Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Denmark parliament approves giant artificial island off Copenhagen

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 139 posts

Re: Denmark parliament approves giant artificial island off Copenhagen

#21

Post by Ericson2314 »

jltsiren wrote: post #13
Retric wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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.

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.

Re: Denmark parliament approves giant artificial island off Copenhagen

#22

Post by BurningFrog »

bobthepanda wrote: post #19
davidhyde wrote: post #18

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/...

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...

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.

Re: Denmark parliament approves giant artificial island off Copenhagen

#24

Post by gregwebs »

davidhyde wrote: post #18

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/...

According to that link 2 meters is possible as well.

Re: Denmark parliament approves giant artificial island off Copenhagen

#25

Post by dhosek »

mkl wrote: post #17
sharken wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

That wasn't the original plan though.

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.

Re: Denmark parliament approves giant artificial island off Copenhagen

#26

Post by grecy »

perihelions wrote: post #3

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?

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.

Re: Denmark parliament approves giant artificial island off Copenhagen

#27

Post by bombcar »

BurningFrog wrote: post #23

> 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.

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.

Re: Denmark parliament approves giant artificial island off Copenhagen

#28

Post by ed25519FUUU »

> 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.

Re: Denmark parliament approves giant artificial island off Copenhagen

#29

Post by Barrin92 »

davidhyde wrote: post #18

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/...

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)

Re: Denmark parliament approves giant artificial island off Copenhagen

#30

Post by rsj_hn »

ed25519FUUU wrote: post #28

> 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 the…

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.
Post reply on HN