposes building many large floating cities out of hexagonal
cells made from a material called Sea-crete or alternatively
Seament. They would be powered by OTEC generators, which operate on
the temperature differential between surface and deep water.
Income comes from mariculture, hydrogen, magnesium, and
several other sources. Actually, only the first 100 pages of
TMP are about Aquarius, and the remainder discusses the
remaining 7 stages necessary to begin colonizing the galaxy.
This is an excellent example of the viewpoint that ocean
cities are a stepping stone to space colonies.
Unfortunately, while the book is stuffed full of technical
information, the basic ideas behind Aquarius are at the very
least ahead of their time. They may even be inaccurate. We
discuss the flawed calculations behind seacrete [Seacrete] and the currently
nascent state of OTEC [OTEC] in
more detail later, when explaining why those technologies are
not currently part of our plan. In addition, Savage is overly
ambitious, focusing on huge cities without any plan for
starting with small ones. Unsurprisingly, without prototypes
to demonstrate that the ideas were sound, there was not enough
interest to build an initial Aquarius settlement.
A seamount is a not-quite island, an underwater
mountain without enough oomph to make it to sea level. Like
land, seamounts are geographically stable but politically
problematic. They can act as breakwaters if
they're close enough to the surface, which is quite useful
since waves are one of the major dangers of the ocean. Also
they can function as anchoring points or pillar
foundations. However if they are raised above sea level,
they are vulnerable to claim by land-based jurisdictions, as
happened with the Minerva Reef. Since this incident
exemplifies the reasons why free-floating sea structures are
better politically, we will recount it here.
Michael Oliver, a Las Vegas real estate millionaire, made
several nation founding attempts. At one point he focused on
the Minerva Reefs, 260 miles southwest of Tonga, which were
conveniently outside the territorial waters of any nation and
below water at high tide. Quite large, they seemed perfect
as a foundation for a new, sovereign territory. His plan was
to build them up with sand and create a new island and a new
country, and he hired dredges from Australia in 1971. After
six months, he proclaimed the independence of the Republic of
Minerva, which issued coins.
The only reaction he got was from the Kingdom of Tonga,
Minerva's closest neighbor. A box of supplies was dropped on
the new land which said "supplied and maintained by the
government of Tonga", an action said to be supported by other
nations in the area. His Majesty then ventured to Minerva
with a gang of convicts and a four-member band. They planted
the Tongan flag, played the Tongan national anthem, and
claimed the sandy patch for Tonga. After they left, the
forces of nature did their work, and the sand of Minerva
returned slowly to the ocean from whence it had sprung. [Strauss1984 pp. 115-117].
This is a classic example of the lengths to which nations
will go to preserve their cartel status - even a worthless
patch of sand is seen as competition. If a new nation is
created on land (no matter how small or undesirable), it is
likely that the nearest traditional nations will claim
jurisdiction. It may be possible to negotiate a treaty, but
that is likely to be expensive and prospective nation
founders are unlikely to have much to bargain with.
The short-lived Isle of Roses offers another excellent
example of the antipathy with which countries view nearby
nation-founding attempts. As Strauss explains:
Giorgio Rosa was (or is) a professor of engineering in Bologna, Italy. In the early 1960's, he built a tower in the Adriatic Sea, in water less than 20 feet deep, about 8 miles off the coast of the Italian city of Rimini. This first tower was wrecked by a storm on February 13, 1965. A new one was built, with an area of about 4,000 square feet. It had a bar, a restaurant, a post office, a bank and a store, all surrounded by a promenade. The Italian authorities took no notice (since they only claimed 3 miles from shore as their territorial waters) until May 1, 1968, when the platform was declared to be an independent republic, whose official language was the artificial one Esperanto. The Italians invaded 55 days later, speaking vaguely of such things as "national security, illegality, tax avoidance, maritime obstruction and pornography." In the spring of 1969, Italian Navy frogmen dynamited the structure. At last report, Rosa did not plan to try again, saying darkly that "This country is all Mafia."
![]()
Mafia or not, this illustrates the extent to which existing countries are willing to brush aside written law if they think a new-country project has the potential to seriuosly inconvenience them.
