AHC: Make Denver, Colorado America's largest city

[GodoftheTranses]

Your challenge, if you choose to accept it, is just that, make Denver the largest city in America by the year 2000. Pod can be anytime, but i assume most PODs will be post 1900 so im posting it here. Feel free to use any POD tho.

Edit: there can be more then one POD

 

[Father Maryland]

Nuclear war in say the mid 1960's when everything larger get's hit and Denver gets lucky escaping a direct hit and becomes the US's new capitol.

 

[Analytical Engine]

Short of some pretty apocalyptic events, I'm not sure that this is possible.

 

[Helicon One]

Short of some pretty apocalyptic events, I'm not sure that this is possible.

Or some pretty wild fragmenting of the US so that all the bigger cities are no longer part of the rump state calling itself "America" and Denver falls into number one status by default.

 

[Duke Andrew of Dank]

The Cold War starts defrosting in the 1950s, and worried Americans start moving to the middle of the country in droves, with Denver being a main target due to its size.

 

[OldNavy1988]

Denver is already pretty big IOTL, right?

How about if the film industry moved over there after being driven out of Jacksonville, Florida in the early 1900's?

 

[CalBear]

Nuclear war in say the mid 1960's when everything larger get's hit and Denver gets lucky escaping a direct hit and becomes the US's new capitol.

Interestingly, Denver was one of the "alternate capitals" that existed in U.S. Civil Defense of the era (no Earthquakes, hurricanes, rarely any tornadoes, not as could as might be thought (it can get into the teens at night, but it averages in the mid 40s even in the coldest months, and it isn't overly hot in the summer) while also being both centrally located and regional headquarters from most Federal Agencies).

Biggest issues with having a large population is water. and, especially, altitude.

It is fairly arid, even with snow it averages around 20 inches of rain a year, which isn't a lot. It draws from the Colorado for about half it's water, but that source has a hard cap since the flow of the Colorado is governed both by U.S. law AND International Treaty with Mexico. The allocation is sufficient (generally) for a population of around 3/4 of a million/Metro of ~3M, but 8,000,000+ in the city and 15-18M in the Metro? Not going to happen (also can't draw that much more from the Colorado, even without the Treaty with Mexico, since LA with its 3M+ (13 M metro) San Diego (1.4M/3.3 metro) and Vegas (2.3M metro) are all downstream, not to mention the Imperial Valley.

The altitude is also nothing to be underestimated. 5,100 feet may not seem that impressive compared to La Paz, Bogotá, or Mexico City, but it's about 10% higher than Katmandu and it is high enough to be a medical issue for a good number of people with headaches/dehydration/etc. being a real issue. 5K won't wreck most people, but if you are trying to get 10M in one place it could be something of an issue if there are equally good, if not superior, locations at sea level.

*It is also a pain-in-the-ass if you are cooking or making coffee (ideally 95°C/205°) or Black tea (100°C/212°F), among other things, since you can't get "boiling point" (100°C/212°F) temps unless you use a pressure cooker (thingscap out at 94.9°C/203°F).

 

[fluttersky]

Good idea, Denver as LA should be plausible

 

[TwisterAce]

Nuclear war in say the mid 1960's when everything larger get's hit and Denver gets lucky escaping a direct hit and becomes the US's new capitol.

Denver might be spared if the Cuban Missile Crisis went hot, given the small number of Soviet ICBMs deployed at the time and the fact that none of the R-14 IRBMs had arrived in Cuba before the blockade. But the city would likely be on the Soviet target list since it had at least five military-related targets at the time: the Rocky Flats Plant (which produced plutonium pits and other materials for nuclear weapons), the Rocky Mountain Arsenal (which produced chemical weapons), Lowry Air Force Base (451st Strategic Missile Wing, whose Titan I ICBMs were just east of Denver), Buckley Air National Guard Base (140th Tactical Fighter Wing), and Air Force Plant PJKS (which built Titan missiles).

 

[Father Maryland]

Denver might be spared if the Cuban Missile Crisis went hot, given the small number of Soviet ICBMs deployed at the time and the fact that none of the R-14 IRBMs had arrived in Cuba before the blockade. But the city would likely be on the Soviet target list since it had at least five military-related targets at the time: the Rocky Flats Plant (which produced plutonium pits and other materials for nuclear weapons), the Rocky Mountain Arsenal (which produced chemical weapons), Lowry Air Force Base (451st Strategic Missile Wing, whose Titan I ICBMs were just east of Denver), Buckley Air National Guard Base (140th Tactical Fighter Wing), and Air Force Plant PJKS (which built Titan missiles).

