[HN Gopher] Denmark parliament approves giant artificial island ...
___________________________________________________________________
Denmark parliament approves giant artificial island off Copenhagen
Author : BlackVanilla
Score : 260 points
Date : 2021-06-04 21:27 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.bbc.co.uk)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.bbc.co.uk)
| gvd wrote:
| Cute
| dncornholio wrote:
| Giant? 2.5 km2 is childsplay :)
| sschueller wrote:
| Is this where they are going to send their asylum applicants? It
| would be a lot safer for them than in their home countries where
| they are being persecuted.
|
| https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-57343572
| geewee wrote:
| No the property prices would be way too high there for that..
| potiuper wrote:
| Might as well be done with it and build the wall between Skagen
| and Gothenburg.
| dustymcp wrote:
| I cant stop wondering the why its such a massive undertaking and
| we have plenty of land just expand on the other side i cant stop
| feeling that this is a prestige project with very little gain.
| aaron695 wrote:
| The article mentions it also "protects the port of Copenhagen"
|
| But otherwise it steals value from the city and it increases
| the coastline.
|
| Increasing the coastline is truly adding to society, humans
| value water access, but I suspect the stolen value by shifting
| the centre of mass of Copenhagen obfuscates it's true added
| worth.
|
| It's quite different to building up or down or abstract
| improvements like tunnels which increase density and more
| clearly add more than they take.
| lbriner wrote:
| That's exactly what I thought. There is a ridiculous amount of
| power that gets attached to a capital city, which means we
| can't do the sensible thing which would be to spend far less
| creating new towns or cities with modern sustainable methods,
| better balance of transport/living etc.
|
| I guess it is just good money after bad and the fact that
| despite the amount of sense it makes to build elsewhere, lots
| of companies cannot find good employees and think they need to
| be in the big city to get those.
| ed25519FUUU wrote:
| > _A case against the development of Lynetteholm has been brought
| before the European Court of Justice by environmental groups._
|
| I'm always a little surprised that the most wild and natural
| parts of world (the flyover country) is populated by anti
| environmentalists (or rather, libertarians typically), and the
| most densely populated cities devoid of most green things tend to
| have clusters of environmentalists.
|
| Don't they know they can come out to the country, buy 50 acres of
| woods and streams and meadows and wildlife, and not worry about
| how many cars are on the streets of Copenhagen?
|
| They'd love it in these areas. People ride horses and graze
| animals. They hunt and go bird watching and identify all of the
| local trees.
| monocasa wrote:
| I've heard some environmentalists make an argument for dense
| human cities. If you're going to have all those people and
| their infrastructure either way, compress it down and maybe you
| can leave more room for nature? They tend to be very anti
| suburbs along the same thinking.
| vidarh wrote:
| I ended up in an argument with local "environmentalists"
| exactly over this (in quotes, because I think being opposed
| to high density is not very environmentalist at all):
|
| They complained about new highrises near my local train
| station. I pointed out to them that those highrises would
| take up ~2,000 m^2 but provide housing for as many as one of
| the nearest local roads, that with the sidewalks, houses and
| gardens, many of which are paved over or mostly decking,
| takes up ~40,000 m^2.
|
| As such, if they wanted more green spaces the better stance
| would be to argue for _replacement_ rather than denying
| planning: E.g. make developers commit to buying up more low
| density housing and demolish a proportion of it and replace
| it with parkland or rewild it. The overall societal effect of
| not increasing housing supply _as much_ would be a negative
| (and so there may well be needs for government incentives),
| but increased green spaces would be a positive. And if it
| reduced overall resistance to more high density construction
| to explicitly link density to replacement, I think it 'd be
| worth it. E.g. award construction proposals with "points" in
| favour for whatever amount of existing construction they
| replace with parkland or nature that causes planning rules to
| strongly favour projects that increase density.
|
| But said "environmentalists" seemed dead set on seeing bigger
| buildings as inherently bad without engaging with the point
| that absent getting rid of people, creating more space for
| nature means making people take up less space, and that means
| higher density.
|
| To me arguing for high density is an essential part of
| environmentalism.
| pjc50 wrote:
| If only it was possible to have the kind of job and money
| that's only available in big cities while living there. Maybe
| the remote revolution will finally let this happen. Oh, and the
| social and cultural life as well.
