| Eagle Rising Nonprofit Vision, Survival, and Adaptability |
Will future cities be built underground? We all hope that there will never
be a reason to build cities underground. However, it is not a new strategy,
many ancient civilizations built underground quarters and structures for
escape, hiding, and defense. However, building cities underground might
be the greatest survival strategy for those who would like to survive
human induced disasters such nuclear war, chemical, and biological
plague. New modern underground cities would make the population less
vulnerable to the nuclear thermal blasts, and the air system could be
filtered for radioactive fallout and hazardous chemicals. Furthermore,
such a living system would be easier to handle for quarantine encase a
biological plague (on humans or plants). For the maximum safely and
comfort such a living system would have to be powered by a nuclear
reactor (even if only for an emergency). The nuclear reactor would be the
only source of energy that would create sufficient energy for the
population to filter the air, provide filtered safe water, and supply
adequate energy to grow most of the food indoors (safe from fallout
contamination) needed for a population. In addition, food would be
vulnerable to biological agents (we don’t know what kind of biological
attack would occur), and drastic climate changes that might make growing
food too difficult the first couple of years. Of course such a population
would have to think in terms of the most efficient food sources such as
spirulina, fish, and the most productive plants.
I don’t believe that humanity would need such cities to survive such
catastrophic events, but humanity does need such cities if it wants to
save a critical population mass in order to preserve a common
civilization. However, would there be other attractive benefits to moving
a city underground. Such a city could free space on the surface for
recreation/conservation, reduce the amount of materials needed to build
other surface cities, and make filtered pollution free air possible. Further
more, a population that is not interfering with the web of life on the
surface may help devastated lands recover faster. The rivers could flood
their natural flooding plains; large herd animal could once again travel
great distances, and etc. Right now, underground cities are no use to the
majority of the population of the earth. However, there are several
situations and groups of people that such cities would benefit the
population and might even offer an interesting investment opportunity for
people. Here are three good examples of countries that would strongly
benefit from the underground city paradigm. The three that come to my
mind are India, Taiwan, and Israel. These three countries suffer from a
common threat; nuclear or some other kind of war with their neighbors,
pollution, and over population. It was only recent, that India was close to a
nuclear standoff with Pakistan over Kashmir. Furthermore, Israel lives
under threat of rocket attacks everyday and has belligerent neighbors
that even utter the words, “wipe Israel off the map.” Even more, Taiwan
lives under threat of an invasion from China everyday. Even if the worst
case scenario does not happen, these countries could free up land and
protect land that is not in use right now by moving the current population
or the population growth underground. The countries would also save
precious resources needed to build extensive cities on the surface.
Further more, the filter system in the city could also produce clean air,
current air in those countries are sometimes hazardous compared to
pollution level standards in the many Western Nations. Though these
cities offer extremely attractive benefits to these countries, could they be
a source of investment in a country like the USA.
Is it true that the people from countries like the USA or Canada have no
interest or current need for such cities? These countries probably don’t
need these types of cities in order to reduce pollution or save space.
Many of the problems inflicting these countries currently are related to
efficiency, better management, and development of green technology.
Unfortunately, we do have a need for such cities, in order to face
unprecedented attacks or mishaps. Such cities would be necessary in
order to protect against nuclear attacks, air dispersed chemical attacks,
or for quarantine in the aftermath of a severe biological attack. Such
structures could be used for growing food if the biological attack or
pestilence targeted our food supply. For such an attack, granted we don’t
even know what it might be, we only get one warning and chance. In order
for such cities to be a realistic safeguard they must have an investment
incentive. Such underground cities could slowly be develop over time by
being built first as nuclear plants as a way to free ourselves from fossil
fuels such as coal, ease quarantine in the case of meltdowns or terrorist
attack, and be able to produce energy in the aftermath of a nuclear strike.
This would be one of the first steps to develop a safe and sustainable city
in the aftermath of certain types of disasters. Additionally, such structures
could be built for biotechnology development encase of necessary
quarantine in the event of an industrial accident. There would also be
benefits for the military to develop safe operating bases for the military
personal and families. Unfortunately, if the structures do not provide a
safe food supply and a way to manufacture armaments our military
structure would surely fail. This may seem like a good thing for those that
want a more utopia world of peace; however we don’t know what type of
threat we will face. Moving on, people with an interest in sustainability or
space colonization might be interested in these types of structures.
