In addition to the one above (USCG Doc. No. 1243693), here's another one on the way: USCG Doc. No.: 1225103.

According to this CBS Local article, construction stopped a few weeks ago due to a lack of permits:

The reason: Google does not have a permit for a floating anything. “Google has spent millions on this,” said an insider close to the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission. “But they can’t park this barge on the waterfront without a permit, and they don’t have one.” A BCDC official confirmed the agency has held discussions with Google about “hypothetical operations” on the water, but he complained the tech giant has been vague about how the barge would be used.

According to this CBS Local article, construction stopped a few weeks ago due to a lack of permits:

The reason: Google does not have a permit for a floating anything. “Google has spent millions on this,” said an insider close to the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission. “But they can’t park this barge on the waterfront without a permit, and they don’t have one.” A BCDC official confirmed the agency has held discussions with Google about “hypothetical operations” on the water, but he complained the tech giant has been vague about how the barge would be used.

You don't have to submerge a barge to keep it in one spot. There are two easier options: mooring (a few $M upfront cost) and Dynamic Positioning (high running cost).

If you read through the Wikipedia article you quoted, you'll learn that OTEC only really works in warm waters, where the heat difference between surface and depth is large enough. The best US location for OTEC is Hawaii, and there's only one functioning OTEC plant in the world, near Japan. So Google is most likely not building an OTEC plant, or they'd do so in a very different shipyard instead of on Treasure Island.

Fixed now.

Steve Blank should stop lamenting and instead invest in Blueseed. Now THAT's hardware.

Blueseed is a visa-free startup community located on a cruise ship 30 minutes from the coast of Silicon Valley, in international waters outside the jurisdiction of the United States.

The value proposition is proximity to Silicon Valley - http://www.blueseed.co/faq.html#silicon_valley

See http://www.blueseed.co/faq.html#silicon_valley. And again, Blueseed will host startups. The project that intended to host coders was Sea Code, http://sea-code.com/

Very well put. There's nothing radical about Blueseed. People from Vancouver have been traveling to Silicon Valley for tens of years to conduct business. Blueseed is legally just like Vancouver, but closer.

Correct - http://www.blueseed.co/faq.html#laws and correction - http://www.blueseed.co/faq.html#silicon_valley

Crime will be handled the same way it's been handled on cruise ships that have transported tens of millions over the past 30 years. http://www.blueseed.co/faq.html#laws

Also, it's one thing to steal someone's wallet on a cruise, knowing you won't see them again, vs. on the ship that's practically the town you both live in.

How in the world do you expect a sweatship for startup entrepreneurs online 24/7, to survive in the press spotlight near California's coast? Have you the faintest idea about the PR implications?

VCs aren't after "offshore talent". They're looking for high-growth startups. Plus, Blueseed wasn't started by VCs, but by immigrant entrepreneurs (look at the bios of the founders). And please drop the silly argument about "enslaving". If someone doesn't like it on the ship, they leave. Do you realize the amount of press the ship will get? If anyone is in the least unhappy, that would lead to a PR disaster to Blueseed. Slavery? Please.