| rvense wrote:
| > Don't they know they can come out to the country, buy 50
| acres of woods and streams and meadows and wildlife, and not
| worry about how many cars are on the streets of Copenhagen?
|
| In Denmark? Hardly. If you buy 50 acres here, you'll get fields
| or pastures, and the legal obligation to keep it as such.
| Actually, as far as I remember anything over 30 hectares will
| come with requirements that you have some sort of certification
| as a farmer.
|
| 0,5% of Denmark's 40,000 square kilometers is wild. The largest
| forests are all state-owned. 60% is farmed land - 80% of which,
| ie., 50% of the country, is used just to grow pig feed.
| boublepop wrote:
| There's no requirement to get a "certificate as a farmer" and
| you can get European subsidies to fund converting fields to
| forrests. The only thing you can't do is build more housing
| on the fields, because everyone in power in Denmark is doing
| everything they can to fight affordable housing.
| rvense wrote:
| A few years ago when I was looking at houses in the country
| there was definitely some requirement for buying more than
| 30 or 35 hectares of farmland. And while you might be able
| to get permission to convert some areas into forests, it is
| explicitly stated in the planning laws that the character
| of the countryside is to be preserved. I can assure you
| that there are lots of things you can't do.
|
| And before that, of course, there's the price. 50 acres way
| out in the sticks in America might be quite affordable.
| Arable land in Denmark, less so. There's no easy escape
| here like the post I reacted made it sound.
| henrikeh wrote:
| This case has nothing to do with urbanism but has to do with
| how the environmental impact of the project is measured.
|
| Put simply, despite planning and projecting the entire project,
| the environmental impact is done piece by piece. This vastly
| understated the environmental impact in the harbor and Oresund.
| This approach is what is being challenged, since it obviously
| disregards big picture thinking.
| fogihujy wrote:
| Also, many people are fed up with construction noise due to
| the metro being expanded.
| rsj_hn wrote:
| It makes sense if you view all these *-isms as a form of
| crafting a personal identity to distinguish yourself from
| others and find a peer group. You would need to do that to
| stand apart in a crowded city much more than out in the
| country. People who truly love nature, rather than the politics
| of nature, do spend a lot of time in it.
| gpm wrote:
| This has not been my experience, the most environmentalist
| people I know were generally born in small towns... Most also
| spent at least some time working in some form of "outdoor
| entertainment" that included long periods of time spent in the
| complete wilderness. Canoe/Hiking trips and the like. This
| includes people who at least publicly admired people who stuck
| spikes in trees to damage logging equipment (acts that people
| on the other side classify as terrorism).
|
| I get the impression that the least environmentalist people are
| also generally in small towns, but I can't say I've ended up
| associating with them as much. My impression is that they're
| generally this way because they're the people that
| environmental laws impact the most.
|
| City people seem to typically fall into a middle ground, not
| rabid in either direction.
|
| (Europe may be different, I'm Canadian, but broad generalities
| about environmentalists seem likely to carry over?)
| jaza wrote:
| Most of those environmentalists, strong though their
| convictions may be, wouldn't give up almond milk lattes,
| organic fusion sushi, constant social media, fast reliable
| internet, and all the other trappings of cosmopolitan hipster
| life, at least not for more than a few days.
| Tijdreiziger wrote:
| https://i.kym-
| cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/001/259/257/342...
| ilyu wrote:
| Some of them are just nimbys who doesn't want to see new
| residents in their neighborood especially if they esteem that
| theirs propertys could be valued less.
| vidarh wrote:
| This "neighbourhood" is currently water. I very much doubt
| that is the issue here.
| jamil7 wrote:
| Same tired angle over and over huh? Environmentalists are
| city-dwelling hipster hypocrites. It's been used by various
| politicians over the years.
| a0-prw wrote:
| The absolutely worst thing a human being can do to nature is
| move into it XD
| rhplus wrote:
| The photo in the article is labeled, _" The port of Copenhagen,
| where the artificial island Lynetteholm is planned to be built,
| as it is today"_, but fails to mention that the picture is of
| Trekroner Fort, itself an artificial island built on sunken
| warships from 1713:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trekroner_Fort
| BurningFrog wrote:
| > _The approval by Denmark 's parliament paves the way for the 1
| sq mile (2.6 sq km) project to begin later this year._
|
| That's not a giant island.
