The Maldives is building a floating city to cope with rising sea levels

Shawn Knight

Posts: 14,252   +159
Staff member
Forward-looking: The Republic of Maldives has partnered with property developer Dutch Docklands and architecture firm Waterstudio to build a floating city large enough to accommodate 20,000 residents. Unlike other projects born out of luxury, the development is viewed as a practical solution to combat rising sea levels.

The Maldives is an archipelago consisting of many low-lying islands, 80 percent of which are less than one meter above sea level. In a worst-case scenario, the entire country could be submerged by the year 2100 due to rising sea levels.

The floating city being constructed in the Maldives is just 10 minutes away from the capital city by boat. It'll consist of some 5,000 floating homes, restaurants, schools and shops, which will be built in a local shipyard and towed into place. Units are anchored to an underwater hull to prevent them from drifting away.

Nearby coral reefs act as a natural wave breaker to minimize movement felt by residents.

The city will be self-sufficient as well, with most electricity coming via solar. Sewage will be treated and repurposed as plant fertilizer. Instead of traditional air conditioning, buildings and homes will be cooled with cold water from the depths of the Indian Ocean.

Pricing isn't all that bad, either, with a studio starting around $150,000 and a family home commanding roughly $250,000.

The city is expected to welcome its first inhabitants in early 2024 with the project due for completion by 2027.

Permalink to story.

 

scavengerspc

Posts: 2,657   +2,873
TechSpot Elite
About a quarter of an inch, which is on par with cyclical ocean rises in past eons.
This is an example of why our friends on the right don't post links with their "alternate facts". No reality needed! :joy:

 

scavengerspc

Posts: 2,657   +2,873
TechSpot Elite
Looking online it seems to be about 0.5-1.5 inches in the past 20 years and about 3 inches since 1950.
Another thing is the "cycling" so many are in love with, but this chart:

Co2-levels-800k.jpg


Shows an interesting fact. Consider that sea level has been rising since 1950s and look at what has happened with Co2 level during the exact time span.

Impossible to argue that we have broken the cycle.

 

Eldritch

Posts: 439   +710
Another thing is the "cycling" so many are in love with, but this chart:

Co2-levels-800k.jpg


Shows an interesting fact. Consider that sea level has been rising since 1950s and look at what has happened with Co2 level during the exact time span.

Impossible to argue that we have broken the cycle.

All excellent points but you can only wake up a person who is sleeping, never a person who is pretending to be asleep.
 

ScottSoapbox

Posts: 342   +601

Badvok

Posts: 350   +180
"80 percent of which are less than one meter above sea level" - I know the Maldives doesn't have a massive tidal range but doesn't that mean that 80 percent of it gets pretty much swamped twice a day?
 

Badvok

Posts: 350   +180
Impossible to argue that we have broken the cycle.
Not impossible, just anti-doctrine. Not a debate to really get into here but few of the data used are empirical, just extrapolations from very limited sample sets. If you go back further, rather than showing just a selection that supports your point of view, you'll find that all the CO2 we are putting into the atmosphere now came from the atmosphere. CO2 levels were over twice what they are now in the past.
 

Endymio

Posts: 1,673   +1,670
Consider that sea level has been rising since 1950s
Whoa, whoa. Sea level has been rising for the last 20,000 years -- since the last ice age ended. And point in fact, it's rising far slower today than it was 5,000 years ago. Events seen in the geologic record such as Meltwalter Pulse 1A show sea level rising as much as 25 meters just a few centuries ... several hundred times faster than the current rate of rise:
Post-Glacial_Sea_Level.png
 

Endymio

Posts: 1,673   +1,670
all the CO2 we are putting into the atmosphere now came from the atmosphere. CO2 levels were over twice what they are now in the past.
Much higher than that, in fact. During the early Carboniferous Period, CO2 levels may have been as high as 9,000 ppm -- or more than 20 times higher than today.

Interestingly enough, that period saw one of the greatest increased in biodiversity in the earth's history.
 

scavengerspc

Posts: 2,657   +2,873
TechSpot Elite
Sea level has been rising for the last 20,000 years
Not at this rate, is what I made clear. Since 1950.
For God’s sake, just think for a minute. If sea level had been rising at 3+ inches per every 60+ years there would have been no Maldives long, long ago.

