Why dont more people live in antarctica (living in, cost of)

[acoffma]

To be honest I'm glad I came across this thread. Personally I think every advantage should be taken and resource exercised to see how we could potentially set a permanent establishment there; not necessarily claiming for it for an individual nation but as the country of Antarctica. I mean there are many issues that arise with doing it but look at the extremes we are going to to see how we can populate Mars or the Moon? Antarctica is a frozen desert yes, but the coast areas do have two types of grass and the vegetation is becoming more wide spread. Hell I even just looked up the current weather conditions for Antarctica and in one area along the peninnsula is over 40 degrees (F) and the highest ever recorded temperature was 56. It would cost a crap ton of money to do this but it's completely do-able, obviously since there are already permanent stations there, and being a graduate Architecture student I think we should seriously consider this.

[noela]

what a preposterous thread. And the best part is... Even this thread has generated some debate. I seriously love C-D

As for settling in Antarctica as some of you have suggested... You do look forward to seeing the ship sink, don't you?

[OyCrumbler]

I'm going to try a serious reply with a few main points:

Many of the most northerly settlements may be incredibly cold and comparable in climate to the warmest parts of coastal Antarctica, but there were actual population pressures (invasions, overpopulation of places where resources were already scarce) to create these settlements. Along with these population pressures though, there was still enough boons to keep these communities viable such as contiguous masses of land to warmer and more populated parts of the world which would allow for trading, immigration, emigration, and even migrating herds of animals to slaughter and use. Up to the current day, these places still have these advantages as well as being necessary to their respective sovereign states for both scientific and military purposes. Meanwhile, Antarctica has no established history of settlement, much greater isolation (with no land connection whatsoever), little military purpose, no population pressures that would make anyone choose Antarctica over other more favorable locations, and a treaty that prevents any nation from developing any industries.

[Trimac20]

Originally Posted by MoMark

When they refused to build a Dunkin' Donuts there, I tore up my moving plans. No Dunkin' Donuts, no Antarctic MoMark.

Seriously...I'm suffering in Southwest Missouri where this month as been unusually cold. It's 45F outside at 2:36pm and the days seem to be alternating between low forties to high fifties when we should be 70F or more. I have the heater running right now and am thinking about lying over a floor vent with a blanket over me to capture the warmth. I can't imagine having to live in the sub-zero (by 100F) of somewhere like Antarctica! Even if they really did have a Dunkin' Donuts, though...that would lessen the misery momentarily

Gives a new meaning to 'iced' donuts!

[arctichomesteader]

Originally Posted by acoffma

To be honest I'm glad I came across this thread. Personally I think every advantage should be taken and resource exercised to see how we could potentially set a permanent establishment there; not necessarily claiming for it for an individual nation but as the country of Antarctica. I mean there are many issues that arise with doing it but look at the extremes we are going to to see how we can populate Mars or the Moon? Antarctica is a frozen desert yes, but the coast areas do have two types of grass and the vegetation is becoming more wide spread. Hell I even just looked up the current weather conditions for Antarctica and in one area along the peninnsula is over 40 degrees (F) and the highest ever recorded temperature was 56. It would cost a crap ton of money to do this but it's completely do-able, obviously since there are already permanent stations there, and being a graduate Architecture student I think we should seriously consider this.

I wouldn't mind starting my own country, but be realistic: at best it'd have to resemble how the Natives of the Arctic survived...fishing and even whaling would be the only practical food/supply sources, maybe greenhouses could be done t grow a little but heating them would be a major issue...

I see no reason to make a modern country there and harm the environment.

[Cobb]

I seconed the .............. "duh"

[Thomas R.]

I'm not willing to look through but South Georgia Island, in that part of the world, is fascinating in that it had its own town but now has no permanent inhabitants.

the island - South Georgia Website

I think there might be ways to make a settlement on Antarctica profitable, but its distance from other land-masses and harsh conditions might make that difficult. Also there's international treaties that I think discourage it.

Still the idea of people in Antarctica has been bandied about on occasion. There's The Birth of the People's Republic of Antarctica and the century old Russian story "The Republic of the Southern Cross."

Amazon.com: The birth of the People's Republic of Antarctica (9780385278119): John Calvin Batchelor: Books
THE REPUBLIC OF THE SOUTHERN CROSS (1907, 1918 ed.) by Valery Bryusov

[SpartacusTheSpartan]

But there's already 2 Schools in Anartica! You know children have been born and lived in Anartica. So don't complain.

[585WNY]

It would be extremely expensive to run a country in Antarctica. It is already very hard to work on the upkeep of station building simply because it is too expensive. Unless there is a huge supply of money and the earth warms up more I don't think Antarctica will support permanent residents in our lifetime.

[Aolbenjik1]

I've heard that there is 600 residents in a hidden town. It is supposedly the unofficial capital, by the name of New Bristol, Antarctica.