| bombcar wrote:
| A square mile is pretty big, especially for an artificial
| island. It's 640 acres (or something like 2,400 suburban
| homes).
|
| Sure it's not the size of Japan or something, but it's not
| tiny.
| danieldk wrote:
| The Dutch artificial island 'Flevopolder' is ~970 square km.
| So, I wouldn't say _giant_ when there is an artificial island
| that has a 373x larger surface area.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flevopolder
|
| It is still a very nice project nonetheless!
| tgv wrote:
| Even IJburg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IJburg) is
| 2.2km^2.
| dan-robertson wrote:
| But that's a polder made mostly by building dykes and
| draining the land rather than raising up the ground level
| across 970 square km. Flevopolder is about 4m _below_ sea
| level.
|
| I think the plan here is different and will not be done by
| building up dykes and draining the area inside.
| bombcar wrote:
| Yeah replacing water with air is a big project but
| replacing water and air with land is bigger.
| 7952 wrote:
| These kind of numbers are not intuitive. Don't forget that you
| are working in _volume_ of material. Making something only 1m
| high across 1 sq mile is around 2.5 million cubic metres.
| BurningFrog wrote:
| I only commented on the size of the island.
|
| As island go, "giant" is far from a correct description.
|
| Calling it a "giant project" would be fine.
| manexploitsman wrote:
| Wouldn't it be cheaper and better for the environment to buy some
| land off Germany or Sweden? Once the deal is sealed, they could
| start building the city the very next day.
| mongol wrote:
| Why do you think part of Sweden is for sale?
| Hamuko wrote:
| Yeah, countries are usually unwilling or incapable of turning
| over their land to another country.
|
| Back in 2016, the Norwegians had an idea to gift Finland a
| new highest peak by shifting the border between Finland and
| Norway just a bit as Finland was due to celebrate its 100th
| year of independence. However, it never actually went
| anywhere since it'd be unconstitutional for Norway to start
| splitting off its country.
|
| https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-37662811
| jeofken wrote:
| I'm not sure they would want Malmo back
| flexie wrote:
| There is plenty of space in Denmark for its existing population
| (and for millions more, for that sake). The issue is that there
| is not that much space in Copenhagen.
| haasted wrote:
| I don't really understand why expansion towards West is not
| an option.
| KozmoNau7 wrote:
| Because they want to sell expensive housing close to the
| sea, not affordable housing far from the sea.
|
| It's a stupid prestige project, primarily designed to
| attract rich investors, who will let their investment
| object apartments sit empty, creating another dead
| neighborhood.
| boublepop wrote:
| There is plenty of space in Copenhagen. However plans to
| build anything anywhere gets shot down constantly with silly
| laws and restrictions. Politicians don't want a more healthy
| housing market in the capital because they are all some of
| those who are profiting most from how unhealthy it is.
| hadlock wrote:
| This is to protect the local port for the capital of the
| country, particularly during large storms. Buying land inland
| along the border would not accomplish this protection task.
| ToFab123 wrote:
| There is a few miles of ocean between Demmark and Sweden.
| iscrewyou wrote:
| Here's a list of existing such islands:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_artificial_islands
| andrewshadura wrote:
| This insanity must be stopped. I hope the protesters don't give
| up and continue fighting this megalomaniac project.
| boublepop wrote:
| This is the absolute concentrate of idiocy. They need the island
| because there isn't land to build new housing... there's plenty
| of land to build new housing but every single attempt gets shot
| down with excuses about "maintaining nature" because every single
| politician has had a 3000% increase of the value of their houses
| and apartments in the capital region and don't want to see that
| end.
|
| Once the island is finally build and complete, some politician
| will find some species of frog on it that's suddenly vitally
| important to conserve even though it's also verywhere else in
| Denmark, and construction of housing will become prohibited.
| perihelions wrote:
| This is some remarkably long-term planning:
|
| _" If construction goes ahead as planned, the majority of the
| foundations for the island off Denmark's capital should be in
| place by 2035, with an aim to fully complete the project by
| 2070."_
|
| I can't recall ever seeing the year 2070 or later in print, in
| the context of some definite project or plan. Are there other
| examples?
| Clewza313 wrote:
| Closest I can think of is the Chuo Maglev in Japan, approved in
| 2011 with a completion target of 2045.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ch%C5%AB%C5%8D_Shinkansen
| sharken wrote:
| You could also add Sagrada Familia in Barcelona to the list,
| construction began in 1882 and might be done by 2032.
