It also shows that building nuclear power plants in an active fault zone may not be the brightest thing. I'm sure someone can produce a nifty 'cost/benefit' analysis to do with the risk of death or contamination against the value of power generated, but if this does result in a leak it won't be easy to explain that to those affected.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Earthquake in Japan!
Collapse
X
-
I just watched an interesting documentary on coastal cities in history being wiped out. It focused on the Minoan people and their decline and how it relates to today.
Minoan civilization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I could not find a link directly to the documentary but the conclusion that living directly on the coast is not the best plan but we'll do it anyway.
Maybe this is it.
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/ancie...lypse-minoans/Originally posted by GVChampCollege students are very, very, very dumb. But that's what you get when the government subsidizes children to sit in the middle of a corn field to drink alcohol and fuck.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bigfella View PostIt also shows that building nuclear power plants in an active fault zone may not be the brightest thing. I'm sure someone can produce a nifty 'cost/benefit' analysis to do with the risk of death or contamination against the value of power generated, but if this does result in a leak it won't be easy to explain that to those affected.sigpic
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bigfella View PostIt also shows that building nuclear power plants in an active fault zone may not be the brightest thing. I'm sure someone can produce a nifty 'cost/benefit' analysis to do with the risk of death or contamination against the value of power generated, but if this does result in a leak it won't be easy to explain that to those affected.
Comment
-
Originally posted by zraver View Postthe oops moment seems to be the Tsunami, not the quake. The tusami swamped the generators the plants needed when the power grid crashed. They made the buildings strong enough to resist an 8.9 which is good engineering. But they failed to make the generators safe from the Tsunami.sigpic
Comment
-
Originally posted by Dago View PostI think he knows the effect. And he is correct, the effect of the earthquake, and fault lines on coastal centers, IE. Tusami. What do you think causes Tusami's? Yes, that's right, an earthquake. And what can earthquakes be attributed too? Thats right, shifting of plates, IE. Fault lines. "Rim of Fire". And what happens as a result? Yes, massive increase of the level of water, IE. Large tidal waves - Tsunmai's.
the two- local quakes and tsunamis are not automatically or even required to be linked. The building complex withstood the quake ring of fire and all. The problem was not construction per se but location. This likely reflects the knowledge had 40 years ago. The 8.9 is the biggest quake to hit Japan in about 150 years. This means the builders did not know how far a local tsunami would go since this is at least a 150 year event at this point.
I am pretty sure that google maps will show the site was safe from what they thought was an extreme event. Remember the complex was built 40 years ago.
Comment
-
Originally posted by zraver View PostYou're really not impressing me.
the two- local quakes and tsunamis are not automatically or even required to be linked. The building complex withstood the quake ring of fire and all. The problem was not construction per se but location. This likely reflects the knowledge had 40 years ago. The 8.9 is the biggest quake to hit Japan in about 150 years. This means the builders did not know how far a local tsunami would go since this is at least a 150 year event at this point.
I am pretty sure that google maps will show the site was safe from what they thought was an extreme event. Remember the complex was built 40 years ago.
" local quakes and tsunamis are not automatically or even required to be linked."
This says it all! So, the tsunami that followed afterwards wasn't a result of a earthquake!
And, I am referring to the original op, and his post about the situation, in which we are talking about, and the related concern of nuclear sites. While you bang the political drum, of "Nuclear Power Plants" are safe. His argument and concerns is legitimate. Whatever pro-stance your trying to induce on here.
In this situation, the earthquake VIA the tsunami cause the generators to go offline, and there is a possibility of a radiation leak because there is lack of power too run the cooling.
I guess we can argue points, to be right. But I mean, lets see openly, the point of the post. And maybe understand the point of view, and related concerns he was raising. Which was consequence of a disaster and the possible hazardous of the area. There is not only one aspect of consequences IE. Building structure and integrity, there are a number of factors, when you conduct environmental reports and factor in risk of a project.Last edited by Dago; 12 Mar 11,, 07:45.sigpic
Comment
-
Originally posted by Dago View PostWow, you really don't impress me either. Now that is out of the way, of both our feelings.
" local quakes and tsunamis are not automatically or even required to be linked."
This says it all! So, the tsunami that followed afterwards wasn't a result of a earthquake!
