Pages:
Author

Topic: Bir Tawil nation - page 5. (Read 6380 times)

hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 501
April 15, 2014, 04:39:29 PM
#47
Antarctica is impossible from a technological stand point (energy, temperatures and seasons), unless of course you want to live with Hitler and his scret base in antarctica, maybe he can take you in his Hanebu to the dark side of the moon (which is not dark actually)

But anyways if you can set a permanent base in Arctanctica, setting one in Mars shouldn't be an issue (apart from getting stuff to Mars )
Antarctica is not impossible at all.
Mars would not be impossible either, but it would be a lot harder.
Apart from getting materials to Mars, there would be problems with food and water supplies. And of course, we must not forget the problem with oxygen. And the risk of meteor crashes is much higher thanks to its thin atmosphere. Oh, the atmosphere would also be a big problem since it doesn't stop much of the cosmic radiation. So simply, it would be a LOT harder.
So, lets not mix apples and pears, shall we? Wink

It is impossible, 6 month of night during polar winter at -70°C with nothing that can give you supply, you'll need a closed heated ecosystem to grow you own food which requires tons of energy

You can grow food on Mars and water is abundant on Mars and you can create a micro ecosystem CO2 is abundant in Mars plants will creat oxygene trough photosynthesis as there is abundant sunlight you just a green house to creat decent pressure, and yes you'll need space suite on Mars but you can creat oxygen being trough plants or water and air recycling and co2, as for meteorite, earth has more gravity and thus it is bound to attract more meteorites than Mars, also Atmosphere only burn small meteorites while for big ones it either makes them explode or split which is more devastating as for cosmic radiation is a non issue if the habitat is underground
Read my suggestion again. The nation would be build under ground. We'd have a closed ecosystem. The walls would be isolated. We'd be self-sufficient.

You can grow food on mars, and there is water there as well. But you'd still need energy to heat it up. Remember that it can be as cold as −153 °C during night times.
Earth may attract more meteorites than mars, but the martian atmosphere is a lot thiner than the earths.
And basically you're just copying my plan, but instead want to apply it on mars.
It would be much easier to build it on earth. Also, if we fuck up on our colony, we'll get help from the outside world. You won't.
Also, the gravity is much lower on Mars, and we don't know how the effects on the human body in such low gravity long term.

-153°C is the minimum temperature registered on Mars, it doesn't mean it gets that cold everywhere, in the equater the trempreture is more earth like that you might think.

This was answered, Atmosphere when it comes to meteorites won't make much difference, earth attract more and gives more kinetic energy to the incoming meteorites, and since we observe Mars and had probes and orbiters around it there was way more meteorites that impacted earth than on Mars.

Copying your plan? I didn't even read it, but as you mentioned your plan has some issues, like  the soil on Artanctica is 4km deep and to how deep you think you need your base to be built under to be adiabatic? how much would it cost? as for Mars just use an available cave, or use a 3D printer if you don't want to dig to built your own habitat, this plan was presented 3 decades ago by Dr Robert Zubrin, he didn't just present Ideas, but a whole plan presenting everything, from risk to cost. so no not copying your plan.

Getting to Mars and getting the material needed to Mars is the biggest problem in the equation, while when it comes to Artanctica that's a none issue, yet why there isn't a permanent scientific station to this day? while scientist runs whenever it is winter, the scientific research there is of such importance, from meteorological studies and ozone hole studies to, underground sealed lakes like the Vostok and what's not, (btw scientist had to leave because of winter just at the edge of it !)

As for gravity it's not much lower it is indeed lower but we aren't talking about the moon here we are talking about Mars which has around 38% of earth Gravity, which is easily negated with the heavy space suites, Gravity would be a problem getting to Mars on zero gravity not being there in a lower gravity that you can negate the effect.