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sagrada_Fam%C3%ADlia
| mkl wrote:
| That wasn't the original plan though.
| robin_reala wrote:
| If we're talking cathedral delays, Koln Cathedral was
| started in 1248 and finished in 1880.
| dhosek wrote:
| Although medieval cathedral construction plans did often
| have timelines of roughly a century. The reconstruction
| of Notre Dame in Paris is expected to be 20-40 years
| which puts it awfully close to the 2070 completion date
| as well.
| ehnto wrote:
| Japan also has many artificial islands, I wonder how long
| some of those projects took.
| Danieru wrote:
| Most of those are a continuous project. The islands are the
| ultimate destination for incinerator ash and large garbage.
| The occasional tunneling project will dump the dirt etc.
|
| You can see from goog maps how there are a couple outline
| online islands under "construction" and once those are
| filled they'll outline more.
| yread wrote:
| Seems reasonable. Maasvlakte is a comparable project: an
| artificial island (20 km2 while this island is "only" 2.8km2)
| outside Rotterdam harbor and it was built over 25 years
| (1974-1997)
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maasvlakte (Dutch wiki has much
| more info: https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maasvlakte )
|
| Another comparable project is the new Strandeiland in Amsterdam
|
| https://www.amsterdam.nl/projecten/ijburg/deelprojecten-ijbu...
|
| 1.5km2, started this year, fully complete in 2040. But it's
| built in shallow, tide-less Ijsemeer not in the sea so it's a
| lot easier
|
| EDIT; the Dutch out of necessity have plans for up to 2200:
| https://www.delta.tudelft.nl/article/keep-our-feet-dry-new-n...
| _"One day with a sigh of relief we will give up this country to
| the waves."_
| aerique wrote:
| Well, to be somewhat fair: the IJsselmeer used be a sea
| (Zuiderzee) but The Netherlands blocked it off with a large
| dyke in the early 1900's.
|
| So you could consider it part of the long term planning
| ekianjo wrote:
| Kobe in Japan has several artificial islands. all built by a
| Dutch company.
| bertil wrote:
| I used to work with Dutch people who like to tell that "God
| made the world, the Dutch made the Netherlands." I
| corrected them, saying they made a lot more than that: I
| grew up on an island in France that was under the control
| of Dutch merchants in the XVIIth century; they built a levy
| to double the amount of dry land. There's polders like that
| everywhere.
|
| The levy has been fine for the last four centuries, but
| local engineers were thinking of raising it. For that, they
| might need someone to help them translate the original
| blueprint. I once joked about deciphering it when talking
| to another Dutch friend on mine. She's close to the Royal
| family and I was curious possibly needing asking Historian
| for help. She didn't seem surprised at all. Apparently a
| lot of Dutch diplomacy, to this day, is sharing that
| expertise and that unique, century-long, perspective. The
| King is a hydrological engineer (and a commercial pilot)
| and has lead international projects.
|
| The techniques and examples are pretty much ideas tested
| centuries ago, with the occasional minor adjustment like:
| windmills with Archimedes screw can be marginally improved
| if you use wind power and electric pumps. I'm sure someone
| on one of those projects has had to joke "Grand-grand-papa
| wasn't a big believer in ballast. It was a new idea then.
| But we can try this time."
| lazyjones wrote:
| China buit several artificial islands in just a few years -
| and not near shores (but some on reefs).
|
| https://southfront.org/chinas-artificial-islands-south-
| china...
|
| It can be done faster if enough resources are allocated...
| Denmark doesn't seem to be in a hurry.
| ajmurmann wrote:
| Might sustainability and geological context play a role? I
| thought the the Chinese islands were build on coral reefs
| and existing small islands. I also wonder about differences
| in currents and even requirements based on future use. A
| small military base to extend your empire probably needs to
| be less stable than a place you want to build a city on
| that should last forever.
|
| Comparison to the Palm and World islands in Dubai strikes
| me though.