[Strauss1984, p 129-130]
Another brief example of the greed of traditional
nations relates to the Cortes Bank, which lies off the coast of
San Diego:
The USS Abalonia was a concrete cargo ship, constructed for the purpose of becoming an independent nation. The company which built it hoped to anchor it in rich shellfish beds on the Cortes Bank, 100 miles off the coast of San Diego, and claim jurisdiction over the area. Shortly after the Abalonia's launch in 1969, it foundered and sank, nearly killing the crew. In the wake of the Abalonia fiasco, a second company began plans to build a platform on the Cortes Bank and declare it the nation of Taluga. The US government quickly gave notice that the Cortes Bank, as part of the continental shelf, fell within its jurisdiction.
[FootnotesToHistory]
This Ayn Rand-inspired project began as an attempt to
found a modern-day Galt's Gulch. The organizers placed a
declaration of sovereignty and request for a host nation in
several high-profile publications, including The
Economist (6/10/95, 8/12/95). Media such as the London
Times and BBC World Radio covered the story, and 3000 people
from 108 different countries contacted the founding Trust.
Unfortunately, the response from potential sites was less
enthusiastic. The principals followed several leads without
finding an acceptable locations (although their standards may
have been a bit high - the shallow shoals which LFC turned down
would be more than sufficient for our purposes). With no land
in sight, LFC transitioned to seeking freedom in cyberspace,
developing tools for digital freedom.
Eventually, due to personality problems and poor business
practices stemming from one of the founders and major financers
of the project, LFC was dissolved. Their early experiences
exemplify two of our claims about nation founding: that there
is a large potential market, and that it is extraordinarily
difficult to get sovereignty from existing nations.

Their webpage states:
Dedicated to creating ecologically balanced, floating ocean communities and terra-formed, permacultured islands, grown from the mineral-rich waters of the tropical oceans. We wish to share our creations and technologies to help expand the unity, prosperity and quality of life, of all the people of Earth.
This currently active project is based in Costa Rica, and
the fact that its principals were willing to relocate there
suggests that they are serious. Their website contains a
timeline, including the steps they have completed. They are
currently in the stage where they are beginning to need
financing, which is a very difficult time for any project.
While they pitch the seacrete + OTEC combination which we later debunk, they also
acknowledge that seacrete is not ready for prime-time yet and
plan to start with ferrocement. Their designs are partly based
on the Monolithic Dome Institute [MDI], which is another good sign, as
the MDI has helped construct hundreds of concrete domes. They
believe, as do we, in teaching by example rather than rhetoric.
Unfortunately they seem to be looking mainly to donations for
initial funding. It seems to be the most mature
environmentally motivated project.
Now that we have covered the existing strategies for living in
the middle of the ocean, as well as some methods that have been
attempted, it is time to visit some ideas that so far remain
merely visions. Some of the designs listed below are more
practical than others. This list could be quite long, and is
merely a selection of some of our favorites:
This is one of the most recent new country projects [Alexandisle]. Created by
Kevin Alexander, it is a haven for non-believers, where
faith-based promotion is considered fraudulent. It has an
unusual government structure: there are no taxes during an
individuals lifetime, but upon death, no more than $200,000 can
be left to any one heir (excepting spouse(s)). The remainder
must be given to charitable organizations which perform all
social services normally adminstered by modern governments.
Anyone can found a new charity if they are unsatisfied with
current ones. The founder believes that this prohibition on
inheritance will appeal to independent, self-made individuals.
While we have serious doubts about the appeal and viability,
of this system, the strength of the small-nation approach is
that people can experiment with many ideas and see which
work. Thus we wish them the best of luck. Additionally,
Mr. Alexander is writing an upcoming book Ten Thousand
Nations, which suggests "that humanity is much
better off with lots of small governments, rather than a few
large ones" [AlexanderUnp]. As we
wholeheartedly agree with this idea, we look forward to this
contribution to the tiny niche of nation-founding
books.
Pelagic: Adj. Free swimming, living in open ocean.
While Wavyhill's time
limitations have restricted this to a small (but
informative) website [Pelagic] and a small scale
model, we are still quite impressed with what we've seen.
His philosophy is extremely realistic:
"This is a geopolitical experiment on life in a floating oceanic habitat with no mandated societal structure beyond that of a loose, employee owned and operated enterprise. ... Many of these projects have been initiated by idealists, with no or vague business plan, expecting the rest of the idealists to rally to the cause and donate the required capital and effort. The pelagic project is not a utopian scheme, they never work. It's based on profitable enterprise, gradual growth, and being prepared for the worst from people and political organizations
He has a well-thought out timeline
based on an incremental approach, and discusses the problems of
building,
operating,
and financing
such a project. The basic structure is a large (50ft)
ferrocement hexagon, divided into small interior hexagons using
cellular concrete. We discuss this lightweight concrete in the
design section. Since it floats on the surface, his structure is
exposed to wave action, and without a breakwater we don't think
it would be suitable for the open ocean.