Like I said before building a an a floating Island in international water is the most possible and cheapest plan to do
hero member
Activity: 541
Merit: 500
Garbochock
April 15, 2014, 03:53:08 PM
#46
it would really be interesting to see what would happen and how would other nations react to this Cheesy
Yeah, I think they'd get pretty upset, but thanks to their own treaty, they can't do anything about it! Cheesy
Another, 3rd option would be to build this floating island earlier mentioned, and place it in the unclaimed waters in Marie Byrd land, and solve the problems that rough seas brings.

if we were to build a floating island why would we place it near Antarctica when we could place it in international waters with a much better climate? Cheesy
Yeah, but then we'd have the problems with rough seas. Remember that the waves usually gets between 7-15 meters during storms, however, there have been waves reported as big as 30(!) meters. Good luck having a floating island that can resist that kind of waves.
If we place it in Antarctica we'd have protection from such, and we could have our perfect winter wonderland outside our door. Inside the island it would be kinda hot, preferably tropical climate, and outside we'd have a really cold, snowy landscape. We'd attract both tourists that wants a nice hot climate, and those who wants to go skiing. Win-win situation! Wink
what about the possibility of going to an uninhabited part of a 3rd world nation and starting fresh?
What Kiki112 said.
full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 101
April 15, 2014, 03:49:39 PM
#45
what about the possibility of going to an uninhabited part of a 3rd world nation and starting fresh?

interesting idea, but large parts of Africa are filled with armed rebels and dictator goverments, not really safe to start a nation somwhere around there Cheesy
hero member
Activity: 798
Merit: 500
Time is on our side, yes it is!
April 15, 2014, 03:47:13 PM
#44
what about the possibility of going to an uninhabited part of a 3rd world nation and starting fresh?
full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 101
April 15, 2014, 03:45:14 PM
#43
it would really be interesting to see what would happen and how would other nations react to this Cheesy
Yeah, I think they'd get pretty upset, but thanks to their own treaty, they can't do anything about it! Cheesy
Another, 3rd option would be to build this floating island earlier mentioned, and place it in the unclaimed waters in Marie Byrd land, and solve the problems that rough seas brings.

if we were to build a floating island why would we place it near Antarctica when we could place it in international waters with a much better climate? Cheesy
hero member
Activity: 541
Merit: 500
Garbochock
April 15, 2014, 03:36:09 PM
#42
Antarctica is impossible from a technological stand point (energy, temperatures and seasons), unless of course you want to live with Hitler and his scret base in antarctica, maybe he can take you in his Hanebu to the dark side of the moon (which is not dark actually)

But anyways if you can set a permanent base in Arctanctica, setting one in Mars shouldn't be an issue (apart from getting stuff to Mars )
Antarctica is not impossible at all.
Mars would not be impossible either, but it would be a lot harder.
Apart from getting materials to Mars, there would be problems with food and water supplies. And of course, we must not forget the problem with oxygen. And the risk of meteor crashes is much higher thanks to its thin atmosphere. Oh, the atmosphere would also be a big problem since it doesn't stop much of the cosmic radiation. So simply, it would be a LOT harder.
So, lets not mix apples and pears, shall we? Wink

It is impossible, 6 month of night during polar winter at -70°C with nothing that can give you supply, you'll need a closed heated ecosystem to grow you own food which requires tons of energy

You can grow food on Mars and water is abundant on Mars and you can create a micro ecosystem CO2 is abundant in Mars plants will creat oxygene trough photosynthesis as there is abundant sunlight you just a green house to creat decent pressure, and yes you'll need space suite on Mars but you can creat oxygen being trough plants or water and air recycling and co2, as for meteorite, earth has more gravity and thus it is bound to attract more meteorites than Mars, also Atmosphere only burn small meteorites while for big ones it either makes them explode or split which is more devastating as for cosmic radiation is a non issue if the habitat is underground
Read my suggestion again. The nation would be build under ground. We'd have a closed ecosystem. The walls would be isolated. We'd be self-sufficient.

