3 ms·
Living underground tackles the one issue that no green revolution is going to fix - space. Above ground space is fixed and the population will continue to rise.
by forgotusername6 4y ago
Living underground tackles the one issue that no green revolution is going to fix - space. Above ground space is fixed and the population will continue to rise. We can build upwards or downwards but upwards blocks light, which is also a fixed quantity.
- micromacrofoot 4y agoliving space isn’t remotely a concern, if we all (the whole world) lived in a single mega-city as dense as NYC it would be about the size of Texas light also isn’t much of an issue, we could power the world with a solar array the size of New Mexico fertile farm land, stable temperature, and distribution are much much much larger issues living underground might be good for reducing electricity needs for heating and cooling, or avoiding certain natural disasters… but probably isn’t very useful for much else
- orev 4y agoMost of the US is solving this by building sideways (i.e. sprawl). It’s far cheaper than digging down, at least in the short term.
- 88913527 4y agoIf space above ground is fixed, space below ground is also fixed. Seems like a tautology to me.
- stormbrew 4y agoIf anything there’s probably less useable space under the (land) surface than above it.
- ryukafalz 4y ago> but upwards blocks light Also known as "shade," which is a nice thing to have when temperatures are rising.
- stormbrew 4y agoAlso the buildings themselves still get the light and can funnel it into living/working spaces or just turn it into electricity. Sure it’s shadier at ground level in a tall dense city but like, I’m pretty sure it’s more feasible to build km-ish tall buildings that still manage to post some light down to street level than it’ll ever be to build living space that goes equivalently deep.