32 replies to this topic

[CyberMisterBeauty]

Very nice,but it will only be feasible with advanced nanotechnology(build things,molecule-by-molecule,atom-by-atom)in a far future,when nanotech will be able to build something of such gargantuam proportions(It's even greater than a space elevator I guess) See the graphic below:




It could be feasible in 2090,according to the graphic.I will be 98 years old .

Edited by CyberMisterBeauty, 24 February 2012 - 02:30 PM.

[Logically Irrational]

^^ If you're talking about the entire highway, it could be built way before that. It's just road and rail, and most of it is already in place. The biggest thing that needs to be done is building the major transcontinental bridges and tunnels (which we already have the technology to do). If money wasn't an issue we could totally do it today with current technolgy (and I imagine the overall cost will come down somewhat with robotic construction technolgy, but we'll see). Even the tunnel to Australia wouldn't be too extreme. It would probably be made up of three or so tunnels from mainland Asia, and the longest segments could be done as a submerged floating tunnel. Again, because of money, this probably won't happen for a while, but we definitely wouldn't need nanotechnology and an 80 year timeframe.

[CyberMisterBeauty]

^^ If you're talking about the entire highway, it could be built way before that. It's just road and rail, and most of it is already in place. The biggest thing that needs to be done is building the major transcontinental bridges and tunnels (which we already have the technology to do). If money wasn't an issue we could totally do it today with current technolgy (and I imagine the overall cost will come down somewhat with robotic construction technolgy, but we'll see). Even the tunnel to Australia wouldn't be too extreme. It would probably be made up of three or so tunnels from mainland Asia, and the longest segments could be done as a submerged floating tunnel. Again, because of money, this probably won't happen for a while, but we definitely wouldn't need nanotechnology and an 80 year timeframe.

No,my friend,it's not just road and rail,we will need extreme infraestructure to build something like that,we will need special rails that will have some technology to make the trains run thousands of miles per hour,and to build the submerge tunnels that will link the continents,they will have to be made by specials materials that are currently difficult to fabricate(ex carbon nanotubes),because in case of earthquakes(you forgot that),they will not danificate the tunnels.Just search on the timeline about the transcontinental tunnel that will link new york to london in 2080.

It's not so easy as you think.

Edited by CyberMisterBeauty, 24 February 2012 - 10:30 PM.

[Logically Irrational]

The transglobal highway that I'm talking about just refers to the ability to move around the world via terrestrial means. Almost all of the connections that would be needed have been under study for quite a while. The issues have been political and economic. This is what Frank Didik said in his orginal proposal:

From a technical point of view, the entire road and rail network is feasible, utilizing the engineering, materials and technology of today. At first glance, the development obstacles of the AmerAsian Peach Tunnel (Bering Strait tunnel) may seem insurmountable, but this is not the case. The Bering Strait Tunnel would consist of 3 tunnels connecting Alaska and Russia by going through two islands (the Little Diomede(USA) and Big Diomede (Russia)). The longest single tunnel would be 24 miles in length. Since the Bering Sea at the proposed crossing has a maximum known depth of only 170 feet, it is proposed that the tunnel be dug using conventional, modern tunnel boring machines, of the type that was employed in the construction of the Chunnel. The three tunnel proposal would be much preferred over a bridge for a variety of reasons including that fact that during the winter months, the Bering Strait is iced over and a bridge would be subject to sever environmental conditions. Further, in most cases, tunnels are both less expensive to construct and cost less to maintain. Suspended under water tunnels are not suggested for this crossing, because of the shallow depth of the Bering Strait

The transatlantic tunnel is a much more difficult project currently as far as technology goes. I understand you're idea of the highway as a futuristic, ultra-high speed route, but that's not what the current proposal is, that's what it eventually can become. It's just meant to connect all the current road/rail systems together, not create a massive new highway system from scratch.

More from Didik:

It should be noted that presently, there are many tunnels around the world that are as long as the longest tunnel needed to complete the Trans-Global Highway. The "Chunnel" linking England with Europe is approximately 31.34 miles (50.45km) long, the ocean tunnel Seikan linking Hokkaido with Honshu in Japan is 33.46 miles (55.86km) long, while the new Swiss Gotthard tunnel through the Alps, currently under construction, will be 35.7 miles (59.60km) long. There are in fact, 5 tunnels over 30 miles in length, in existence today.

Edited by Logically Irrational, 24 February 2012 - 11:11 PM.

[Logically Irrational]

Some recent information on a Strait of Gibraltar Tunnel. It'll be interesting to see this materialize if it does.

http://basementgeogr...y-bridging.html
http://www.chinafric...tent_408409.htm
http://www.theolivep...-rail-corridor/

[Logically Irrational]

[CyberMisterBeauty]

<sub>People,there is a new post in the timeline talking about the construction of the transcontinental bridges and roads in 2044,I don't have any idea how they will built that monstruosity,since according to the graphic above in 2044 nanotechnology will be still in its infancy(altought it's growing exponencially),so I particullaly think that built that will be a waste of time and money because in 2044 the climate of earth will made several countries to war,the extreme phenomena will destroy much of infraestructure and billion people will die due to global warming and resource based economies will have to evolve to substitute capitalism according to the timeline(see year 2070).