And, I am referring to the original op, and his post about the situation, in which we are talking about, and the related concern of nuclear sites. While you bang the political drum, of "Nuclear Power Plants" are safe. His argument and concerns is legitimate. Whatever pro-stance your trying to induce on here.
In fact, that you want to argue semantics, and contribute and argue the ladder while in fact the former caused it.
What caused the failure was improper protection of the back up generator. Notice the main site of concern has three reactors, only 1 is in danger. Now it may be the other two were 'cool", or it maybe that the system worked for those reactors. Although the failure of a second site indicates a desing or code that was not up to task. However this may be a reflection of the body of knowledge when the site was built.
In this situation, the earthquake VIA the tsunami cause the generators to go offline, and there is a possibility of a radiation leak because there is lack of power too run the cooling.
I guess we can argue points, to be right. But I mean, lets see openly, the point of the post. And maybe understand the point of view, and related concerns he was raising. Which was consequence of a disaster in a hazardous area. There is not only one aspect of consequences IE. Building structure and integrity, there are a number of factors, when you conduct environmental reports and factor in risk of a project.
How would your life be different?
As BF said, it kight be hard to explain to the locals, but in the big picture- locals don't matter. Going nuclear was a smart choice for Japan given its situations.
Comment
-
Originally posted by zraver View PostNotice I said local. Tsunamis have a much greater reach than the quake that spawned them, and some quakes can create a "smaller" wave locally than what ends up hitting farther out depending on location, depth, geography and strength.
Coastal area's are hazardous especially for most active region in the world for earthquakes. That's all I have too say.
Really, making the argument that the situation wasn't due too the disaster because one aspect didn't fail, but the other, was in no way linked with the current disaster? So they building did it's job?
Obviously, it didn't.
You do not design only one aspect of safety, you incorporate the entire enviroment that shapes from said incident, or could develop.
Perhaps, knowing, that the risk isn't an earthquake, but the cause of an earthquake can have on the surrounding situation, IE. Tidal waves... they could have possibly planned construction on higher ground? That is one aspect. But hey, I guess I am just looking on how the situation could of been avoided. Instead of focusing on building integrity and stability.Last edited by Dago; 12 Mar 11,, 08:43.sigpic
Comment
-
Originally posted by Dago View Post.....
Really, making the argument that the situation wasn't due too the disaster because one aspect of the consequence of the disaster didn't fail, but the other, was in no way linked with the current disaster? So they building did it's job?
Obviously, it didn't.
You do not design only one aspect of safety, you incorporate the entire event. An event that directly links to another, that causes dames, can say that disaster caused it. Hence the current earthquake.
So until we know more about how it happened, why don't you enjoy a big cup of STFU.
So until we know why the generators failed
Perhaps, knowing, that the risk isn't an earthquake, but the cause of an earthquake can have on the surrounding situation, IE. Tidal waves... they could have possibly planned construction on higher ground? That is one aspect. But hey, I guess I am just looking on how the situation could of been avoided. Instead of focusing on building integrity and stability.[/QUOTE]
Comment
-
[3:08 a.m. ET, 5:08 p.m. Tokyo] An explosion has been reported near a nuclear plant in northeastern Japan's Fukushima prefecture, Japanese public broadcaster NHK reported, citing the country's nuclear and industrial safety agency.
[2:19 a.m. ET, 4:19 p.m. Tokyo] A small amount of radioactive Cesium has escaped into the air surrounding a nuclear plant in northeastern Japan's Fukushima prefecture, Japan's Nuclear and Industrial Agency said.
The agency said there was a strong possibility that this was caused by the melting of a fuel rod, adding that plant engineers were continuing to cool the fuel rods by pumping water around the rods.
To my knowledge, fo far the area 10km around the nuclear power plant has been evacuated, but I am pretty sure that they'll increase the radius (and that many people in the area have already left on their own).
Also there have been reports of further problem in yet another nuclear plant, though I did not find any details about that one yet.
Comment
-
Been following information via twitter. My heart's shivering.
Twitter
Edit: also live streaming here: http://www.ustream.tv/channel/foxtok..._medium=social
(ignore the first 30 sec ad)Last edited by snowhole; 12 Mar 11,, 09:39.夫唯不爭,故天下莫能與之爭。
Comment
-
Amateurs study tactics, professionals study logistics, and China is watching The Weather Channel.
Its a light water reactor so the risk of a big explosion is lower but still there. Where the wind blows is about to be very important.
Comment
Comment