| Muromec wrote:
| My most favorite fact about Strandeiland is how it looks on
| google maps plan view. Apparently google already extracted
| streets from the satellite imagery, but didn't yet updated
| the shape of island itself. So you see streets on IJ surface.
| https://goo.gl/maps/wrL42MHhBvPf1Ben9
|
| Oh and of course in this country cycling paths are built
| before any houses.
| krab wrote:
| Some countries export streets, addresses and buildings in a
| machine readable format. So it could be based on a periodic
| import, not on image recognition.
| dane-pgp wrote:
| It's not unusual to see such timeframes in the context of
| nuclear decommissioning. For example:
|
| "At around 2116, care and maintenance will end and any
| remaining buildings will be removed and the site returned as
| close as possible to its original state."[0]
|
| Also, depending on what you mean by "some definite plan", and
| how young you are, your pension plan may include an estimated
| retirement date later than 2070.
|
| [0] https://www.anglesey-today.com/decommissioning-wylfa.html
| shoto_io wrote:
| I think that's about the time that interplanetary space
| travel starts in Star Trek. I always thought that's way too
| early and the whole time should be starting 1,000 years
| later.
| guerrilla wrote:
| Seems like Blade Runner did even worse.
| shoto_io wrote:
| Indeed. I don't get it though. Why not push every
| timeline out by a safety margin of hundreds/thousand
| years?
| dane-pgp wrote:
| Personally I would have a hard time suspending disbelief
| if a story set in 2200 didn't have super-human AI and all
| diseases cured. Similarly there should be no pollution or
| over-population, at least in first world countries.
|
| For humanity to avoid achieving those things, there would
| have to be some significant barriers to progress that we
| don't know about yet, or a fairly disastrous collapse,
| which would limit the possible stories that could be
| told.
|
| I suppose that setting a story thousands of years into
| the future allows there to have been multiple collapses
| and renaissances, but I'm not convinced that such a path
| is as likely as a permanent collapse or reaching some
| sort of uninterruptible paradise state.
| another-dave wrote:
| Given only 58 years from the first flight to getting
| someone in space, they probably thought another 100 years
| of innovation sounded OK!
|
| Crazy looking back to think that Star Trek originally aired
| before the moon landing.
| Retric wrote:
| I think the retirement thing is a stretch. A 16 year old
| might see a retirement age of 2070 using a retirement age of
| 65.
| jltsiren wrote:
| Someone born in the late 1990s might expect to retire
| around 2070. Given the population structure in wealthy
| countries, early retirement at 65 is no longer feasible for
| most people in the younger generations.
| tiagod wrote:
| Calling 65 years old early retirement is insulting...
| cyberlurker wrote:
| Not sure if joking but that's generally the age where
| pension kicks in/an individual can start pulling from tax
| advantaged retirement accounts.
| Retric wrote:
| In the US you can start pulling from retirement accounts
| in your 40's as long as it's even distributions for the
| rest of your life.
| MomoXenosaga wrote:
| People from my mother's generation often started working
| when they were just 16. So when I see someone talking
| about them retiring at 65 it's important to keep that in
| mind.
| mech422 wrote:
| I was actually working 30+ hours/week from 12-13 years
| old, and I'm GenX. We're slated to retire at 67.
|
| P.S. - I was doing data entry for local real estate
| companies and simple BASIC 'cash register' setups for
| local businesses.
| Ericson2314 wrote:
| This is an oft-quoted phenomenon, but I think it's
| important to point out it need not be true. We've had
| chronically weak demand, in which case more retires
| should actually be _good_ , raising wages and spurring
| productivity improvements.
|
| In the US, just need to keep healthcare costs under
| control.
| adrianN wrote:
| Retirees are not known for generating large amounts of
| demand compared to younger people who work.
| Ericson2314 wrote:
| I don't really follow? Workers are supply (their labor)
| _and_ demand (their consumption), but as we have more
| productive industrial capacity and more of it, the cycle
| breaks down as not enough labor is needed, reducing their
| purchasing power and further slackening the labor market
| in a vicious cycle.
|
| Retirees don't work, which means nevermind the absolute
| amount of demand (no kids, etc., make less per household
| sure) the _ratio_ of supply to demand offsets the
| productivity / industrial capacity gains. Coupled with
| more retires, that could restore the balance and get the
| "Keynsian feedback loop" going again.