In 2003, Wavyhill actually made a 1/12th scale
model of his design using a cheap homebuilt foammaker.
This may not sound like much, but experimentation and a
willingness to start with small prototypes is rare among
nation-founders. This is unfortunate since we think its crucial
to success. While this project is no longer active, we
definitely recommend checking it out to see someone else's
version of the incremental, realistic sort of approach which we
are convinced is the most promising.
The New Utopia [NewUtopia] project is a
proposal to build a new country on an unused sea mount in the
Carribean. Like the Freedom Ship, this project has been able
to garner a significant amount of press coverage, especially at
the beginning when it seemed viable. Former insiders report
that there was significant business interest. Unfortunately,
the leadership was not interested in tackling the hard problems
that came up, preferring to sell a fantasy. Given what
happened with Minerva Reef [Minerva], we
are very doubtful that any sea mount raised above surface level
will remain unclaimed by the existing sovereign nations for
very long. More importantly, a number of more recent reports
have suggested that the project has become little more than a
scam [Patri_NU].
Floating Cities are one part of Jacque Fresco's The
Venus Project [VenusProject], which aims to
redesign world civilization to be more in line with human and
environmental concerns. This includes switching to a
resource-based world economy. While we are a bit suspicious of
their economic theories, Mr. Fresco has quite an impressive
resume. He's also designed and built a research center for the
project, which puts it well ahead of the plethora of
similar-sounding visions. Unfortunately, they said we could
not use any pictures from their site in this entry because our
description was too negative, which is a bad sign.
The Spar Buoy concept [Piolenc2001] is the brain
child of F. Marc De Piolenc. The concept is to build a livable
structure that is basically a long cylinder that is ballasted
on one end to cause the cylinder (i.e. spar) to float
vertically. Since the center of gravity is significantly below
the center of buoyancy, it basically impossible to tip the
structure over. In severe ocean storms, the cylinder bobs up
and down with the waves and the cylinder occupants may get
quite motion sick, but they should survive.
More recently, Dr. Robert D. Ballard (of finding the
Titanic fame) has proposed building a modest ocean habitat that
has many similarities to F. Marc De Piolenc's spar buoy
idea. The idea is to start with a ballasted spar and then place
a somewhat larger habitat on top. Thus, the difference is that
the living quarters are on top of the spar rather than on the
inside of the spar. This proposal has the advantage of being
quite modest and Dr. Ballard's obvious oceanagraphic experience
would provide a great deal of credence to any
investors.
Enrique Perez has come up with a novel idea based on
ancient reed ships [Perez2001]. The basic idea is
to make the whole flotation system flexible enough that it just
bends and sways in severe ocean storms. He has come up with
scripts that allow you to compute the costs and
buoyancies.
Another project out there for awhile was the Atlantis
project [Atlantis1994].
This project has an above average number of pretty pictures,
created by architect Jim Albea [ShadowMasons]. Indeed, it was this site that
got Wayne Gramlich interested in the concept of
seasteading.
Many nation-founding projects and websites focus on
pictures instead of planning. The Seascape [Seascape] site takes this to an
extreme, as it consists almost entirely of pretty 3D rendered
pictures and animations (along with a little flavortext). The
result is to showcase artistic skills rather than present a
practical proposal. As reader Glen Raphael comments:
They never quite make it clear why having drink-dispensing robots following guests around the complex is an improvement over the usual alternatives. Sure, it could be cool in a sci-fi sort of way, but it's ludicrously inefficient. Wouldn't some combination of drink vending machines, water fountains and human waitpersons delivering your drink order to human bartenders work just about as well and be a lot cheaper, more energy efficient, and more reliable? ... One really does get the sense this is more about creating an interesting science-fictiony fantasy environment than it is about making something practical.
When asked for permission to use a picture with the text
above, the project authors commented:
The site you saw is only an inter-office overview. Seascape endeavors to provide an environment that is responsive to the individual- it makes no attempt to be practical (or impractical for that matter). Does your city know you? Is your city "interactive"? We urge you to "stay tuned" over the ensuing months to see if we distinguish ourselves. Good luck on your compendium of sea-faring environments. You may wish to re-read the "flavor-text".
