
Atlantropa - luu
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantropa
======
ern
When I read the first paragraph, I was immediately reminded of my feelings
when watching the Star Trek:TNG episode, made in the late 80's where Picard
considered quitting Star Fleet to head the Atlantis Project. When I watched
that episode recently, I found the idea that future people would allow large
alterations to the earth to be discordant.

It is interesting that, according to the article, Roddenberry also
incorporated the idea of a dam across the Strait of Gibraltar into one of his
works.

Today, I expect that terraforming Mars and mining the moon will face
significant opposition. Would massive land reclamation projects like those in
the Netherlands ever happen today, if a particular hyper-conservation Western
mindset were in place when they commenced? We can't even let go of outdated
urban streetscapes, and buildings past their useful lifespans[1], so it isn't
far-fetched to think of moon miners having to recreate impact craters on the
moon's surface after mining them, if mining happened in the first place.

Large segments of humanity are becoming sclerotic. Even if [2] the positive
effects of damming the Mediterranean (or terraforming central Australia or
Antarctica) were found to outweigh the losses, and the impacts could be
mitigated, it would still be extremely unlikely to happen, for sentimental
reasons.

[1] See recent news about Lloyds of London building, which has became an
expensive burden, but can't be touched because of its "iconic" status

[2] yes, obviously there are risks, and they would need to be weighed
carefully.

~~~
omegaworks
Realize you are considering completely altering the hydrology that has
historically served as the cradle of humanity's longest-lived civilizations.
This project would touch huge population centers, many different cultures that
speak different languages. What happens when people that have lived in costal
communities for generations suddenly find themselves landlocked?

There's a reason this was an undertaking contemplated in the time period that
it was. Herman Sörgel could propose this and simply not care what the
consequences would be for the people that were already present. The Superior
Race simply needed more Lebensraum, to hell with the inferior races.

One man's sclerosis is another man's stability. This is not hyper-conservation
Western mindset, this is living in a world where one remote political power
can not radically alter the living conditions for millions of people that are
not represented in that power.

~~~
ern
As I said, there would have to be careful study and consideration of the
effects, and in all likelihood, it would fail, probably for the reasons you
cite.

However, I suspect the modern knee-jerk reaction would be to reject these
sorts of ideas out-of-hand, not because of infeasibility, but because of the
"preserve at all costs" mentality that has taken hold among many, and then to
look for ways to justify the rejection.

~~~
nfoz
The will of industry has such a strong influence on political outcomes that it
seems rational (though perhaps unfortunate) for people to oppose big projects
as early as possible.

------
exratione
Imposing large scale engineering projects of this nature will probably have to
wait until after production and point control of self-replicating nanorobots,
organic or otherwise, is fairly mature. At that point the cost reduces down to
design and raw materials and looks feasible when compared to simply going to
other worlds in search of additional space, or building arcologies, or other
methods.

Sadly much vision has been lost somewhere in the last century. People are much
more conservative about preserving the present state of whatever exists, and
have lost the sense of wonder and ambition that characterized the opening of
the modern age of machinery.

~~~
twright
Can you say more about this ambition we've lost? In my eyes that ambition is
more arrogance that we can control the forces of nature around us without
consequence.

~~~
aaronem
It is the peculiar human genius that we adapt our environment to ourselves, as
well as the converse; we're not the only species on Earth which does so, but
we're the only one for which adapting our environment is the keystone of a
species survival strategy so successful that we have made ourselves, and for
the foreseeable future will remain, the entire planet's apex predator.

Lately, we hear much of how this strategy is doomed to failure, of how such
failure will come sooner rather than later, and of how anything less than its
immediate and radical replacement will surely doom our species. I don't buy it
for a second. That the developed world has some rough times ahead, I don't
doubt. But we're smart apes, and mean, and tough to kill, and there are an
almighty lot of us. Perhaps we're due a new dark age, and perhaps not. But if
so, we'll come out of it eventually, and we'll be better and smarter still for
it, just like we were last time.

Be it ever so popular of late, the belief otherwise is, in my considered
opinion, born entirely of arrogance, in two parts: first, that even we have
the capability to so radically reëngineer this planet as to no longer support
our species, and second, that our species is somehow apart from nature, such
that the axiom that all species not killed outright by them eventually adapt
to changes of environment, somehow does not apply to us. That humanity is
special, I happily agree, but we are not gods.

------
skrebbel
_The Atlantropa movement, through its several decades, was characterised by
four constants:

\- ...

\- Pan-European sentiment, seeing the project as a way to unite a war-torn
Europe;

\- White-centric superiority (and even racist) attitudes to Africa

\- ..._

It interests me how such a positive sentiment (Pan-Europanism) can be combined
with a very negative sentiment (white supremacism) without any trouble.

I'm not sure we can play the "they were different times" card so easily.
Currently, the EU has open borders, so the Pan-Europanism part worked out
quite well, actually. As a consequence, the outer borders of the EU have
become rock hard, because once you made it to Spain or Italy, you made it to
most of Europe. We treat Africans who try to make it across like animals - not
out of some white supremacist sense, admittedly, but the effect is the same.

------
avz
Brings to mind Aral Sea where the diversion of rivers for irrigation projects
have led to the shrinking of the sea area with disastrous consequences for
local ecosystems and communities.
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aral_Sea](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aral_Sea)

EDIT: There must be better ways to become a Type I civilization
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardashev_scale](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardashev_scale)

------
adrianN
If you like this, you should get yourself a copy of "Engineer's Dreams" by
Ley. It is fairly old and full of such grand projects. One of them, the
Channel Tunnel, is no longer a dream.