Space colonist could model the city after a mining structure on an
asteroid or another planet. They would need efficient living quarters that
use the least amount of resources. Certain aspects about underground
city may even be attractive to people interested in sustainability. Such
people might be interested in the idea of minimal interference with
ecosystems on the surface or the amount of efficient it would require to
run such a living environment.
be a reason to build cities underground. However, it is not a new strategy,
many ancient civilizations built underground quarters and structures for
escape, hiding, and defense. However, building cities underground might
be the greatest survival strategy for those who would like to survive
human induced disasters such nuclear war, chemical, and biological
plague. New modern underground cities would make the population less
vulnerable to the nuclear thermal blasts, and the air system could be
filtered for radioactive fallout and hazardous chemicals. Furthermore,
such a living system would be easier to handle for quarantine encase a
biological plague (on humans or plants). For the maximum safely and
comfort such a living system would have to be powered by a nuclear
reactor (even if only for an emergency). The nuclear reactor would be the
only source of energy that would create sufficient energy for the
population to filter the air, provide filtered safe water, and supply
adequate energy to grow most of the food indoors (safe from fallout
contamination) needed for a population. In addition, food would be
vulnerable to biological agents (we don’t know what kind of biological
attack would occur), and drastic climate changes that might make growing
food too difficult the first couple of years. Of course such a population
would have to think in terms of the most efficient food sources such as
spirulina, fish, and the most productive plants.
I don’t believe that humanity would need such cities to survive such
catastrophic events, but humanity does need such cities if it wants to
save a critical population mass in order to preserve a common
civilization. However, would there be other attractive benefits to moving
a city underground. Such a city could free space on the surface for
recreation/conservation, reduce the amount of materials needed to build
other surface cities, and make filtered pollution free air possible. Further
more, a population that is not interfering with the web of life on the
surface may help devastated lands recover faster. The rivers could flood
their natural flooding plains; large herd animal could once again travel
great distances, and etc. Right now, underground cities are no use to the
majority of the population of the earth. However, there are several
situations and groups of people that such cities would benefit the
population and might even offer an interesting investment opportunity for
people. Here are three good examples of countries that would strongly
benefit from the underground city paradigm. The three that come to my
mind are India, Taiwan, and Israel. These three countries suffer from a
common threat; nuclear or some other kind of war with their neighbors,
pollution, and over population. It was only recent, that India was close to a
nuclear standoff with Pakistan over Kashmir. Furthermore, Israel lives
under threat of rocket attacks everyday and has belligerent neighbors
that even utter the words, “wipe Israel off the map.” Even more, Taiwan
lives under threat of an invasion from China everyday. Even if the worst
case scenario does not happen, these countries could free up land and
protect land that is not in use right now by moving the current population
or the population growth underground. The countries would also save
precious resources needed to build extensive cities on the surface.
Further more, the filter system in the city could also produce clean air,
current air in those countries are sometimes hazardous compared to
pollution level standards in the many Western Nations. Though these
cities offer extremely attractive benefits to these countries, could they be
a source of investment in a country like the USA.
Is it true that the people from countries like the USA or Canada have no
interest or current need for such cities? These countries probably don’t
need these types of cities in order to reduce pollution or save space.
Many of the problems inflicting these countries currently are related to
efficiency, better management, and development of green technology.
Unfortunately, we do have a need for such cities, in order to face
unprecedented attacks or mishaps. Such cities would be necessary in
order to protect against nuclear attacks, air dispersed chemical attacks,
or for quarantine in the aftermath of a severe biological attack. Such
structures could be used for growing food if the biological attack or
pestilence targeted our food supply. For such an attack, granted we don’t
even know what it might be, we only get one warning and chance. In order
for such cities to be a realistic safeguard they must have an investment
incentive. Such underground cities could slowly be develop over time by
being built first as nuclear plants as a way to free ourselves from fossil
fuels such as coal, ease quarantine in the case of meltdowns or terrorist
attack, and be able to produce energy in the aftermath of a nuclear strike.
This would be one of the first steps to develop a safe and sustainable city
in the aftermath of certain types of disasters. Additionally, such structures
could be built for biotechnology development encase of necessary
quarantine in the event of an industrial accident. There would also be
benefits for the military to develop safe operating bases for the military
personal and families. Unfortunately, if the structures do not provide a
safe food supply and a way to manufacture armaments our military
structure would surely fail. This may seem like a good thing for those that
want a more utopia world of peace; however we don’t know what type of
threat we will face. Moving on, people with an interest in sustainability or
space colonization might be interested in these types of structures.
Space colonist could model the city after a mining structure on an
asteroid or another planet. They would need efficient living quarters that
use the least amount of resources. Certain aspects about underground
city may even be attractive to people interested in sustainability. Such
people might be interested in the idea of minimal interference with
ecosystems on the surface or the amount of efficient it would require to
run such a living environment.
| Home |
| Express your ideas on the future cities forum |
The Green Economy
Save the economy
New jobs
National security
Save the economy
New jobs
National security
Join the Eagle Rising Listserve
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eaglerising/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eaglerising/