Unsuprisingly, their website has not changed in the
ensuing year. While there is nothing wrong with this approach
per se, it makes it harder for those of us interested in the
reality of floating cities to get taken seriously.
Buckminster Fuller designed a tetrahedronal floating city
for Tokyo bay in the 1960's. He wrote:
Three-quarters of our planet Earth is covered with water, most of which may float organic cities...Floating cities pay no rent to landlords. They are situated on the water, which they desalinate and recirculate in many useful and nonpolluting ways. They are ships with all an ocean ship's technical autonomy, but they are also ships that will always be anchored. They don't have to go anywhere. Their shape and its human-life accommodations are not compromised, as must be the shape of the living quarters of ships whose hull shapes are constructed so that they may slip, fishlike, at high speed through the water and high seas with maximum economy...Floating cities are designed with the most buoyantly stable conformation of deep-sea bell-buoys. Their omni-surface-terraced, slop-faced, tetrahedronal structuring is employed to avoid the lethal threat of precipitous falls by humans from vertically sheer high-rising buildings...The tetrahedron has the most surface with the least volume of all polyhedra. As such, it provides the most possible 'outside' living. Its sloping external surface is adequate for all its occupants to enjoy their own private, outside, tiered-terracing, garden homes. These are most economically serviced from the common, omni-nearest-possible center of volume of all polyhedra...When suitable, the floating cities are equipped with 'alongside' or interiorly lagooned marinas for the safe mooring of the sail- and powerboats of the floating-city occupants. When moored in protected waters, the floating cities may be connected to the land by bridgeways.
[Banham1976]![]()
There are some similarities between Bucky's design for a
floating city and our current plan. Both have buoyancy was
located below the wave action, and both use slopes to give
residents more solar area.
The Ocean Technology Foundation has proposed an undersea
habitat called Ocean Base One as part of its OASIS research
project [OASIS]. 3D images
of the design have been featured on Tech TV and The Learning
Channel, as well as in several print media outlets. Its main
purpose is research, and it is to be funded by foundations, oil
companies, the government, and other sources [Behar2002]. They expect to
complete funding and begin construction in approx. 2007-2010 [Rappaport2002]. While such
claims should be treated with some skepticism, there are a number
of points in its favor. OTF is an established foundation, oil
companies and government departments have lots of money, and the
$75M budget is modest compared to gargantuan proposals like
the Freedom Ship.
This project has been proposed by US Submarines, which has
succeeded in getting a fair amount of media attention for its
personal and tourist submarines. For example, a $20M model was
listed in one of Neiman-Marcus's christmas catalogues. Poseidon
is their concept of an undersea resort containing a restaurant,
bar, kitchen, foyer, and 20 luxury suites. It would be in 30-60
feet of water, and locations being considered include the
Bahamas, Uniated Arab Emirates, and Belize. The interior
pressure would be maintained at one atmosphere.
While political sovereignty is our interest, many past
projects have taken advantage of the ocean's freedom in other
ways. They demonstrate that "hacking the system" really can
work. Its important to have this empirical evidence to show that
there our ideas are not just based on theory. Many political
movements have failed because they misunderstood the difference
between theory and practice, words and actions, vision and
reality.
{ If you have any similar examples of using international
waters to increase freedom, please let us know }
Anyone who has been on a cruise ship knows that gambling
in international waters continues to the present day. Its
history near the United States, however, is a bit rocky:
Earl Warren...decided to advance his career by declaring war on the gambling interests. The operators responded by moving the casinos onto ships keeping the old mother-ship stations off the coast. The first reaction of Warren was just to go out and break up the casinos anyway, never mind that his lawful authority ended at the territorial limit. This is yet another caution to new-country organizers not to place overmuch faith in the written law.
![]()
However, the operators then went into Federal court...Roosevelt's Democratic Federal Regime wasn't very interested in helping him with his crackdown...when World War II broke out. The "war emergency" and ensuing near-panic on the West Coast were used as an excuse to shut down the ships summarily. After the war, a Federal law was finally passed making it illegal for a United States citizen or resident to own a gambling ship, or for anyone to transport people between the United States and a gambling ship...such a ban could likely be defeated on a challenge. But then other measures to harass the ship doubtless would be taken. In any case, with the spread of legalized casinos onshore, the long-term prospects for casino ships appear limited.