~~~
kumarski
any other book recommendations?

~~~
chiph
It's fiction, but still a fun read: Harry Harrison's _A Transatlantic Tunnel,
Hurrah!_

In Which Our Hero, A Descendent of the Traitorous George Washington, Builds a
Railway Under The Sea, Wherein Passengers Travel To The Court of Her Britannic
Majesty In Atomic Powered Comfort.

[http://www.amazon.com/Transatlantic-Tunnel-Hurrah-Harry-
Harr...](http://www.amazon.com/Transatlantic-Tunnel-Hurrah-Harry-
Harrison/dp/0765327864)

------
igravious
Hilarious that the first two comments are diametrically opposed: "Wow that's
pretty fucked" versus "Sadly much vision has been lost somewhere in the last
century"

I'm going to tread a line between the two and say that I miss the visionary
engineering works of old but that I am not completely heedless of the Law of
Unintended Consequences. I do think that the Straits of Gilbraltar should be
either bridged or dammed. (I'm assuming damming means bridging.) Too good an
economic opportunity to pass up.

~~~
notahacker
I'm not convinced the economic opportunity is that enormous, or even enough to
pay back the costs of a relatively trivial bridge over a long time period, at
least until there are some very radical changes to the political and economic
stability in North Africa. At the moment vast sums are being spent on trying
to _prevent_ North Africans getting into mainland Europe (the Spanish enclaves
in Morocco have barbed wire fences and military patrols on either side).

As far as transport links for those fortunate enough not to be fleeing abject
poverty and brutal regional conflicts goes, the fast ferry ride is less than
40 minutes between the Spanish mainland and Morocco/Ceuta, flights to major
Moroccan cities are very cheap from most European cities and Libyan oil is
piped direct to Italy.

~~~
syllogism
The upside of a bridge isn't passenger transport, it's freight. There's an
awful lot of trade between Africa and Europe, e.g. for agriculture.

------
thisjepisje
Does anything come closer to this than Flevoland?

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flevoland](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flevoland)

Slightly related: _" a narrow body of water was preserved along the old coast
to stabilise the water table and to prevent coastal towns from losing their
access to the sea."_

------
jzila
There's a documentary about the project here:
[http://vimeo.com/92381391](http://vimeo.com/92381391). Fascinating watch.

~~~
dinkumthinkum
Nice, this was interesting. Thanks for sharing; I never really see good
documentaries on vimeo, but I don't go looking often.

------
austinz
I don't think big projects are intrinsically bad because they are big, but
it's probably true that something of this scale would have drastic, wide-
ranging effects on climate, geological characteristics, rainfall, and many
other aspects that might adversely affect millions of people. Due diligence
would require us to study and characterize these effects before spending
trillions of dollars on such a project.

~~~
opminion
In fact, the formation of the Mediterranean is mentioned in Episode 9 of
Cosmos (2014), in the context of climate change affecting evolution.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lost_Worlds_of_Planet_Earth](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lost_Worlds_of_Planet_Earth)

------
matthewmcg
This is not mentioned in the article, but plate tectonics actually closed the
straight of Gibraltar and caused the Mediterranean to completely dry out for a
period of hundreds of thousands of years. It eventually reopened with what may
have been the largest waterfall ever.

See
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messinian_salinity_crisis](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messinian_salinity_crisis)

------
incision
Awesome, in the more formal sense.

Reading about the intended colonization of Africa puts me in mind of something
I read about Moroccan phosphate reserves [1] a while back.

1: [http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/essential-
element-...](http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/essential-element-
becoming-scarce-experts-warn-of-impending-phosphorus-crisis-a-690450.html)

------
nnx
"Most proposals to dam the Strait of Gibraltar since that time have focused on
the hydroelectric potential of such a project, and do not envisage any
substantial lowering of the Mediterranean sea level."

This sounds a tiny bit more sane.

What would be the capacity of such a gigantic hydroelectric dam?

------
acqq
Note also what I consider a spamming by "Cathcart, R.B." who probably added to
the article himself the big list of his texts as relevant for the subject and
even a clumsy attempt to the citation.

------
ARothfusz
Is there an explanation for how adding these dams _lowers_ water levels?

~~~
sbierwagen
The Mediterranean loses more water to evaporation than it gains from rivers
and rainfall. It's only at sea level because it's connected to the Atlantic at
the Strait Of Gibraltar. Dam the Strait, and the Mediterranean goes down.

That isn't just speculation, the Mediterranean actually _was_ a dry sea, when
the Strait closed 5.9 million years ago:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mediterranean_Sea#Geology](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mediterranean_Sea#Geology)

A better question is "how _quickly_ would the Mediterranean dry up if you dam
Gibraltar?" A thousand years? More? Would you have to dam every river that
drains into the Mediterranean?

------
batmansbelt
Wow that's pretty fucked. No one would even dream of anything so crazy these
days. The world certainly has improved in the past 90 years.

~~~
wyager
What is "pretty fucked" about this?

~~~
limsup
Dude, it's totally fucked. Like removing the sea from seaside towns. i'm sure
if you're a mediterranean fisherman you would not be happy having the sea
forcibly moved away from your home... The environmental impact is probably
immeasurable.

~~~
wyager
How is this any worse than normal dam construction, apart from scale?

~~~
smacktoward
How is a flood worse than a drop of water, apart from scale?

~~~
mavdi
Wise words.

------
desireco42
No wonder they are digging out this Nazi projects now when they occupied us on
Balkans. But as before, we will rise again and free ourselves.

Not that everything Nazis did was bad, but this is classic megalomanic
project, which honestly doesn't sound completely bad, but it is like those
Chinese 3 gorges dam, huge and rife with potential problems.