You can grow food on mars, and there is water there as well. But you'd still need energy to heat it up. Remember that it can be as cold as −153 °C during night times.
Earth may attract more meteorites than mars, but the martian atmosphere is a lot thiner than the earths.
And basically you're just copying my plan, but instead want to apply it on mars.
It would be much easier to build it on earth. Also, if we fuck up on our colony, we'll get help from the outside world. You won't.
Also, the gravity is much lower on Mars, and we don't know how the effects on the human body in such low gravity long term.
hero member
Activity: 541
Merit: 500
Garbochock
April 15, 2014, 03:25:46 PM
#41
it would really be interesting to see what would happen and how would other nations react to this Cheesy
Yeah, I think they'd get pretty upset, but thanks to their own treaty, they can't do anything about it! Cheesy
Another, 3rd option would be to build this floating island earlier mentioned, and place it in the unclaimed waters in Marie Byrd land, and solve the problems that rough seas brings.
full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 101
April 15, 2014, 03:20:56 PM
#40
yeah, but low efficiency of the solar panels because of not so many sunny hours..

we would need a larger investment but it's worth it since we'll be saving a lot because we're not building our own island Cheesy

it's not only -70° but 6 months nights and also blizzard no supply can reach you for over half a year and no infrastructure there
Yes, but six months of night also means six months of day.
Sure, during that 6 months night the solar panels will not produce any electricity, but thanks to the power buoys and wind turbines we might have enough anyway. We could also produce biogas to use if we don't produce enough with our renewable systems, since it is hard to store the excessive energy for a time as long as six months. It's always good to have a backup system.

seems a bit too expensive

there isn't enough sunlight to produce a lot of electricity I think even the sun is there..
I'm pretty sure it is.

The biggest problem would be where to place it. It'd have to be placed in an "Antarctic oasis", an area that's not covered with snow or ice. However, all of those "oases" I can find is placed in territory claimed by other nations. The other option would be to build it inside a mountain in unclaimed territory, but that'd be to destroy the antarctic nature + rock is not very fertile.
So, that leaves us with only one option, to build in claimed territory. However, since most countries in the world does not recognize any claims on antarctica that should not be a problem. The country that claims the area we'll build on will not be able to do anything either, since military operations are strictly forbidden.
Here's a list of possible places for this settlement: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarctic_oasis#Geography

it would really be interesting to see what would happen and how would other nations react to this Cheesy
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 501
April 15, 2014, 03:18:27 PM
#39
Antarctica is impossible from a technological stand point (energy, temperatures and seasons), unless of course you want to live with Hitler and his scret base in antarctica, maybe he can take you in his Hanebu to the dark side of the moon (which is not dark actually)

But anyways if you can set a permanent base in Arctanctica, setting one in Mars shouldn't be an issue (apart from getting stuff to Mars )
Antarctica is not impossible at all.
Mars would not be impossible either, but it would be a lot harder.
Apart from getting materials to Mars, there would be problems with food and water supplies. And of course, we must not forget the problem with oxygen. And the risk of meteor crashes is much higher thanks to its thin atmosphere. Oh, the atmosphere would also be a big problem since it doesn't stop much of the cosmic radiation. So simply, it would be a LOT harder.
So, lets not mix apples and pears, shall we? Wink

It is impossible, 6 month of night during polar winter at -70°C with nothing that can give you supply, you'll need a closed heated ecosystem to grow you own food which requires tons of energy

You can grow food on Mars and water is abundant on Mars and you can create a micro ecosystem CO2 is abundant in Mars plants will creat oxygene trough photosynthesis as there is abundant sunlight you just a green house to creat decent pressure, and yes you'll need space suite on Mars but you can creat oxygen being trough plants or water and air recycling and co2, as for meteorite, earth has more gravity and thus it is bound to attract more meteorites than Mars, also Atmosphere only burn small meteorites while for big ones it either makes them explode or split which is more devastating as for cosmic radiation is a non issue if the habitat is underground
hero member
Activity: 541
Merit: 500
Garbochock
April 15, 2014, 03:15:37 PM
#38
yeah, but low efficiency of the solar panels because of not so many sunny hours..

we would need a larger investment but it's worth it since we'll be saving a lot because we're not building our own island Cheesy

it's not only -70° but 6 months nights and also blizzard no supply can reach you for over half a year and no infrastructure there
Yes, but six months of night also means six months of day.
Sure, during that 6 months night the solar panels will not produce any electricity, but thanks to the power buoys and wind turbines we might have enough anyway. We could also produce biogas to use if we don't produce enough with our renewable systems, since it is hard to store the excessive energy for a time as long as six months. It's always good to have a backup system.

seems a bit too expensive

there isn't enough sunlight to produce a lot of electricity I think even the sun is there..
I'm pretty sure it is.

