|
When we talk migration people freak and declare there isnt enough room in wustralia (no that aint a spelling error). The fact is we could give twenty million families an acre of land each in tasmania and still have fifty percent of Tasmania as national park. We could do the same in the northern territory, creating a billion population city made of one acre lots covering everything south of tenant creek to the south Australian border.
It would be better for us to stop the coastal suburban sprawl that is eating up farmland vital to feeding that population.
Isn't a large portion of Australia trapped in a desert climate? And most of the rest sub-desert grasslands?
Given the results of attempting what you suggest in Africa and how it only made the Sahara spread faster and made things worse... I am not certain this would work out for the Australians. This kinda seems like a nice way to kill off the population of an entire continent.
Land is plentiful. Inhabitable land isn't.
If you can't get water to farms in the northern territory, how are you going to get water for the showers to MegaCity Oz?
Coastal desalination and pipelines for moving water inland.Land is plentiful. Inhabitable land isn't.
If you can't get water to farms in the northern territory, how are you going to get water for the showers to MegaCity Oz?
Why move there in the first place? What natural economic incentive exists to live there?
|
|
Why move there in the first place? What natural economic incentive exists to live there?Coastal desalination and pipelines for moving water inland.Land is plentiful. Inhabitable land isn't.
If you can't get water to farms in the northern territory, how are you going to get water for the showers to MegaCity Oz?
federal regulation ending growth and investment elsewhere.
First off, irrigation based on sea water always brings salt. Even if there is only a little, you're salting the ground you live on, which is not among the top ten ideas in human history. Ask the israeli what happens.
Second, wasn't there just a thread about LIMITING city size???
|
|
First off, irrigation based on sea water always brings salt. Even if there is only a little, you're salting the ground you live on, which is not among the top ten ideas in human history. Ask the israeli what happens.
Second, wasn't there just a thread about LIMITING city size???
Desalination: the removal of salt from sea water.
And yes there is said petition...for us cities.
Certainly, you can desalinate. But unless you want to use distilled water, which would cost an exorbitant amount of energy, desalination is a relative result, nowhere near an absolute.
I understand you correctly that US cities should be limited in size, while all people living in Australia should move to one ultra-colossal city? Isn't the total population below 50 million people?
|
|
Certainly, you can desalinate. But unless you want to use distilled water, which would cost an exorbitant amount of energy, desalination is a relative result, nowhere near an absolute.
I understand you correctly that US cities should be limited in size, while all people living in Australia should move to one ultra-colossal city? Isn't the total population below 50 million people?
Somewhere around twenty two million...and yes, U.S. Cities suffer from sprawl, and its social woes seem tied to a lack of limit to that sprawl until entire towns become outer suburbs by absorbtion.
Where will the other 978 million people come from??? The US plus the EU plus Indonesia? All of China? I don't get it...
Has there ever been a Yellowdingo thread that isn't amusing in some way?
And yeah, why leave out Europe and Asia from these equations? For convenience?
When we talk migration people freak and declare there isnt enough room in wustralia (no that aint a spelling error). The fact is we could give twenty million families an acre of land each in tasmania and still have fifty percent of Tasmania as national park. We could do the same in the northern territory, creating a billion population city made of one acre lots covering everything south of tenant creek to the south Australian border.
It would be better for us to stop the coastal suburban sprawl that is eating up farmland vital to feeding that population.
Ha... ha... bwahahahahahahahaha!
Have you even been to the N.T? Australia already has trouble getting essential services deep into the outback, into the aboriginal communities and into Arnhem land, and you want to spam people into the N.T as if that is some sort of solution? Where is the water and electricity going to come from? Who is going to build all those roads across the desert, hard rock, bush, mangroves and thick scrubland? How will you build across the floodplains and gorges of Arnhem land and why would the Aboriginals let this mass immigration settlement take place? Where will you find the resources to build a billion houses? Lastly, have you considered the ecological damage of filling the N.T with a megacity from top to bottom?
You don't have a single clue positing that idea champ. No idea.
|
|
When we talk migration people freak and declare there isnt enough room in wustralia (no that aint a spelling error). The fact is we could give twenty million families an acre of land each in tasmania and still have fifty percent of Tasmania as national park. We could do the same in the northern territory, creating a billion population city made of one acre lots covering everything south of tenant creek to the south Australian border.
It would be better for us to stop the coastal suburban sprawl that is eating up farmland vital to feeding that population.Ha... ha... bwahahahahahahahaha!
Have you even been to the N.T? Australia already has trouble getting essential services deep into the outback, into the aboriginal communities and into Arnhem land, and you want to spam people into the N.T as if that is some sort of solution? Where is the water and electricity going to come from? Who is going to build all those roads across the desert, hard rock, bush, mangroves and thick scrubland? How will you build across the floodplains and gorges of Arnhem land and why would the Aboriginals let this mass immigration settlement take place? Where will you find the resources to build a billion houses? Lastly, have you considered the ecological damage of filling the N.T with a megacity from top to bottom?
You don't have a single clue positing that idea champ. No idea.
Considered. The southern half of the northern territory. Arnhem land can remain intact on its escarpment. We have resources, its just currently being sold overseas. Considered it all.
Well you are going to have to clear a lot of termite mounds and take a lot of Aboriginal land for development. The Aboriginals of Alice Springs and further out would not be in favour of expansionistic multiculturalism of mass overseas settlement.
Also something else you seem to have forgotten, the "burning" season.
If you build streets upon streets over that hot scrub grassland, a fire is going to burn through and take a lot of it out. There is a lot of fire each year and with small spread out settlements near water it is managed, with fire breaks and very active firefighters. If you keep expanding into fire zones, people will simply go up in flames when the fire comes through the same time, every year.
This is happening in Melbourne because the suburbs keep stretching out into fire zones. Get a hot summer and you get mass evacuations and destroyed homes. Building under a mangnifying glass in former grasslands is not a good idea.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sissyl, you're responding to someone who put up a White House petition to make every woman in the Mid-East a US citizen. Keep that in mind.Certainly, you can desalinate. But unless you want to use distilled water, which would cost an exorbitant amount of energy, desalination is a relative result, nowhere near an absolute.
I understand you correctly that US cities should be limited in size, while all people living in Australia should move to one ultra-colossal city? Isn't the total population below 50 million people?
Hmmm... you really need to consider them all together. Let's see now, just off the top of my head:
The US takes all the women of the world (3.5 B people...), puts them into container residential areas, powered by millions of wind turbines, with gazillions in economic support to get environmentally-friendly cars, and a hyperloop so they could all work in Vegas. So far so good. However, these more than three BILLION women can't all live in the same places, because American cities need to be small. So, when there simply is NO. MORE. ROOM. for them, a billion of them are instead sent to Giga-city Oz. Any who get sentenced to execution are instead sent to the Antarctic. Furthermore, they will all have the option of self-represention (instead of having elected representatives, I assume)...
...
Uhhh... why did I get this sudden headache...?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Evidently, the solution to the water problem in Australia should involve catapults on Antarctica that shoot frozen water northward.
Hmmm... food for a new petition, methinks. Dingo?