|
| (We could still go into a massive worldwide recession,
| but that would be a _political_ result of the powers that
| be not wanting the profit share of national income to
| decrease. That is plenty possible but not some
| unavoidable "demographic destiny".)
| JamilD wrote:
| The options for retirement funds in my 401(k) include
| "LifePath Index 2065 Account A", but that's as far as it
| goes for now.
| adventured wrote:
| Dams, skyscrapers, military bases, housing mortgages, bonds,
| business contracts, commercial leases, land/resource/farm
| leases.
|
| Lots of things have 50 (or longer) year plans, contracts,
| payoffs, repayment schedules, and so on.
|
| Here's Austria's recent 100 year bond (paying a comical 0.88%):
|
| https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-06-24/austri...
|
| The deal on Hong Kong was supposed to be 50 years, with it
| operating as a SAR.
|
| Modern US aircraft carriers are usually given a ~50 year
| service life. CVN-79, USS John F. Kennedy, would be planned to
| operate until roughly 2070. (the prior John F. Kennedy aircraft
| carrier, CV-67, made it about 40 years, 1967-2007)
| Gravityloss wrote:
| DC-3 aircraft from the thirties still operate. And aircraft
| experience nontrivial loads and wear.
|
| Good engineering and craftsmanship.
| keiferski wrote:
| Not quite the same, as it's already completed, but John
| Malkovich made a film with Robert Rodriguez that won't be
| released until 2115.
|
| _100 Years is an upcoming experimental science fiction film
| written by John Malkovich and directed by Robert Rodriguez.
| Advertised in 2015 with the tagline "The Movie You Will Never
| See", it is due to be released on November 18, 2115. The
| 100-year span matches the time it takes for a bottle of Louis
| XIII Cognac to be properly aged before its release to
| consumers._
|
| _Pending release, the film is being kept in a high-tech safe
| behind bulletproof glass that will open automatically on
| November 18, 2115, the day of the film 's premiere._
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/100_Years_(film)
| grp000 wrote:
| That's just pomp and show business though. I think the
| ancients were very long term planners. One of the upsides to
| a regime with very centralized and absolute power. Great wall
| of China, Pyramids of Giza to name some.
| Zenst wrote:
| One of my favorite would be
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petra
|
| Which even today looks like it would take many years to
| produce as is.
| Someone wrote:
| The Great Wall is impressive, but wasn't fully built as one
| project. It was patched together from multiple parts (with
| some major upgrade/renovation projects)
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Wall_of_China:
|
| _The Great Wall of China (traditional Chinese: Wan Li
| Chang Cheng ; simplified Chinese: Mo Li Chang Cheng ;
| pinyin: Wanli Changcheng) is a series of fortifications
| that were built across the historical northern borders of
| ancient Chinese states and Imperial China as protection
| against various nomadic groups from the Eurasian Steppe_
| keiferski wrote:
| On that note, if you are interested in the complexities of
| building a multi-generational structure, I really recommend
| Kafka's short story, _The Great Wall of China._ It is not
| about the actual historical wall, as far as I know, but it
| uses it as an example to make some genius insights about
| human society and psychology.
|
| http://www.kafka-online.info/the-great-wall-of-china.html
| cozzyd wrote:
| yeah, I bet their safe software fails in 2038.
| nealabq wrote:
| On Jan 19. At 03:14:07 UTC.
| cozzyd wrote:
| You don't know that! Can't predict leap seconds
| londons_explore wrote:
| What are the chances the tape contains an empty tape?
|
| Nobody is going to come and complain you didn't do the work
| you were paid for...
| keiferski wrote:
| The movie was made before he knew it was the one that would
| be locked away.
|
| _100 Years is apparently a short film, Rodriguez having
| stated in a 2019 interview with French YouTuber InThePanda:
| "I was making several short films for them, and I finished
| that one first, we shot that one first, I thought that was
| gonna be a commercial or something. And then I showed them
| the movie and they said 'Yeah, that's great, that's great.