[Strauss1984, p. 140]![]()
Despite this pessimisstic outlook, gambling cruises are still
an active business. For example, a 2002 article on gambling in
the southern US reports: "FLORIDA: Numerous gambling cruise
vessels, ranging from ships carrying 1,800 passengers to
yacht-size boats carrying 150, sail from the East and West coasts
into international waters where gambling is permitted. The boats
offer roulette, blackjack, craps, video poker and slots, with
some of the larger cruise ships offering additional games." [McBee2002]
The offshore pirate radio movement is interesting both for its
own sake and in relation to the ideas of seasteading. A summary
of appears in Strauss:
In the 1960's, a new form of offshore activity emerged. Commercial radio as known in the United States didn't exist in Europe at the time. With few exceptions, all that was to be heard were staid government stations. Then a ship named Veronica dropped anchor just off the Dutch coast, with a transmitter beaming programing filled with the latest popular music. Advertisers eagerly bought up all the available time at premium rates, and imitators soon followed in the Scandinavian and British markets...At first, there was considerable violence between ships; however, the practice of maintaining 24-hour watches soon reduced that greatly...
![]()
The governments of Europe were outraged, and applied the pejorative term "pirates" to the broadcasters, a term with which they weren't entirely unhappy - due to its romantic connotations. Attempts were made to jam the ships' transmissions, but the public outcry was too great...International agreements were entered into to ban broadcasting from ships, but the African country of Sierra Leone chose to offer its flag as a flag of convenience rather than subscribe to the treaties...
![]()
The British finally knocked their offshore broadcasters off the air by banning advertising on them by firms doing business in the United Kingdom...then the coup de grace was delivered: the opening of popular music stations on land.
[Strauss1984, p. 141-145]![]()
Various snippets from another chronicle of pirate radio's
colorful history help fill in more detail:
"badly needed a way to break the 'payola' monopoly enjoyed by the 'big four' recording companies Decca, Philips, EMI and Pye."
![]()
"Only three weeks after it started the pirate station had an estimated 7 million listeners "
![]()
"Tragedy occurred at Red Sands fort on December 16th when RADIO INVICTA co-owner Tom Pepper, engineer Martin Shaw and disc jockey Simon Ashley were drowned in very bad circumstances following the capsizing of their launch after having delivered supplies to the station "
![]()
"The start of 1965 saw some 'big guns' lining up against the pop pirates when, on January 22nd, the governments of Belgium, France, Greece, Sweden, Luxembourg, Denmark and Britain signed a Council of Europe Agreement that not only banned broadcasts 'on board ships, aircraft or any other floating or airborne objects' but also banned anyone from those countries from supplying the pirates with materials, supplies or equipment. The stations were forced to obtain new sources of supply from either Holland or Spain, neither of whom had been party to the agreement...Caroline' was also in the happier position of being able to obtain supplies from Dublin or even the Isle of Man as the Manx government were reluctant to ratify legislation against the pirate ship due to the trade and tourism she brought to the island. "
![]()
"On May 12th at 5p.m. the entire Beatles 'Sergeant Pepper' was played by Radio London, two weeks before its official release date, despite the fact that no promotional versions had been issued by EMI. The origin of the music has never been explained, although Paul McCartney's house had been burgled a fortnight earlier and among the items taken were two proof pressings of the disc...."
![]()
"At midnight on 14th August 1967, The Marine etc, Broadcasting (Offences) Act came into force, which effectively banned all U.K. subjects from being involved with offshore broadcasting within territorial waters and rendering all the pirate radio station operators and personnel open to prosecution as soon as they came within the '3 mile limit'...RADIO VERONICA, being off the Dutch coast, was unaffected by the British Act but had its own problems in the Seventies when the Dutch government finally got around to passing a similar law...The last of the legendary Sixties offshore pirates still operating in its original form, RADIO VERONICA, finally succumbed to the Dutch Marine Broadcasting Act on August 31st 1974. "
[SixtiesCityPR]![]()
The history of pirate radio is fascinating and involved.
While we've only briefly touched on it here, you've heard enough
about pirate radio and gambling ships to see a common life cycle
for such ventures. Government regulation creates a market.
An offshore provider springs up to serve that market, and at
first enjoys tremendous success. New regulations attempt to
limit the industry, with mixed success. Finally, the onshore
industry opens up - not as open as the pirates, but with a small
enough difference that the extra costs and difficulties of
offshore operation render the pirates uncompetitive.