I think the only way it will be useful is to save the minority of people that will survive and will be able to move to the colder and stable regions,or move enormous quantities of resources/goodies to these regions that would be difficulty or slow to move wih air travel,since the future trains will run at thousand of miles per hour...

Like wjfox said,it will be 100% useless in the 22nd century and beyond,since some technologies will replace the need for physical travel...</sub>

Edited by CyberMisterBeauty, 28 March 2012 - 08:34 PM.

[SG-1]

Do you really think that by the 2040s billions of people will die because of global warming? I'm not saying that global warming isn't real but billions of people is a lot.
People will always want to physically travel somewhere, anyway I bet that by the middle of the 21st century at least and early 22nd century at the most we will have one. If not, its because it was to expensive when air travel is cheaper.

Also, I don't think that war will destroy America by 2070 and we are the gap between the rest of the world, so its possible we will make one, likely I don't know.

[eacao]

Do you really think that by the 2040s billions of people will die because of global warming? I'm not saying that global warming isn't real but billions of people is a lot.

I also doubt global warming will kill billions of people. However, it may displace tens of millions and cost that many again in hunger and drought. The bigger problems will be disease in refugees (from climate change but also war) and, more seriously, peak phosphorous which cannot really be argued and debated over. Depending on when we reach peak phosphorous, if it is in the 2030s as the timeline predicts then it is not inconceivable that a decade later, billions could be dead from hunger. Peak phosphorous will be exacerbated by peak oil where food will be more difficult to produce with limited energy available.

[wjfox]

_{People,there is a new post in the timeline talking about the construction of the transcontinental bridges and roads in 2044,I don't have any idea how they will built that monstruosity,since according to the graphic above in 2044 nanotechnology will be still in its infancy(altought it's growing exponencially),}

Why would the highway need to use nanotech? A trans-global highway could still emerge, without the need for nanotech.

Nanotech on a continent-wide scale becomes optional by the 2080s, but that doesn't preclude a transglobal highway of some sort before that date. It wouldn't even need to be "continent"-wide, since we're just talking about smaller bridges/links at certain key points between nations, rather than a single gigantic structure.

<sub>so I particullaly think that built that will be a waste of time and money because in 2044 the climate of earth will made several countries to war,the extreme phenomena will destroy much of infraestructure and billion people will die due to global warming and resource based economies will have to evolve to substitute capitalism according to the timeline(see year 2070).

I think the only way it will be useful is to save the minority of people that will survive and will be able to move to the colder and stable regions,or move enormous quantities of resources/goodies to these regions that would be difficulty or slow to move wih air travel,since the future trains will run at thousand of miles per hour...

Like wjfox said,it will be 100% useless in the 22nd century and beyond,since some technologies will replace the need for physical travel...</sub>

The possibility of disruptions to the network as a result of environmental and resource issues has been mentioned - global warming reaches 2°C in the 2040s (the "danger point" according to scientists), so from then on, infrastructure may start to suffer.

[CyberMisterBeauty]

Do you really think that by the 2040s billions of people will die because of global warming? I'm not saying that global warming isn't real but billions of people is a lot.
People will always want to physically travel somewhere, anyway I bet that by the middle of the 21st century at least and early 22nd century at the most we will have one. If not, its because it was to expensive when air travel is cheaper.

Also, I don't think that war will destroy America by 2070 and we are the gap between the rest of the world, so its possible we will make one, likely I don't know.

No,I didn't mean 2040,but later in the century and in the beggining of the 22nd century(see years 2060,2070 and 2100)...


And Wjfox,the transglobal road are incredbly enourmous!How they will built that in a few decades without nanotech(realizing that it takes 4-5 years to built a 400-500 metres high skyscraper...)

[Logically Irrational]

But the roads are alread there, in between. The most road building that needs to be done would be in Alaska and Siberia for the Bering Strait crossing, and that's one of the last parts to be finished. From this point on, depending on how you define it, there are 5-6 major bridges/tunnels that need to be built, all by different countries. That's far from inconceivable to happen in 32 years.

We're not talking about building from a scratch one giant highway or railway to connect all these things. The infrastructure is already there in between. It may not be the shortest route in certain places, but there is still a definitive connection between the continents. All we're talking about here is terrestrial connections linking the continents.

See my previous post (#24).

[Dead Redshirt]

Yeah, take the Trans-Canadian highway for instance. It's already there and widely used, and would be the most likely candidate for Canadian-wide transportation and could easily be part of a transglobal network. It already connects Canada to the U.S, and all it would take to become part of a global network would be for it to be connected.