The biggest problem would be where to place it. It'd have to be placed in an "Antarctic oasis", an area that's not covered with snow or ice. However, all of those "oases" I can find is placed in territory claimed by other nations. The other option would be to build it inside a mountain in unclaimed territory, but that'd be to destroy the antarctic nature + rock is not very fertile.
So, that leaves us with only one option, to build in claimed territory. However, since most countries in the world does not recognize any claims on antarctica that should not be a problem. The country that claims the area we'll build on will not be able to do anything either, since military operations are strictly forbidden.
Here's a list of possible places for this settlement: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarctic_oasis#Geography
full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 101
April 15, 2014, 02:29:53 PM
#37
yeah, but low efficiency of the solar panels because of not so many sunny hours..

we would need a larger investment but it's worth it since we'll be saving a lot because we're not building our own island Cheesy

it's not only -70° but 6 months nights and also blizzard no supply can reach you for over half a year and no infrastructure there
Yes, but six months of night also means six months of day.
Sure, during that 6 months night the solar panels will not produce any electricity, but thanks to the power buoys and wind turbines we might have enough anyway. We could also produce biogas to use if we don't produce enough with our renewable systems, since it is hard to store the excessive energy for a time as long as six months. It's always good to have a backup system.

seems a bit too expensive

there isn't enough sunlight to produce a lot of electricity I think even the sun is there..
hero member
Activity: 541
Merit: 500
Garbochock
April 15, 2014, 02:26:45 PM
#36
yeah, but low efficiency of the solar panels because of not so many sunny hours..

we would need a larger investment but it's worth it since we'll be saving a lot because we're not building our own island Cheesy

it's not only -70° but 6 months nights and also blizzard no supply can reach you for over half a year and no infrastructure there
Yes, but six months of night also means six months of day.
Sure, during that 6 months night the solar panels will not produce any electricity, but thanks to the power buoys and wind turbines we might have enough anyway. We could also produce biogas to use if we don't produce enough with our renewable systems, since it is hard to store the excessive energy for a time as long as six months. It's always good to have a backup system.
full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 101
April 15, 2014, 02:22:22 PM
#35

they will not allow us

Quote
Article IV § 2 states: “No acts or activities taking place while the present Treaty is in force shall constitute a basis for asserting, supporting or denying a claim to territorial sovereignty in Antarctica. No new claim, or enlargement of an existing claim, to territorial sovereignty shall be asserted while the present Treaty is in force”

That only applies to countries that has signed the treaty. Which we won't. Anyway, non of the nations have the right to deny our claim either. Also, if they disagree with our decision they can't do anything since according to the treaty, no military activity is allowed on Antarctica. I don't see what could possibly stop us? (except for money)

hmm

you made a point there

but it's Antarctica, it's -70C Cheesy

who would want to live here? Cheesy

altough, yeah, nice temperature so our miners don't overheat Cheesy

but we'll have a hard time acquiring free electricity

it's not only -70° but 6 months nights and also blizzard no supply can reach you for over half a year and no infrastructure there

that put solar panels out of the option Cheesy

lol

is there enough wind for wind power?

also curious if there are parts which aren't frozen and unclaimed
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 501
April 15, 2014, 02:15:10 PM
#34

they will not allow us

Quote
Article IV § 2 states: “No acts or activities taking place while the present Treaty is in force shall constitute a basis for asserting, supporting or denying a claim to territorial sovereignty in Antarctica. No new claim, or enlargement of an existing claim, to territorial sovereignty shall be asserted while the present Treaty is in force”

