July 26, 2011

Dealing with the effects of climate change

A Bangkok-based architecture firm recently unveiled its vision for a floating city that could deal with the threat of rising sea levels. Set in what they dub a “Post Diluvian Future”, this design would allow Bangkok to rise and fall with the tides.

Bangkok’s foundations are rapidly sinking due to erosion caused by yearly floods of seawater. Overpopulation and rising sea levels have been accelerating this process, and one recent UN study found that most of the city will become marshland by 2050.

This proposed design seeks to embrace the change in a Waterworld-inspired city dubbed by S+PBA as “Wetropolis”. Mangroves would serve as natural water filters, as well as supplying fresh oxygen and natural cooling. The filtered water could then be used for shrimp farming. People would live above the water fields in an interconnected network of buildings, walkways and roads.

China might well be wealthy enough to afford such radical changes to their cities. The rest of the world will likely not be so lucky, but might have no other choice. If you think that the cost of acting now to reduce the impacts of human-induced climate change are high (when they are clearly minimal compared to something like the GST), then consider the cost of implementing something like this on a mass scale.

  • John

    It is great that withe introduction with Carbon Tax you see people moving away from Generators and going with Inverters. The 8ZED Inverters are the way to go and you do not get chagred the carbon tax. I run a mobile Coffee Van and this has been a life saver. 
    http://performanceshop.com.au/power-inverters.html

  • http://twitter.com/juggler3482 Steve Hammond

    Shame on the Australian government for buying into the carbon credit scam.  You have failed your citizens!

  • Saferain

    Please tell me why helium comes from “natural gas”.
    Remember the Hindenburg.
    It was supposed to run on Helium supplied from Texas.
    The Yanks pulled the plug on this.
    So, you “fossil fuel” believers, why is it so?
    Why do we have perfectly formed Jurassic fossils
    in coal? Coal is supposed to be compressed cycads
    and squashed dinosaurs. So, the surrounding fossils
    escaped destruction.
    Don’t you feel a little uneasy?
    All of what we were taught about oil and coal as
    kids about a gently sinking swamp morphing into
    the vast coal belts and mighty oil fields are lies.
    Oil will NEVER  run out. There is more gas (methane)
    than ever before. Coal seam gas seems to be
    everywhere.
    Read Thomas Gold.

  • Steve

    I spoke to an environmentalist the other day, and as always they mention overpopulation. As usual they complain about others, especially from poor developing countries.  I mentioned how Environmentalism is really just another push for globalisation by destroying nations ability to produce, while fostering Multinationals.  The example was how AWB is now owned by Cargill the biggest grain cartel in the world responsible for destroying more Amazon forest than any other company, growing Monsanto Soy beans.  AWB used to allow our farmers to compete with Multinationals by pooling the crop, what interest does Cargill have in getting any price for our grain, and then the Enviro’s are cutting back water allocations in the Murry Darling – where do we get our food from when we don’t produce any – see how Environmentalism works with Imperial Industry – that is the intention of the Carbon Tax as well.  The Enviro crazy then said, we produce more than we need so it doesn’t matter – I said isn’t it a morale responsibility to provide food to those who cannot produce it until they develop their own production?  The Greenie said no its not. I said why do you think you have the right to choose who live and who dies because of your ideology of “Overpopulation”, The Greenie the ranted about war and how it relates to the “Planet” – the key being some quote about “Not to die for your country”, but let the “enemy die for theirs” – meaning poor developing peoples of the world.  I challenged him and said, “since that is your belief, would you kill members of your family for this ideology.”  The crazy Greenie said, “Yes I would, I stand by my principles.”
      Would you consider this person to be a Genocidalist? I would.  The guy was from Lismore.