The Soviets only had like 10 ICBMs at the time all of the pad launched R7 design and their bomber force that could actually really CONUS was pretty small. That's pretty much the latest the US could have " Won" a nuclear war with Soviets ( As in only lose a few cities like DC and NYC but not much else in CONUS leaving most of the populace alive and the standard of living knocked back but still in the 20th century. The Soviets had a number of shorter ranged missiles and bombers so Europe and East Asia would be pretty much erased. The US in turn had a fuckload more long ranged bombers and ICBMs and more shorter ranged nuke missiles and bombers so the USSR and Eastern Europe would be gone.).

 

[Father Maryland]

Interestingly, Denver was one of the "alternate capitals" that existed in U.S. Civil Defense of the era (no Earthquakes, hurricanes, rarely any tornadoes, not as could as might be thought (it can get into the teens at night, but it averages in the mid 40s even in the coldest months, and it isn't overly hot in the summer) while also being both centrally located and regional headquarters from most Federal Agencies).

Biggest issues with having a large population is water. and, especially, altitude.

It is fairly arid, even with snow it averages around 20 inches of rain a year, which isn't a lot. It draws from the Colorado for about half it's water, but that source has a hard cap since the flow of the Colorado is governed both by U.S. law AND International Treaty with Mexico. The allocation is sufficient (generally) for a population of around 3/4 of a million/Metro of ~3M, but 8,000,000+ in the city and 15-18M in the Metro? Not going to happen (also can't draw that much more from the Colorado, even without the Treaty with Mexico, since LA with its 3M+ (13 M metro) San Diego (1.4M/3.3 metro) and Vegas (2.3M metro) are all downstream, not to mention the Imperial Valley.

The altitude is also nothing to be underestimated. 5,100 feet may not seem that impressive compared to La Paz, Bogotá, or Mexico City, but it's about 10% higher than Katmandu and it is high enough to be a medical issue for a good number of people with headaches/dehydration/etc. being a real issue. 5K won't wreck most people, but if you are trying to get 10M in one place it could be something of an issue if there are equally good, if not superior, locations at sea level.

*It is also a pain-in-the-ass if you are cooking or making coffee (ideally 95°C/205°) or Black tea (100°C/212°F), among other things, since you can't get "boiling point" (100°C/212°F) temps unless you use a pressure cooker (thingscap out at 94.9°C/203°F).

Wasn't Denver the provisional capitol in "Alas Babylon"?

I remember seeing the old WW1 era plans for a "Summer Capitol" in Colorado I think Colorado Springs. I think the plans I saw were just for a capital building but it was still pretty kick ass.

 

[GodoftheTranses]

I mean since nuclear war is all most has come up with, and id rather not have that be the answer (note: there can be more then one pod) ill present a couple pod ideas i had

1. The summer white house is built, leading to more people moving into the area

2. Denver, similar to NYC, annexes a bunch of the more urban areas of central colorado into the city proper, maybe even leading to them eventually gaining county level similar to the NYC boroughs, leading to Denver being bigger in area and bigger in population. I know these areas would have to grow significantly too, but its a good start.

 

[GodoftheTranses]

Interestingly, Denver was one of the "alternate capitals" that existed in U.S. Civil Defense of the era (no Earthquakes, hurricanes, rarely any tornadoes, not as could as might be thought (it can get into the teens at night, but it averages in the mid 40s even in the coldest months, and it isn't overly hot in the summer) while also being both centrally located and regional headquarters from most Federal Agencies).

Biggest issues with having a large population is water. and, especially, altitude.

It is fairly arid, even with snow it averages around 20 inches of rain a year, which isn't a lot. It draws from the Colorado for about half it's water, but that source has a hard cap since the flow of the Colorado is governed both by U.S. law AND International Treaty with Mexico. The allocation is sufficient (generally) for a population of around 3/4 of a million/Metro of ~3M, but 8,000,000+ in the city and 15-18M in the Metro? Not going to happen (also can't draw that much more from the Colorado, even without the Treaty with Mexico, since LA with its 3M+ (13 M metro) San Diego (1.4M/3.3 metro) and Vegas (2.3M metro) are all downstream, not to mention the Imperial Valley.

The altitude is also nothing to be underestimated. 5,100 feet may not seem that impressive compared to La Paz, Bogotá, or Mexico City, but it's about 10% higher than Katmandu and it is high enough to be a medical issue for a good number of people with headaches/dehydration/etc. being a real issue. 5K won't wreck most people, but if you are trying to get 10M in one place it could be something of an issue if there are equally good, if not superior, locations at sea level.

*It is also a pain-in-the-ass if you are cooking or making coffee (ideally 95°C/205°) or Black tea (100°C/212°F), among other things, since you can't get "boiling point" (100°C/212°F) temps unless you use a pressure cooker (thingscap out at 94.9°C/203°F).