We'd like to point out that if the offshore provider's goal
was to stay in business and make money forever, being co-opted
like this indicates failure. But if the goal was a social
movement like increasing freedom, it is at least partial success.
We'd consider it a victory if building seasteads becomes
unattractive because traditional governments become more dynamic
and flexible. However, we think this is unlikely because of some
key advantages of water over land which we'll talk about in the
next section.
Although pirate radio history is definitely relevant, there
are some important differences between pirate radio and
seasteading. First, note that these broadcasts targeted
sovereign territory, infringing the government's right to control
the signals on its land. This is a much more questionable
activity than seasteading, and more likely to generate a strong
reaction. Also, the government cracked down by making it illegal
to advertise on pirate radio ships or sell them supplies.
Advertising doesn't work unless you know what the product is,
thus its easy to crack down on. Also pirate radio ships were not
in the least self-sufficient. So stronger economic levers were
available against this business than will be for opponents of
seasteading.
This was an internet server business run on Sealand, offering secure colocation
facilities without government regulation. While its not clear
exactly why the business failed, there are a number of strong
possibilities.
In the beginning, they got a fair amount of publicity as a
"data haven". However, they had to compete with small countries
around the world also eager to profit from a low-regulation
environment. They were founded just in time for the dot-com
crash and associated global recession. A few years later, when
the War on Terrorism got going, the owners of Sealand become
worried about anti-terrorist blowback. Furthermore, as a
somewhat amateur venture, Havenco was plagued with business
problems, at least according to cofounder Ryan Lackey, who spoke
at Defcon about the experience [Defcon_Havenco].
From his report, most of the time was spent dealing with the
large amount of press stemming from a Wired magazine cover
article, rather than on sales and customer service. The business
was disorganized, lacking proper capital, and displaying a much
better face to the world than the actual situation. Eventually,
the business problems, and the issues between Sealand and Havenco
led to the end of the company.
Many of these are important points for prospective
seasteaders. If they are building a business, not just a home,
it needs to be run like a business - which means a reasonable
amount of financing and business experience for the job at hand.
The difficulties in being reliant on the whims of Sealand's
owners is an example of why it is better to find solutions that
don't depend on a cooperative host country. And on a more
optimistic note, HavenCo found it quite easiy to get a huge
amount of publicity, which would have been invaluable if they'd
had the other pieces in place.
The reason we include the busines here, rather than among
failed projects, is that nowhere in that list of reasons is
"significant interference from other states". Havenco
successfully hosted online gambling sites through an internet
connection to the UK, less than 10 miles away, which would not
have been legal in that country. They were left alone, and not
because they had a navy to match the UK's (an amusingly laughable
fantasy), or because no one had heard of them (quite to the
contrary!). Instead they just chose a business they could get
away with and a location with reasonable historical precedents to
be independent.
Whether or not one agrees with their views, this pro-choice
Dutch project is a good example of the potential for using
international waters for political freedom. One of the founders
of WoW had been a doctor on board the Greenpeace vessel
Rainbow Warrior, and was influenced by offshore pirate
radio. They traveled to Ireland in 2001 and Poland in 2003. In
their own words:
Women on Waves is a non-profit organization concerned with women's human rights. Its mission is to prevent unwanted pregnancy and unsafe abortions throughout the world.
![]()
Every year 20 million abortions are performed under illegal and unsafe conditions, resulting in the deaths of an estimated 70,000 women annually. In response to this medical calamity, Women on Waves has developed a mobile gynecological unit, the 'A-portable'. It can easily be loaded onto a ship, which enables it to travel to wherever it is needed worldwide. The 'A-Portable' can also travel by truck allowing it to go to countries where reproductive health services are legal but largely unavailable, for example due to war.
![]()
With a ship Women on Waves can provide contraceptives, information, training, workshops, and safe and legal abortion outside territorial waters in countries where abortion is illegal . Working in close cooperation with local organizations, Women on Waves wants to respond to an urgent medical need, empower women to exercise their human right to reproductive health and legal, safe abortion and draw public attention to the consequences of unwanted pregnancy and illegal abortion.
![]()
An Australian doctor proposed a similar plan in 2000 and 2001
for a "euthanasia ship" to legally help end the lives of
terminally ill patients [Batty2001]. However nothing
further appears to have been done.
| Prev | Table of Contents | Next |
| Introduction | Why Seasteading? |