| That's the one we lock away.' And I said 'What? That's the
| one you lock away? What about the other one with the
| future--' 'No, that's the commercial.' [...] The one that I
| was most attached to was the one they locked away."_
| DonHopkins wrote:
| Oh Yeah: Dieter Meier, of the band Yello, made a plaque with
| a promise that he honored 22 years later.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dieter_Meier
|
| >As a conceptual artist, he has been keeping himself busy
| with many art exhibitions. He began his career as a
| performance artist in the late 1960s. In 1972 as part of
| Documenta 5, Meier installed a commemorative plaque at the
| railway station in Kassel (Germany) which read: "On 23 March
| 1994, from 3 to 4 pm, Dieter Meier will stand on this
| plaque". He honored the promise 22 years later.
|
| https://www.dietermeier.com/1994
|
| https://fawny.org/shyello.html
| jacquesm wrote:
| The Dutch fairly routinely reclaimed land that could only be
| built on decades later (once it dried out sufficiently to be
| stable enough to build on).
| danieldk wrote:
| One of the largest such projects was the Zuiderzee works,
| which closed a large inlet of the North Sea. Then (according
| to the table in the Wikipedia page), 1650 km^2 land was
| claimed from the sea (the land was large enough to add a new
| province to The Netherlands in 1986).
|
| Even though (AFAIK) the timeline was not exactly laid out, it
| was clear from the outset that this project would take many
| decades.
|
| The scale of the Zuiderzee works is really insane. Even
| building of the dyke that encloses the inlet was projected to
| cost _a year_ of the national budget.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zuiderzee_Works
| HPsquared wrote:
| Cathedral projects often took decades.
| another-dave wrote:
| Ground breaking on Sagrada Familia in Barcelona was in 1882
| -- it was consecrated in 2010, but still not finished!
|
| According to Wikipedia they're expecting it to take more than
| 5 years more, with a completion date of "post 2026"
| mmmmmbop wrote:
| Construction of the Cologne Cathedral began in 1248 and was
| not completed until 1880, with a generous break between
| 1560 and 1840. During the break, a medieval crane remained
| in place as a landmark of the Cologne skyline for 400
| years. [0]
|
| [0] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:Sch%C3%B6nscheidt,_
| J._H....
| renewiltord wrote:
| That's true. California has projects that have true timelines
| like that but there are usually lies about completion dates.
| Bayart wrote:
| That's similar to the timeframe of the ITER/DEMO/PROTO project,
| if you bake in the delays.
| Zenst wrote:
| It will be good to see how many Y2038 issues they run into over
| such a duration and certainly be a good project that will touch
| upon that issue more than most due to planning dates.
|
| Y2038 issue for those that don't know
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2038_problem
| grecy wrote:
| Japan built an island for the Kansai airport. Construction
| started in 1987 and the airport opened in 1994.
|
| Japan have a host of "long term big engineering projects"
| they're always working on.
| umeshunni wrote:
| That's only 7 years?
| ehnto wrote:
| I flew in and out of there the first time I visited, it was
| so cool. Japan is an infrastructure nerds dream.
|
| It didn't feel like being on an island at all, since it's
| entirely developed. But once you hop on a train you shoot out
| across the ocean and it's quite spectacular.
|
| I recommend going up to the viewing tower if you have time
| before your flight, it's an inimitable view.
| grecy wrote:
| A couple of years after it was built I stayed high up in
| the hotel that is immediately on the mainland with a view
| directly along the bridge to the island.
|
| 10/10
| tonyedgecombe wrote:
| That's the retirement date for someone leaving school in the UK
| this year. If they go straight into work then they will be
| signed up for a workplace pension with that date in mind.
| mushishi wrote:
| John Cage's musical piece is played hundreds of years.
|
| > The longest music piece in the world is being performed in
| the city of Halberstadt in Germany: John Cage's composition for
| organ ORGAN2/ASLSP - As SLow aS Possible - is resounding here
| in an extreme interpretation of 639 years, that means until the
| year 2640! Halberstadt is a town (43,800 inhabitants in 2015)
| in the German state of Saxony-Anhalt, and the capital of the
| district of Harz.
|
| https://universes.art/en/specials/john-cage-organ-project-ha...
| Zenst wrote:
| Whilst this does today seem like a long way off and a lifetime
| project. There have thruout history been many projects of far
| longer duration and some early examples would be:
|
| https://www.archi-ninja.com/the-10-longest-construction-proj...
|
| Which for the longest has a duration of 2,000 years for the
| great wall of China.