Speaking of water, is there any alternative water source? Especially if we expand Denver into other urban areas of Colorado?

 

[GodoftheTranses]

Denver is already pretty big IOTL, right?

How about if the film industry moved over there after being driven out of Jacksonville, Florida in the early 1900's?

Thats a good one. That along wigh the summer white house could bring in alot of immigrants and tourism to Denver.

 

[RonaldReagram]

A ridiculously higher sea level could do the trick

 

[Codae]

If Denver somehow annexed everything in its MSA, and New York were broken up into its component boroughs, only Los Angeles would be larger than Denver (though Chicago would be close) even without modifying any actual demography.

 

[Arkenfolm]

Your challenge, if you choose to accept it, is just that, make Denver the largest city in America by the year 2000. Pod can be anytime, but i assume most PODs will be post 1900 so im posting it here. Feel free to use any POD tho.

I do like the idea of an independent Louisiana which eventually shifts the capital to *Denver (since New Orleans and St. Louis are too close to the alt-American/British North America border) and uses the natural resources in the area (coal, iron, gold, and good farmland etc.) to build a successful industrial metropolis which is basically the Front Range on steroids.

OTL Denver is an extremely strategic city which the US government has considered in planning as a "backup capital" but even if it's a key transportation hub it's very hard for it to be the largest city.

It is fairly arid, even with snow it averages around 20 inches of rain a year, which isn't a lot. It draws from the Colorado for about half it's water, but that source has a hard cap since the flow of the Colorado is governed both by U.S. law AND International Treaty with Mexico. The allocation is sufficient (generally) for a population of around 3/4 of a million/Metro of ~3M, but 8,000,000+ in the city and 15-18M in the Metro? Not going to happen (also can't draw that much more from the Colorado, even without the Treaty with Mexico, since LA with its 3M+ (13 M metro) San Diego (1.4M/3.3 metro) and Vegas (2.3M metro) are all downstream, not to mention the Imperial Valley.

Sounds like the solution is better local water use, convincing other states, and perhaps bullying Mexico. If the US annexed Baja California and Sonora in 1848 (or afterwards), it would be easier to work out that agreement. But it probably still will take nuclear war, since Denver as the greatest US city seems very much like a nuclear war trope and usually one where Denver is home to US military forces trying to reconquer the rest of the country.

Speaking of water, is there any alternative water source? Especially if we expand Denver into other urban areas of Colorado?

Artesian sources in the High Plains and lots of interbasin transfer. Spend enough money building canals and desalination plants, and the US West will never water ever again (even if the water irrigating tomatoes in Southern California is coming from the Yukon). It doesn't have to be that dramatic of course.

 

[brunohusker]

Have to solve water issues and even then, it would have to be a post apocalyptic future. I think somewhere like St. Louis or KC might work but they are still too close to heavily populated areas.

 

[stevej713]

The Front Range is already an incredibly expensive place to live due to the high cost of transporting just about everything there. Colorado's arid climate means the vast majority of its food and grain have to be shipped in. It's too far away from the major inland waterways of the United States and the primary east-west railroads are to the north. Rugged terrain also increases transportation times and costs considerably. Before the mid-20th century, these factors made it absolutely impossible for Denver to be a city on the scale of NYC, Chicago, etc. But even after the relatively recent advances in storage and shipping, the costs are just too prohibitive for the majority of people and businesses.

 

[Galba Otho Vitelius]

Well you get the issue that this is post 1900, so now you have seriously nerf all those cities in America larger than Denver, so that is why everyone comes up with nuclear war scenarios. As of the last census update, the Denver-Aurora-Lakewood metropolitan area ranked nineteenth in population, and that is after a decent growth rate, so you have to destroy or almost destroy eighteen other metropolitan areas just in the United States. And I am assuming "America" means "United States of America" and not "North America".

Post 1900, to do these things you need global thermonuclear war, or the United States collapsing and breaking up into warlord controlled areas during the Great Depression.

Historically, the largest city in the United States, New York, was the one with the best port on the Atlantic, and best positioned for trade between Europe and the interior, and also quickly became the financial center. Even before 1900, you have to somehow keep New York outside the boundaries of the United States (I am assuming having the city on the west bank of the Hudson would be cheating), or put the national capitol in a substantial city instead of having a purpose built capitol. So even with a POD before 1900, your only other option for largest city is Philadelphia, by having the city remain the financial center or keep the national capitol. Otherwise you have to come up with some say to seriously nerf the Northeast, and do so before 1900. Chicago didn't emerge as a rival until after the Civil War, and the slave states didn't have many cities comparable to even a mid-sized northern or midwestern city.