That only applies to countries that has signed the treaty. Which we won't. Anyway, non of the nations have the right to deny our claim either. Also, if they disagree with our decision they can't do anything since according to the treaty, no military activity is allowed on Antarctica. I don't see what could possibly stop us? (except for money)

hmm

you made a point there

but it's Antarctica, it's -70C Cheesy

who would want to live here? Cheesy

altough, yeah, nice temperature so our miners don't overheat Cheesy

but we'll have a hard time acquiring free electricity

it's not only -70° but 6 months nights and also blizzard no supply can reach you for over half a year and no infrastructure there
full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 101
April 15, 2014, 02:14:20 PM
#33

they will not allow us

Quote
Article IV § 2 states: “No acts or activities taking place while the present Treaty is in force shall constitute a basis for asserting, supporting or denying a claim to territorial sovereignty in Antarctica. No new claim, or enlargement of an existing claim, to territorial sovereignty shall be asserted while the present Treaty is in force”

That only applies to countries that has signed the treaty. Which we won't. Anyway, non of the nations have the right to deny our claim either. Also, if they disagree with our decision they can't do anything since according to the treaty, no military activity is allowed on Antarctica. I don't see what could possibly stop us? (except for money)

hmm

you made a point there

but it's Antarctica, it's -70C Cheesy

who would want to live here? Cheesy

altough, yeah, nice temperature so our miners don't overheat Cheesy

but we'll have a hard time acquiring free electricity
In the coldest place on Antarctica the average temperature is -55°C. The costal areas however is much warmer. During the winters the average temperatures is around −18 °C, while during the summers it's about 0°C, and sometimes even more.

Who would want to live there? Well, people who feels this is a cool concept and people who have no future in their current countries would probably at least consider it for example.

And no, we would not have to worry about miners overheating! Smiley

The electricity, as I've said earlier, we'll get from solar power, wind turbines and power buoys, and with the right amount of them they should be able to support us.

yeah, but low efficiency of the solar panels because of not so many sunny hours..

we would need a larger investment but it's worth it since we'll be saving a lot because we're not building our own island Cheesy

@about Mars

let's stay realistic, food transfer would be too expensive, not mentioning other things + oxygen
hero member
Activity: 541
Merit: 500
Garbochock
April 15, 2014, 02:11:32 PM
#32
Antarctica is impossible from a technological stand point (energy, temperatures and seasons), unless of course you want to live with Hitler and his scret base in antarctica, maybe he can take you in his Hanebu to the dark side of the moon (which is not dark actually)

But anyways if you can set a permanent base in Arctanctica, setting one in Mars shouldn't be an issue (apart from getting stuff to Mars )
Antarctica is not impossible at all.
Mars would not be impossible either, but it would be a lot harder.
Apart from getting materials to Mars, there would be problems with food and water supplies. And of course, we must not forget the problem with oxygen. And the risk of meteor crashes is much higher thanks to its thin atmosphere. Oh, the atmosphere would also be a big problem since it doesn't stop much of the cosmic radiation. So simply, it would be a LOT harder.
So, lets not mix apples and pears, shall we? Wink
hero member
Activity: 541
Merit: 500
Garbochock
April 15, 2014, 02:05:29 PM
#31

they will not allow us

Quote
Article IV § 2 states: “No acts or activities taking place while the present Treaty is in force shall constitute a basis for asserting, supporting or denying a claim to territorial sovereignty in Antarctica. No new claim, or enlargement of an existing claim, to territorial sovereignty shall be asserted while the present Treaty is in force”

That only applies to countries that has signed the treaty. Which we won't. Anyway, non of the nations have the right to deny our claim either. Also, if they disagree with our decision they can't do anything since according to the treaty, no military activity is allowed on Antarctica. I don't see what could possibly stop us? (except for money)

hmm

you made a point there

but it's Antarctica, it's -70C Cheesy

who would want to live here? Cheesy

altough, yeah, nice temperature so our miners don't overheat Cheesy

but we'll have a hard time acquiring free electricity
In the coldest place on Antarctica the average temperature is -55°C. The costal areas however is much warmer. During the winters the average temperatures is around −18 °C, while during the summers it's about 0°C, and sometimes even more.