| lucb1e wrote:
| I saw 2069 yesterday when reading about the plan to do a fly-by
| of the nearest star system (Alpha Centauri), so technically
| yep, 2070 is the longest-ahead plan I've seen so far! And more
| concrete, too (literally, hah).
|
| (In case anyone wants to read more, there isn't much info yet
| but:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_Centauri#Future_explorat...
| )
| ajcp wrote:
| The city of Copenhagen has a more comprehensive breakdown of the
| project.[1]
|
| I think it's interesting that they intend to build residential
| property to accommodate 35,000. The area around that island is
| very...heavy industry related. It's also very very windy over
| there, but then again so is Denmark in general.
|
| 1. https://www.kk.dk/lynetteholm
| tokai wrote:
| The time and money spent per resident is ludicrous. But I guess
| it is a politically much easier way to get housing build, than
| finding/making space elsewhere in the city for development.
| Clewza313 wrote:
| It's also meant to protect Copenhagen against sea surges and
| rising water levels.
| tokai wrote:
| Could be done quicker and cheaper with other means than an
| artificial urbanised island.
| katbyte wrote:
| Sure but you wouldn't get dual use out of it, need
| housing need a storm break why not combine them?
| KozmoNau7 wrote:
| Because the storm break could be a relatively simple
| dike, a thin structure jutting out, instead of a massive
| artificial island.
|
| There will be hundreds of trucks driving through
| Copenhagen every single day for decades, to dump the
| necessary dirt to construct the island. That is going to
| cause _massive_ noise and disturbance problems for people
| living in the city, all for a prestige project that has
| been hastily jammed through, including a runaround on
| environmental regulations.
|
| The end result will be even more unaffordable luxury
| apartments, which will be bought by rich investors,
| creating yet another dead area devoid of local culture
| and life, just like Orestad and Nordhavn, where a huge
| number of expensive apartments sit completely empty,
| bought only as investment objects.
|
| A much better alternative would be to construct a simpler
| storm break, and then expand Copenhagen westwards,
| increasing density in the suburbs and outlying areas, by
| predominantly building affordable apartments and ensuring
| good public transit coverage, to combat the current
| situation of students and working class people being
| pushed out of the city by ever-increasing housing prices.
| jltsiren wrote:
| $100 / square foot sounds like a reasonable price for urban
| land close to the center of a major city. All good land is
| already in use, the remaining unbuilt areas are expensive to
| build or too far away, and new construction in existing parts
| of a city is a massive struggle that requires a lot of time
| and effort.
| davidhyde wrote:
| My knee jerk reaction to this was "Why build an island when the
| glaciers are melting and the global sea level is rising?" but
| then I looked into it and by 2100 the average rise will be about
| 0.3m. Just dredge up more mud and you should be good!
|
| https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/...
| bobthepanda wrote:
| Global sea level rise also doesn't affect all places equally.
| Northern Europe is expected to be below average for sea level
| rise. https://www.climatecentral.org/news/ice-melt-means-
| uneven-se...
| YetAnotherNick wrote:
| Yes, sue nature for 4 times more tidal range than the 0.3m
| cited due to climate change. If you can handle the tide, you
| should just need to allocate bit more space to shore.
| BurningFrog wrote:
| Northern Scandinavia is rising by ~5mm/year, because the land
| is still adjusting from being weighed down by ice during the
| ice age 10k years ago.
|
| But Denmark is not affected by this.
| mercutio2 wrote:
| It depends very much on what happens with Antarctic and (to a
| lesser extent) Greenland ice sheets.
| Barrin92 wrote:
| As the article states one of the functions of the island is
| actually to protect the rest of the land from rising sea levels
| because it will involve building advanced flooding protections.
|
| (Also as a side note, a 0.3m rise doesn't sound like much, but
| that is an enormous mass of water. IIRC a rise of that level
| would destroy more than a quarter of the land of most American
| coastal cities)
| jessriedel wrote:
| That 1-foot sea level rise destroying a quarter of American
| costal city land sounds wrong to me. I think you may be
| recalling wrong.
| yitianjian wrote:
| It may be "putting at risk" - I can easily imagine that
| most seawalls aren't 1 foot above high water line but are
| designed with some safety in mind for storms and such, but
| now are at risk to smaller storms.
| gregwebs wrote:
| According to that link 2 meters is possible as well.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-06-05 23:02 UTC)