During the early Carboniferous Period, CO2 levels may have been as high as 9,000 ppm -- or more than 20 times higher than today.
And check what the whole climate was like back then. Making a comparison to 325 million years ago is not wise. Earth now barely resembles Earth then, and we have known about climate and air quality from back then for a long time.
 
Last edited:

scavengerspc

Posts: 2,657   +2,873
TechSpot Elite
Not a debate to really get into here but few of the data used are empirical, just extrapolations from very limited sample sets. If you go back further, rather than showing just a selection that supports your point of view, you'll find that all the CO2 we are putting into the atmosphere now came from the atmosphere. CO2 levels were over twice what they are now in the past.
Just read the link to see how many things you are wrong about.
Let's count them!

Everything you said is in there, but you get a comedy award for saying the data is from "extrapolations". The data is from ice core samples that go back 800k years.
 

Endymio

Posts: 1,673   +1,670
Not at this rate, is what I made clear. Since 1950.
For God’s sake, just think for a minute. If sea level had been rising at 3+ inches per every 60+ years there would have been no land long, long ago.
Untrue, of course. The math here really isn't that difficult. Sea level has risen 120 meters in the last 18,000 years. That's an average of 16 inches every 60 years -- a much faster rise than what we see today.

In fact, if you look at the historical graph I posted, you'll see periods where sea level was rising faster than 3 inches per year, rather than 3 inches per 60 years.
 

scavengerspc

Posts: 2,657   +2,873
TechSpot Elite
Untrue, of course. The math here really isn't that difficult. Sea level has risen 120 meters in the last 18,000 years. That's an average of 16 inches every 60 years -- a much faster rise than what we see today.

In fact, if you look at the historical graph I posted, you'll see periods where sea level was rising faster than 3 inches per year, rather than 3 inches per 60 years.
Not fact checked. Again. Levels we saw were Temporary!
You quote Bill Bubba University and still dont provide the entire story.


"Over the past 20,000 years or so, sea level has climbed some 400 feet (120 meters). As the climate warmed as part of a natural cycle, ice melted and glaciers retreated until ice sheets remained only at the poles and at the peaks of mountains"

"But over the past century, the average height of the sea has risen more consistently—less than a centimeter every year, but those small additions add up. Today, sea level is 5 to 8 inches (13-20 centimeters) higher on average than it was in 1900."

"Scientists agree that the changes in climate that we are seeing today are largely caused by human activity, and it's climate change that drives sea level rise."

Of course.
 

Endymio

Posts: 1,673   +1,670
Not fact checked. Again. Levels we saw were Temporary!
No need to shout because I'm challenging your religious orthodoxy. And in fact, the link you posted yourself confirms my statement. Allow me to quote from it:

---> "With so much of the planet's water tied up in ice, global sea level was more than 400 feet lower than it is today. "

400 feet is 122 meters. We've seen a 120+ meter rise in sea level in the last 18,000 years. Simple math clearly demonstrates that average rate is far faster than the current rate of sea level rise.
 

scavengerspc

Posts: 2,657   +2,873
TechSpot Elite
No need to shout because I'm challenging your religious orthodoxy. And in fact, the link you posted yourself confirms my statement. Allow me to quote from it:

---> "With so much of the planet's water tied up in ice, global sea level was more than 400 feet lower than it is today. "

400 feet is 122 meters. We've seen a 120+ meter rise in sea level in the last 18,000 years. Simple math clearly demonstrates that average rate is far faster than the current rate of sea level rise.
Dont quote part of me correcting you and then claim the high ground.

"Over the past 20,000 years or so, sea level has climbed some 400 feet (120 meters). As the climate warmed as part of a natural cycle, ice melted and glaciers retreated until ice sheets remained only at the poles and at the peaks of mountains"

"But over the past century, the average height of the sea has risen more consistently—less than a centimeter every year, but those small additions add up. Today, sea level is 5 to 8 inches (13-20 centimeters) higher on average than it was in 1900."

"Scientists agree that the changes in climate that we are seeing today are largely caused by human activity, and it's climate change that drives sea level rise."