Have been following this story on Thai social media too. Damn - you post both made me laugh and want to weep. Laugh, because of your "How do you recognize pioneers? By the arrows in their backs." (applies another bandaid to her own gaping wounds) and weep due to your closure: "the two are on the run now, fearing for their lives, while the seastead is either in the process of being destroyed or by now has been destroyed by the Thai navy". Pioneers? Thailand has always had its sea gypsy communities and theirs is just a sexed up version of the floating bamboo shacks we've had for centuries. It's a beautiful ideal and one that DOES and WILL push at the edges of homesteading and who 'owns' our seas and where are we ALLOWED to live when it's not possible to "buy" your bit. GREAT post!!
Leading the curation trail for both @ecotrain & @eco-alex.
Together We’re Making This World A Better Place.
Click Here To Join the manually curated trail "@artemislives" to support quality eco-green content.
@ecoTrain
Thanks.
I guess those Bajao structures (Bajaos are the Philippine sea gypsies) are floating directly on top of the water surface, so they are very exposed to wave action, so usually they are close to the shore, protected by a reef for wave breaking.
The spar construction of this seastead is more similar to an oil rig.
By changing the buoancy of the spar, the house on top of the spar can rise up higher above the waves, if the waves become bigger.
So it can be further out in the ocean.
This one can rise up to 5m above the water surface, but in the Andaman sea, average wave height is just 0.5 m, that was also one of the reasons, they put it there.
To be really out of the reach of a nation state, at least theoretically, you need to be outside of the 200 nm zone, so you need a spar which rises high enough above the sea level to withstand the wave action of that area and you need a seamount or the bottom of the sea shallow enough that it is still feasible to anchor your seastead to the bottom