A month after the March 11 Great Eastern Japan Earthquake the Japanese Cabinet finalized a ¥4.02 trillion (US$49 Billion) draft extra budget for the current fiscal year.  This sum shall pay for an initial phase for reconstruction work in devastated communities along Japan’s northeastern coast.   Compared to the total 1995 Kobe quake reconstruction supplemental budget of ¥3.23 trillion (passed in three phases), the initial phase sum for the recent earthquake/tsunami already surpasses the total Kobe figure.

To give an indication of the size of the project involving destroyed houses, harbors, bridges, and roads, ¥351.9 billion is slated for clearing and disposing of rubble — only.  About ¥1.20 trillion shall finance public-works projects, including re-building roads, ports and farmland (additional costs may involve the energy grid, telecommunication lines, mobile base stations, canals/irrigation, sewer and water pipes). About ¥362.6 billion will be spent for temporary homes for tens of thousands still in evacuation shelters.  This huge budget has nothing to do with the earthquake/tsunami-damaged Fukushima nuclear plants – no Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO) nor government estimates are available about the funds required to “clean-up” the plants (and the length of time required).  The Fukushima nuclear plants’ shut down also led to energy shortages in Tokyo, with rolling black outs, plus voluntary measures to curb energy use at homes and businesses.

Will Japan – and all other countries in the world following the current industrial/urban model of societal growth — continue with “business as usual” (re-building homes, malls, factories in earthquake/tsunami prone areas and importing oil/coal/gas to provide power for its cities)?  Or, is this the perfect time for a new vision for transformational, sustainable human colonies somewhere on Earth that can “ride out” future earthquakes and tsunamis?

There have been earlier visions of re-making Japan for a less crowded, less energy-intensive and greener place – going back to Prime Minister Kakuei Tanaka’s best-selling 1970s book on the re-distribution of industry and commercial activities throughout the Japanese archipelago.  Yet, this is more of the same: the paradigm still involves oil/coal/gas/nuclear fuels for power/electricity production, and same traditional industries, like cars, chemicals, steel, electronics — just dispersed.

In the traumatic post-megaquake/tsunami society, pre-quake future strategy for Japan is out the window – just what is now “normal”?  On a wiped-clean whiteboard, there should be entirely new strategies and concepts, risk-taking, in order to create a safer (and less polluting, sustainable world) for future generations.

One area still unexplored is the ocean – more specifically, how can the ocean support large numbers of people in terms of food, energy, innovative products (like pharmaceuticals or sustainable farmed seafood) – on an ocean “platform” for a new frontier in the evolution of human society – on a permanent basis?

By definition, an ocean is a major body of saline water, and a principal component of the hydrosphere.  Over 70% of the Earth’s surface is covered by ocean (and some people do “live” on boats on the ocean, but mostly in harbors close to land or islands).  Though generally recognized as several “separate” oceans, these waters comprise one global, interconnected body of salt water with “parts”, including the Arctic, Atlantic, Indian, Southern, and the large Pacific Ocean.

Although there has been research/popular literature on the colonization of planets in our solar system (NASA has done research on long-term human habitation of the Moon; in Ray Bradbury’s 1950 “The Martian Chronicles”, human colonization is a metaphor for 19^th century Manifest Destiny or Westward Expansion by American settlers – in one short story, a Midwestern town is transplanted to the Mars surface), in contrast ocean colonization on a large scale on Earth has not been a major research topic (although, in a sense, it is our back yard).

In theory, ocean colonies can float on platforms on the ocean surface, or be secured to the ocean floor, or float in various intermediate positions.  Interestingly, these ocean platforms, in legal terms, existing “outside” national sea boundaries, may develop in the future as “micro-nations” (one former World War II British anti-aircraft platform in the North Sea was declared by its new inhabitants as the Principality of Sealand – and the ruling “junta” issued stamps, designed an official flag, and named a national athlete).

One heavily promoted long-term project (hit by the recent global credit crunch) was an artificial archipelago in Dubai, United Arab Emirates – dubbed “The Palms” (actually there were several phases).  Major beachfront commercial and residential projects were planned on these reclaimed islands, yet these “new properties” were not real ocean settlements, but in the Dutch or Japanese tradition of creating more land along coastal areas (unfortunately, in the March 11 earthquake, Urayasu, a district famous for Tokyo Disneyland, suffered from flooding and road fissures due to the reclaimed land sinking).

Although the giant “The Palms” project is not the best example for future ocean colonization, the planning yields many clues and insights on how to design/promote future ocean settlements, since the hype for beach-front lot sales and luxury hotels attracted global attention.

At the core of the branding of “The Palms” is a real estate/leisure marketing angle, not unlike any resort market.  Yet, only tourists or pensioners will not create a long-term ocean colony viable. The best mix would be: long-term residents + workers/researchers + tourists + business deal-makers in a “colony/state” that is not based on one national “culture” but is beyond nation-state and “culture” (for example, what “official language” should the residents speak?  How is the colony governed?  Do residents have votes?  Is the colony administered under the laws of a near-by country?  How “near”?  Also, would a country or island-state object to an artificial ocean colony, even if it was hundreds of miles away from the neighbor’s own shoreline?)

