Comments page
(You may have to reload this page to see new comments
or modifications to the source paragraph. Also note that the source
section may have been edited since some of these comments were
made.)
Original Paragraph:
[ Modified Thu Dec 11 16:14:28 PST 2003
]
[ Modified Mon Sep 20 16:51:28 EDT 2004
]
[ Modified Mon Sep 20 17:00:06 EDT 2004
]
[ Modified Fri Oct 29 02:10:48 EDT 2004
]
[ Modified Fri Oct 29 02:15:01 EDT 2004
]
[ Modified Mon Nov 15 14:48:11 EST 2004
]
[ Modified Mon Nov 15 15:00:28 EST 2004
]
As with most aspects of seasteading, there will be a trade-off
between cost and convenience. As we'll see, obtaining the basic
drinking requirements of 4 L/p/day will be trivial using any of
our methods of water production. The quantities of water used on
land (200-300 L/p/day) are feasible only in very rainy areas or
at great expense. The individual preferences of seasteaders will
determine what point in this range is selected. We'll use 5, 15,
and 100 L/p/day as our points of analysis.
Source: http://seastead.org/commented/paper/infra.html#As_with_most_aspects_of_seasteading_there_will_be_
Add a comment
Comments:
[Thu Nov 13 22:24:14 PST 2003-316] NOSPAMjdgrov@yahoo.com.NOSPAM:
Another interesting thought here is that you could conceivably store large quantities of water on the cheap. Floating freshwater bags on the near-seastead sea. Similar concepts have been 'floated' for transporting freshwater from regions with excess freshwater supply to regions with a deficit (Alaska to Southern California, specifically).
Could be cost competitive with cisterns on a seastead. Would need to be retractable, and probably not feasible except during extended periods at anchor. Could be used to help offset seasonal or shorter fluctuations in precipitation.
[Fri Nov 14 13:57:47 PST 2003-317] Patri Friedman (NOSPAMpatri@seastead.org.NOSPAM):
I actually had the same idea, and it was in the paper for awhile. But our engineer convinced me that a reasonably-sized cistern could easily fit on a seastead and so there was no need. I think part of the reason is that water production is somewhat limited/expensive, so if you build up large amounts of water reserves, you are spending too much effort on water production. Also water really doesn't take up that much volume, ie a waterbed is ~150G, which is months of drinking water.
But for regions with monsoon/drought patterns, or seasteads that had 'local' weather like that because of moving, it would be good...I'll add it back in.
[Thu Feb 12 01:15:01 PST 2004-42] Justin Corwin (NOSPAMthesweetestdream@hotmail.com.NOSPAM):
re water storage, the seastead design as presented contains a significant vertical element, even discounting the possibility of water towers. freshwater storage makes sense from an electrical power point of view(make use of peak power, avoid watermaking during droughts) and could be used as gravitational microhydro batteries as energy storage as well.
[Fri Feb 13 19:54:11 PST 2004-43] Patri Friedman (NOSPAMpatri@seastead.org.NOSPAM):
Yes, we mention the gravitational battery idea briefly in the power section.
Add a comment:
We'd love to get your feedback. Name and email address are optional.
Email will be listed with the comment, but munged to foil spammers.
Comments may be deleted by the sysadmin.
Currently, all HTML tags are forbidden for security reasons. This
will be improved later.
Back to original paragraph
View all comments on paper/infra.html for this
day,
week,
month.
Read about the SOCS commenting package