Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't know how satisfied today's American would be with such an abode. Perhaps some, but I don't think most would. We've gotten too used to the conveniences, niceties and a few luxuries.
My house is on an old lava flow and I love it. [...] I have lot's of landscaping and gardens [...] I liken it to living in the Southwest on the mainland. If you can find beauty in a stark desert, then why not in a lava flow?
So which is it that you prefer? Stark desert or artificially created greenery? I wonder if the answer is in the username.
Might work for slow-moving Aa, but if you try doing that with Pahoehoe, you probably would just accelerate construction of a lave-tube with the result that more lava will go further.
An existing, functional harbor with all that entails is probably worth the expenditure, but Puna.... not so much.
Thank you cloudy days for finding the story about using water to redirect flows, I must've read it long ago. I think on Etna they used dykes and walls to send the flow away from people, with some success.
With the large pahoehoe flows, you wouldn't try to block it or dam it, but rather channel it away from residences and maybe into manageable areas. But I still think it moves too fast. You'd need to deploy lots of equipment and water to exactly the right places, not easy to do when the flows keep changing and access is difficult.
Thank you cloudy days for finding the story about using water to redirect flows, I must've read it long ago. I think on Etna they used dykes and walls to send the flow away from people, with some success.
With the large pahoehoe flows, you wouldn't try to block it or dam it, but rather channel it away from residences and maybe into manageable areas. But I still think it moves too fast. You'd need to deploy lots of equipment and water to exactly the right places, not easy to do when the flows keep changing and access is difficult.
Any manager would shudder at the idea of doing such a thing in Puna.
First, it could become a never-ending task (it IS, after all, one of the world's most active volcanos they've decided to homestead on). Once started, how could you justify stopping (legally and ethically). And how do you decide who gets to be the one who gets redirected onto.
Also, redirecting lava elsewhere has its own liabilities. Prior to redirection, it is an act of god. After re-direction, it is an act of government, with all the liabilities associated therewith.
Also, there is the cost-benefit ratio. Its Puna, not Honolulu. On an individual basis, its a tragedy, but compared to other areas, not so much. Population density, value of the properties involved etc. Perhaps, protecting the PGV or Pahoa would be worthwhile, but the rest, less so.
Any way you slice it, it is a can of worms - hot, chewy, molten basalt worms.
Location: Southernmost tip of the southernmost island in the southernmost state
982 posts, read 1,162,716 times
Reputation: 1652
Quote:
Originally Posted by KauaiHiker
So which is it that you prefer? Stark desert or artificially created greenery? I wonder if the answer is in the username.
I like both. Grassyknoll was a nickname I recieved during a BOD meeting at the last company I was with.
When I lived in California, I had a beautiful, lush 1/2 acre city lot and spent countless hours designing, planting, mowing, hedging and maintaining all that landscaping.
when I moved to Hawai'I, I vowed not to get trapped into that level of yard-maintenance which is a big reason I bought where I did.
A house is just a box for people. How about throwaway homes made from plasticized paper. Costing like a piece of furniture, the owner would fold the "house" up from a kit. If the lava eats the thing, who cares, one orders another.
Who decided a house should cost a kajillion dollars anyway? Let's make some cheap, disposable ones.
A house is just a box for people. How about throwaway homes made from plasticized paper. Costing like a piece of furniture, the owner would fold the "house" up from a kit. If the lava eats the thing, who cares, one orders another.
Who decided a house should cost a kajillion dollars anyway? Let's make some cheap, disposable ones.
Been there, done that. Tents, Teepees, shacks, pallet houses, etc. It's a dog's life, IMHO, but you are welcome to put up a Yurt or wall tent anytime (for a few days, perhaps, due to zoning laws).
A house is just a box for people. How about throwaway homes made from plasticized paper. Costing like a piece of furniture, the owner would fold the "house" up from a kit. If the lava eats the thing, who cares, one orders another.
Who decided a house should cost a kajillion dollars anyway? Let's make some cheap, disposable ones.
Houses used to be pretty inexpensive. Then Hurricane Iniki flattened Kauai and damaged some of Oahu and the Powers That Be decided houses needed to be hurricane proof. That was the beginnings of the current pretty restrictive building codes that we have now.
At some point, there will be houses printed out by big 3D printers, no doubt.
The amount of lava that has been spewing out for the past few days is just absolutely astonishing. No buildings can survive that level of inundation, especially since it's lava and not mud or water. Probably the best answer to building in Lower Puna is movable buildings. Maybe making it a requirement that all communities in that area be either RVs or trailer parks.....
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.