Ultimately, the project (the first one is the model for many more, throughout the oceans) should be a fusion/blend of tourism/education/research/ entertainment/leisure/health programs.  The project should have luxury hotels, apartments, international schools/research universities, hospitals, top-rated restaurants, monorail (no cars), marinas, parks, museums, concert halls, shopping malls, sports facilities and health spas – like an ocean-based San Diego.  In fact, the planning for one section of “The Palms” projected 4,000 homes over several years and theme parks, including Discovery Cove, Sea World, and Bush Gardens – a sales brochure would point out: why not live next to a year-round aquarium/sea attraction theme park?  And taking the cue, an ocean colonization project brochure would state boldly: “Why not live IN an aquarium/sea attraction all year round?”

Aside from real estate/leisure development and sales angle, there must be academic research/education projects to give an ocean colony a solid scientific, environmental foundation.  (By coincidence or not, the Kennedy Space Center in Florida – for visitors to be educated about space exploration – is located a hour’s drive from Disney World and other Orlando-area theme parks – plus, there are many wildlife sanctuaries around the restricted Space Center area).  This leads back to an unusual experiment called Biosphere 2, built in Arizona and used as a laboratory from the late 1980s into the 2000s.

In hindsight, the sprawling Biosphere 2 (“1” was planet Earth, in the Gaia model) can be seen now as an early test for ocean colonization, since its objective was a “sustainable” closed environment, but on land, a micro-Planet Earth.  Anticipating the ocean colony concept, one section in the Biosphere 2 was an tiny “ocean” with a coral reef, plus there was a small rainforest, a wetland, a grassland, a fog desert, and an agricultural section – imagine a covered greenhouse, over several football fields.  Small fields toiled by researchers produced a variety of crops, including rice, wheat, and potatoes — food for the inhabitants (without artificial fertilizers).  (Studies showed that the teams living in the Biosphere were indeed healthy – although the periods were probably not long enough to be conclusive for long-term results.)

The Biosphere 2 project provided a laboratory to address some fundamental issues about energy, sustainability, agriculture, and human health – a future ocean colonization project can be filled with researchers and scientists working on many projects, like aquaculture, that could lead to enormous changes in sustainable fisheries, and create new materials, energy sources, and new inventions and industries.

Where to put a scaled-up Biosphere-like colony in the ocean?  The best location may be near the equator – a colony anchored in a wintry and windy place like the Baltic Sea or Tierra del Fuego would be a sadistic experiment.  Recall the “tourism/leisure” premise of “The Palms”, located by sunny Dubai – the beaches and condos beckon as part of its “story” (even the Vikings of the Middle Ages knew the power of branding — dubbing a place “Greenland” to entice settlers to come to an inhospitable land).

The other long-term R & D project is the colony platform itself, and the development of new materials and technologies.  One concept would be a magnesium alloy-frame tower rising to 1,000 meters floating in an equatorial ocean – housing thousands of inhabitants.  Ocean scientists would pinpoint the optimum site for Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC) conditions – requiring tropical (warm) surface water and access to deep, very cold water. The temperature differential drives rows of electric generators via a turbine – which would power residences, factories, PCs and mobile phones.  Furthermore, deep cold water has fewer impurities and more nutrients, thereby increasing aqua-farming yields.  As discussed before, there would be the real estate component: beach homes, hotels, malls, and lagoons teeming with fish and shellfish – with aquaculture researchers conducting experiments, as well as private investment in farmed lobsters or tuna  – 100 percent food sustainability.

The ocean colony would have no power derived from fossil fuels, with electricity from only natural energy sources, including OTEC, wind, waves, and solar.  CO2 emissions will be reduced dramatically or even recycled.  Recalling the natural “lay-out” of the Biosphere 2 that mimics the earth’s various eco-systems, the colony infrastructure will have grasslands (for dairy farms), rainforest (oxygen release), and a tower of seed plants and vegetables, irrigated by water from desalination plants (powered by solar/OTEC, of course).

Finally, tsunamis cannot pose a danger to an ocean colony tower, since tsunamis in mid-ocean have gentle rolling waves and not the crashing torrents that came ashore along the northeastern Japanese coast during the last mega-earthquake and tsunami.

How to jump-start such a Utopian ocean colony (and a “new” global ocean-based economy)?  The best global leader profile would be an individual in the billionaire Richard Branson-mode (like his visionary Virgin Galactic space exploration venture and his recent ocean submarine and mapping project) who can move the ocean colony project quickly with his own funds, name and promotion.  It is certainly not a short-term project *, requiring horizons of decades until the first colony “anchor” is placed in the ocean.  It is a complex, multi-disciplinary endeavor, involving experts in ocean science, construction, new materials, energy, health, environment, aquaculture, agriculture, plus real estate, law, marketing, tourism, governance, and entrepreneurship.

Perhaps a small project funded with seed venture capital launched with a few dozen researchers scaling to several hundred on a experimental ocean colony platform shall yield insights on how best to plan and build a much larger version: the lab project could be next to an ocean theme park, and condos sold with a contract clause allowing Early-Bird buyers to buy 20-percent discounted Maine lobsters and enjoy free electricity from non-fossil fuel sources.  Promotion is key here, even for a project that may save the planet, back to where all Life began: a spiritual and healing quest for all Humankind.

*  To give a bit of perspective on national “Big Projects”, after President Kennedy spoke in 1961 to put a “man on the moon by 1970”, the U.S. Congress passed US$25 billion funding for the Apollo program, and U.S. astronaut Neil Armstrong bounced on the Moon surface on July 20, 1969 – five months before the 1970 goal – however, beyond several more bouncing astronauts, four decades later no permanent Moon colony exists nor are there any P & L on Moon house lot sales.)

source:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/raytsuchiyama/2011/04/24/ocean-colonies-as-the-next-frontier/