underground cities

[sushi]

i think its an inevitable trend.

Overpopulation and land scarcity, given fixed land supply, will force people either to move up or go down.

Its either the cost of building downwards or colonizing upwards like outer space.

First transportation and infrastructure will move below earth, then production facilities and factories will move downward, to create more space and land to free up the surface. Those production facilities are most likely manless and fullly automated machines.

Earth will probably turn into coruscant from star wars.

 

[Black Rose]

when we run out of oil how will we grow plants underground?
plants need light. light comes from energy. where do you get the energy?
don't forget the minerals the body needs.

 

[sushi]

its actually two elements in this topic

1: how to solve the fixed land supply/scarce vs a exponential growing population

2: is moving and locating underground a trend or not

you can extract more energy from earth's core and inside than any other place, even more than fusion, this will probably freeing up land on surface for agriculture

even if humans are not going to move underground, transportation and advance manless production/manufacturing will locate underground.

 

[Cognisant]

It's really more a matter of energy supply and in most places geothermal energy is inaccessible because the Earth's crust is too thick, the heat dissipates back into the rock before the steam reaches the surface.

Without a large reliable energy source you wouldn't be able to support the necessary hydroponics, water treatment and HVAC systems necessary to keep people alive, much less in a decent standard of living.

Now if we had fusion... Coruscant would be a slum by comparison to the mega-structure Earth will become, hence why nations around the world are pouring billions into fusion energy projects which may not produce a viable energy solution for another 50-100 years.

 

[crippli]

I think there are a lot of words used. But what could one do. What can one do?

What is the humane way to threat an "animal" that is in "pain"?

Is earth in pain?

Or was this the point?

Is there a problem?

 

[scorpiomover]

i think its an inevitable trend.

Overpopulation and land scarcity, given fixed land supply, will force people either to move up or go down.

Its either the cost of building downwards or colonizing upwards like outer space.

First transportation and infrastructure will move below earth, then production facilities and factories will move downward, to create more space and land to free up the surface. Those production facilities are most likely manless and fullly automated machines.

Earth will probably turn into coruscant from star wars.

Humans will live underground and turn into Morlocks and Mole-people.

 

[scorpiomover]

Now if we had fusion...

hence why nations around the world are pouring billions into fusion energy projects which may not produce a viable energy solution for another 50-100 years.

The UK is building a fusion reactor.

I just hope it doesn't end up like Britain's nuclear fission reactor at Windscale.

Sorry, that's Sellafield. It changed its name after a terrible nuclear accident.

Sorry, that's Windscale. It changed its name again after lots more problems with the reactor.

Coruscant would be a slum by comparison to the mega-structure Earth will become,

Don't you mean Mega-City One?

 

[ZenRaiden]

You can also go under water. Just build a sky scraper from bottom of ocean all the way up and above water.
Deep down you have enormous amounts of geothermal energies.

We can also use energy of volcano above water.

Also deserts are inhabitable with little effort. Its just that no one wants to live there or plant any trees since it just costs too much.
To put simply cost is the problem not space.

 

[Cognisant]

I'm surprised seafloor mining isn't a bigger thing, just as there's deposits of iron and coal on land there's deposits under the sea and if you find a deposit in international waters you don't have to pay for mining rights.

 

[sushi]

Is there a way to solve the fixed land supply problem with larger and larger population ?

There is no way to increase the total land and surface area of the earth ( i have thought of some insane idea but it would require massive engineering like split earth crust), its either moving up or down.

the problem of moving to bottom of oceans and aquatic colonizaton is that the pressure is too high.

I'm surprised seafloor mining isn't a bigger thing, just as there's deposits of iron and coal on land there's deposits under the sea and if you find a deposit in international waters you don't have to pay for mining rights.

good point.

 

[sushi]

Creating more land area and expanding the planet is probably as impossible as squaring a circle.

It would probably take some insane engineering to change the maixmize shape surface area of the earth, like changing it into a square or torus.

or we move underground or to space.
otherwise land territory and water on earth would probably be fixed and we would probably kill each other over it.

 

[sushi]

sooner or later the surface of the earth cannot satisfy our lust for resources

what is to be done?

how to expand the earth? move underground move up?

 

[Rook]

underground more likely, in practice you can only go so far up, tho as seen in cities of today outward and upward would tend to be the norm for centuries more I'd say.... plenty of planet surface left, and only island-locked metropoli will likely face this problem, though as these cities tend to be economic hubs with high real-estate values and perhaps cost of living, they are less likely to breed a populous underclass who are desperate for lebensraum--if they can't survive, most will probably emigrate to areas where life and space are cheaper.

Underground/upward construction already happening to an extent in cities like Singapore. The problem comes in with sewer, electrical, communication and transport systems that are in the way, as well as aquifers/oceans. In a city prone to flooding, are vast underground living/working spaces a good idea? Maybe with adequate hatches...
Would almost say that with this mentality its better to design a new city or district from scratch, depending on the level of development of the city ofc. Consider that such digging operations in a city area are going to bring a halt to areas probably for safety/practical reasons. Drainage and sewage systems will have to be designed to take the sub-terra population in mind. Add the danger audits governments will likely conduct to consider the stability of buildings above/near the excavations and the expenses mount even more.

then there's the 40k arcology-turned hive option, where the city has stood for thousands of years and so many new layers and spires have been constructed that the original layers have become sunken, some sinking into the acidic cesspits of runoff from countless centuries of industry.
This isn't anything that we will see soon, perhaps in the far future if such concepts are even architecturally possible... considering that in most civilized places buildings are demolished to make place for newer ones, this fictional conception of human hives might be naive... my experience is that with a considerable underclass and enough poverty, good metal rarely goes to waste if it can be stripped for scrap, a potentiality which somewhat counters my love for sunken fabricatums of jagged rusting metal filled with eldritch science horrors of ages past.

*EDIT: Oh I guess if you drill the initial tunnel deep enough, you can cut under any city without having to go to the trouble of working in the city, which to me is a logistical nightmare considering the scale needed to make underground areas on par with above ground ones. What this will mean for seismic activity tho idk, there are many instances of mines and mining activity causing quakes and tremors, and building human habitats/factories underground will entail far more digging than are done in mines imo. Subsurface colonies under Sahara/Antartica etc. maybe, where excavations won't cause damage to existing settlements?

 

[Hadoblado]

When are we going to reach the population point where this becomes necessary? I've long assumed we're going to take a big hit in population from climate change and so haven't thought much about overpopulation as an issue.

 

[PiedPiper]

i think its an inevitable trend.

Overpopulation and land scarcity, given fixed land supply, will force people either to move up or go down.

Its either the cost of building downwards or colonizing upwards like outer space.

First transportation and infrastructure will move below earth, then production facilities and factories will move downward, to create more space and land to free up the surface. Those production facilities are most likely manless and fullly automated machines.

Earth will probably turn into coruscant from star wars.

If humans have so strategically infected the planet that they can no longer fit on it, and must start to consume another, something needs to erase us. I want to watch the world burn.

 

[Rook]

When are we going to reach the population point where this becomes necessary? I've long assumed we're going to take a big hit in population from climate change and so haven't thought much about overpopulation as an issue.

I think once the species passes the 200bn mark(if that is even possible resource-wise)(also depends on pop distribution, if almost everyone concentrates in certain cities/countries space will become a problem by 50bn, tho one that is still manageable via emigration) ... even then space can be made by building in and onto mountains, floating on oceans etc. Climate change won't lower our pop that much imo, it isn't a flash ice age; war, famine and disease are the most likely things to winnow the herd(where an ever-warming planet might contribute to these factors, esp in concern to water security)