Who would want to live there? Well, people who feels this is a cool concept and people who have no future in their current countries would probably at least consider it for example.

And no, we would not have to worry about miners overheating! Smiley

The electricity, as I've said earlier, we'll get from solar power, wind turbines and power buoys, and with the right amount of them they should be able to support us.
full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 101
April 15, 2014, 01:55:13 PM
#30

they will not allow us

Quote
Article IV § 2 states: “No acts or activities taking place while the present Treaty is in force shall constitute a basis for asserting, supporting or denying a claim to territorial sovereignty in Antarctica. No new claim, or enlargement of an existing claim, to territorial sovereignty shall be asserted while the present Treaty is in force”

That only applies to countries that has signed the treaty. Which we won't. Anyway, non of the nations have the right to deny our claim either. Also, if they disagree with our decision they can't do anything since according to the treaty, no military activity is allowed on Antarctica. I don't see what could possibly stop us? (except for money)

hmm

you made a point there

but it's Antarctica, it's -70C Cheesy

who would want to live here? Cheesy

altough, yeah, nice temperature so our miners don't overheat Cheesy

but we'll have a hard time acquiring free electricity
hero member
Activity: 541
Merit: 500
Garbochock
April 15, 2014, 01:53:15 PM
#29

they will not allow us

Quote
Article IV § 2 states: “No acts or activities taking place while the present Treaty is in force shall constitute a basis for asserting, supporting or denying a claim to territorial sovereignty in Antarctica. No new claim, or enlargement of an existing claim, to territorial sovereignty shall be asserted while the present Treaty is in force”

That only applies to countries that has signed the treaty. Which we won't. Anyway, non of the nations have the right to deny our claim either. Also, if they disagree with our decision they can't do anything since according to the treaty, no military activity is allowed on Antarctica. I don't see what could possibly stop us? (except for money)
full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 101
April 15, 2014, 01:41:10 PM
#28
So I'v seen a few threads about building a bitcoin island

But the only territory that is unclaimed except for Antartica territories is Bir Tawil

It's basically sand, nothing else

BUT

High temperatures, plenty of sunny time means paradise for the crypto community

Why?

Setting up solar panels with maximum usage (so much sunny hours Cheesy) and generating free electricity to build massive space for mining

Possibility of creating a cex.io like website and selling mining GH/s etc. to acquire money for this project

What do you guys think?

2060 km2, a lot more then a 10sq km2 island to build or a 0.2 sq km2 island to purchase Smiley

For reference Bir Tawil (arabic) means long (water) well the zone is unclaimed officialy but there are soldiers in the region.

Solar panels is not a good solution due to the temperature, but Solar thermal power is (better than solar panel imo) plus I'm not sure about this the region should have great wind tunnels so Wind power should be another solution.

but there are some other serious issues, like pirates that have quite the numbers in the region, also it is a very instable and poor region (Sudan is in the middle of a civile war with armed groups and separatist and what's not. The best option for is to built an Island in international waters, near in a strategic zone, I think near the shore of Morocco is not a bad choice, as you can get the work force easly, you are in the middle of major fiber optic lines (between EU/Africa and the US (no NSA Control)) , the weather is not bad, and you can get plenty of energy being it, solar, wind, and hydraulic using ocean currents) the other option would be the pacific, but it doesn't have the same advantages

hm, interesting

I understand the danger

but there is no other territory with such volume we could take

that's why it's so appealing
Antarctica is bigger, safer AND we can take it! It's a bit cold though... Wink

they will not allow us

Quote
Article IV § 2 states: “No acts or activities taking place while the present Treaty is in force shall constitute a basis for asserting, supporting or denying a claim to territorial sovereignty in Antarctica. No new claim, or enlargement of an existing claim, to territorial sovereignty shall be asserted while the present Treaty is in force

Pages:
Jump to: