Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Japan Nuke Plant Accident Raised To Highest Level  
User currently offlinestasisLAX From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 3287 posts, RR: 6
Posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 1831 times:

According to a CNN news flash, a 6.4 magnitude earthquake has just struck Japan (following a 6.6 magnitude quake in the past 12 or so hours). The epicenter of the quake was located just off the coast of Chiba, east of Tokyo. Also, the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant has raised the threat level to level 7, after a new fire has erupted in at least one of the damaged reactors. This is the same threat level as the Chernobyl disaster

Such sad news!

[Edited 2011-04-11 17:29:47]


"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety!" B.Franklin
56 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 20336 posts, RR: 59
Reply 1, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1824 times:

Quoting stasisLAX (Thread starter):
According to a CNN news flash, a 6.4 magnitude earthquake has just struck Japan (following a 6.6 magnitude quake in the past 12 or so hours) and the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant has raised the threat level to level 7, after a new fire has erupted in at least one of the damaged reactors. This is the same threat level as the Chernobyl disaster

Oh crumbs...

Good thing most of the people were already evacuated from the area.

Although the threat level is the same, I don't think the radiation levels will be. If there were a level 8, Chernobyl would probably qualify for it.


User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8766 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1813 times:

This is still going to damage a wide area of Japan. The costs for it are giant because of the scarcity of land in Japan. Russia and Ukraine have plenty of land. Japan really needed that land in the evacuation zone. It looks like this will be a problem for >30 years. It is sad.

My friend is a metals inspector. Between the 737 fatigue issues, rusty bridges, and an ultra fine tooth comb inspection of every nuclear plant in the USA, his career looks bright for the next 10 years. His primary business is pipeline inspections, which, as the BP disaster showed... you get the idea. Crazy world.


User currently offlineJBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4491 posts, RR: 21
Reply 3, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1789 times:

Quoting stasisLAX (Thread starter):
Also, the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant has raised the threat level to level 7, after a new fire has erupted in at least one of the damaged reactors. This is the same threat level as the Chernobyl disaster

1) I cannot find information on this "raised threat level" anywhere, and it's about as useless as the Homeland Security danger color-code scale anyway. Greenpeace's "experts" have been saying it "should" be an INES 7 for the past month, but they're not the IAEA and they're not exactly unbiased.

2) The fire (in a battery box) was extinguished in seven minutes. Source: CNN.

3) The quake apparently had nothing to do with this fire.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 2):
This is still going to damage a wide area of Japan. The costs for it are giant because of the scarcity of land in Japan. Russia and Ukraine have plenty of land. Japan really needed that land in the evacuation zone. It looks like this will be a problem for >30 years. It is sad.

That's a bit premature. This is nowhere near as bad as Chernobyl. And it won't begin to approach it.

The radiation dose in Fukushima prefecture is currently averaging 2.2 microsieverts per hour, according to the IAEA. That's higher than normal background levels, but not a significant threat to human health. Food will need to be monitored for a long time, but vast swaths of Japan will not be an uninhabitable wasteland.

And that's all I'm going to say about this whole mess. I don't particularly feel like getting flamed into "submission" yet again.



I got my head checked--by a jumbo jet
User currently offlinestasisLAX From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 3287 posts, RR: 6
Reply 4, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1762 times:

Here's a link from Reuters which state that the Kyodo News Agency is reporting that the threat level MAY be raised to level 7 - CNN is reporting on-air that the threat level has been raised to level 7.

Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...apan-nuclear-idUSTRE73A6EI20110412



"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety!" B.Franklin
User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8766 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1762 times:

Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 3):
And that's all I'm going to say about this whole mess. I don't particularly feel like getting flamed into "submission" yet again.

That's fine, and I agree it is not set in stone that there will be a permanent exclusion zone. But look man. This is seeping into groundwater. It's cesium which has a half life of decades. We have not 1 reactor in trouble like Chernobyl, but more than one, plus spent fuel issues. I am just trying to guesstimate what the result is. I don't have any special knowledge. It looks like the situation has hardened and Japan did upgrade the rating to a 7. My 30 year comment was based on the half life issue. Sure, life will go on. But this looks like not just a garden variety accident... but a multiple-sided cascade disaster several times over. We shall see. I am in favor of nuclear power. But GE has to be crapping their pants as they consider the ramifications.


User currently offlineokie From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 3188 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1762 times:

Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 3):
1) I cannot find information on this "raised threat level" anywhere, and it's about as useless as the Homeland Security danger color-code scale anyway


I caught the headline and jumped to the IAEA website, usually the best source of information, there was nothing there.
However, while I was looking around on the site they seemed to have run out of bandwidth. I suspect there were others with the same though as myself. Any case when I went back to see if there was any more information where I originally saw the declaration of the level 7 and the story had disappeared.

Okie


User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8289 posts, RR: 26
Reply 7, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1761 times:

Quoting Flighty (Reply 2):
The costs for it are giant because of the scarcity of land in Japan. Russia and Ukraine have plenty of land. Japan really needed that land in the evacuation zone. It looks like this will be a problem for >30 years. It is sad.

Irresponsible overstatement. There is certainly a lot of agricultural and manufacturing activity in the Tohoku area, but only because development was there. There are comparably significant areas in the Chugoku region that are not as widely developed that could pick up the slack, and given the out-migration from those areas over the last 30 years, those prefectural governments would welcome the business with open arms.

Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 3):
Food will need to be monitored for a long time, but vast swaths of Japan will not be an uninhabitable wasteland.

Absolutely true. Vast swaths meaning virtually the entire country save for a 50 km stretch near the Fukushima plant.

Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 3):
I don't particularly feel like getting flamed into "submission" yet again.

People who are so ra-ra about the nuclear issue due to Fukushima are simply willfully ignoring 50 years of established research and science. Kind of like the anti-warming crowd.



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlinestasisLAX From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 3287 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 1755 times:

Quoting okie (Reply 6):
However, while I was looking around on the site they seemed to have run out of bandwidth

Another article on the threat level topic - again from Reuters.

Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/.../11/us-japan-idUSTRE72A0SS20110411



"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety!" B.Franklin
User currently offlineJBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4491 posts, RR: 21
Reply 9, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 1741 times:

Quoting stasisLAX (Reply 8):
Another article on the threat level topic - again from Reuters.

Yeah, I see that reports seem to be trickling in all the news agencies now. You just must be on the bleeding edge of information!



I got my head checked--by a jumbo jet
User currently offlineconnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 10, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 1695 times:

CNN as of 9:20 PM EDT are saying the threat level "may be raised to level 7" but a decision will not be made until tomorrow.

From CNN article:
Chief Cabinet Secretary Yukio Edano said the municipalities are likely to see long-term radiation levels that exceed international safety standards, and he warned that the month-old crisis at Fukushima Daiichi is not yet over.

"Things are relatively more stable, and things are stabilizing," he said. "However, we need to be ready for the possibility that things may turn for the worse."


http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapc...nuclear.reactors/index.html?hpt=T1

Quoting Flighty (Reply 5):
But look man. This is seeping into groundwater. It's cesium which has a half life of decades. We have not 1 reactor in trouble like Chernobyl, but more than one, plus spent fuel issues.

Whatever is seeping is seeping into ground that is in an exchange system with the ocean, so it is more likely that radioactive contaminants will wind up in the ocean, not groundwater that will diffuse inland. Cs indicates fission products which would point I think to broken cladding on spent fuel in the ponds, IMHO. Much better than a containment breach as the inventory is much less.

Much has been made about Pu being found in the ground but it's not clear where that came from. Consider that 6-7 tonnes of Pu was blasted into the stratosphere during atmospheric weapons testing, and has been slowly settling down ever since. You're breathing it in right now. The Pu could be from spent MOX fuel (mixed oxide) or it could be from other sources, and may have been there for a long time. We simply don't know at the moment.

I do not wish to minimise the problem, but the last thing we want to do at the moment is to write off Japan, or a large section of it, as a radioactive wasteland.



Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 20336 posts, RR: 59
Reply 11, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 1654 times:

From IAEA:

Quote:
Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant

Based on a report by the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), NISA confirms that no changes have been observed on the readings at the on-site radiation monitoring posts. Workers have been evacuated to the seismic evacuation shelter. Off-site power was lost and water injection pumps for Units 1, 2 and 3 stopped.

NISA confirms later that off-site power was restored and water injection resumed 50 minutes after the earthquake.

Doesn't sound like anything Big and Bad. Well, bigger and badder than it already is, anyway.


User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12961 posts, RR: 25
Reply 12, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 1634 times:

I guess you can't get a better source than NHK, which is Japan's "PBS":

Japan to raise Fukushima crisis level to worst

Seems we will have to wait a bit to hear why, though:

Quote:

Officials from the agency and the Nuclear Safety Commission will hold a news conference on Tuesday morning to explain the change of evaluation.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14139 posts, RR: 63
Reply 13, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 1622 times:

the funny thing is that I can´t read anything about this in the daily report of the IAEI:
http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/tsunamiupdate01.html

According to them power was lost for 50 minutes, but was fast restored again, with no changes. While workers had temporarely find refuge in an earthquake shelter, cleaning up operations were continuing. Also no drastic changes in radiation readings (they are still quite low).
So somebody is trying to create panic.

Jan


User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12961 posts, RR: 25
Reply 14, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 1606 times:

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 13):
So somebody is trying to create panic.

Jan,

Seems that somebody is:

Quote:

The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency made the decision on Monday. It says the damaged facilities have been releasing a massive amount of radioactive substances, which are posing a threat to human health and the environment over a wide area.

Something tells me that Japan is ready to give up on the BS that a 20 mile exclusion zone is OK and that it's OK to be dumping radioactive substances into the sea and the air for weeks now.

I don't think it has anything to do with today's aftershocks, it has everything to do with Japan realizing they've been way behind the curve on this thing right from the start.

Not that I am blaming them, no nation on earth could cope with what they are trying to cope with now.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinestasisLAX From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 3287 posts, RR: 6
Reply 15, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1573 times:

Associated Press (via Yahoo News) is now reporting that "Japanese nuclear regulators said the rating was being raised from 5 to 7 — the highest level on an international scale overseen by the International Atomic Energy Agency — after new assessments of radiation leaks from the Fukushima Dai-ichi plant since it was disabled by the March 11 tsunami. The new ranking signifies a "major accident" with "wider consequences" than the previous level, including widespread health effects, according to the Vienna-based IAEA."

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/as_japan_earthquake

Thus, it seems we have to official reasoning for the upgrade from Level 5 to Level 7 - perhaps the groundwater contamination is worse than originally known?



"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety!" B.Franklin
User currently offlineTheCommodore From Australia, joined Dec 2007, 3014 posts, RR: 8
Reply 16, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1571 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 11):
Well, bigger and badder than it already is, anyway.

I totally agree with the last part of your statement. But it may also turn out be an understatement ! Time will tell,as things certainly haven't been getting any better have they ?

Quoting Revelation (Reply 14):
no nation on earth could cope with what they are trying to cope with now.

Ok, but just you wait. We'll just keep on building new plants in different countries around the world, until the next Nuclear disaster occurs, claiming that "the disaster" meaning Tsunami, earthquake, whatever, was not foreseeable etc etc etc ...

But don't worry, everything will be OK.

Yeah, pull the other one will you.   

I think we all really need to re- think our use of nuclear energy. This disaster should be a warning, and a BIG one at that.



Flown 905,468 kms or 2.356 times to the moon, 1296 hrs, Longest flight 10,524 kms
User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12961 posts, RR: 25
Reply 17, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1557 times:

Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 16):

I think we all really need to re- think our use of nuclear energy. This disaster should be a warning, and a BIG one at that.

Yeah, but the genie won't go back into the bottle so easily.

I heard a news report that pointed out while the 6 failed reactors at Fukushima-Daichi are of course a huge problem, right now there are a total of 19 reactors off-line in Japan. That's why there are rolling power-outs in Tokyo and why the oh-so-dependable Japan Rail just isn't going to be all that dependable for the foreseeable future.

Also, businesses complain that TEPCO can't tell them when/if there will be power outages. If you run a restaurant in Tokyo, what's the point of preparing food all day if there will be no power when your customers show up at dinnertime? Maybe Tokyo will be like Bagdad or most of the rest of the Iraqi cities, with gas powered generators all over the place?

Since trains are so unreliable, most of the businessmen all leave on-time to try to make it home, instead of working the usual heroic Tokyo hours. Yet another reason for restaurants to not to cook lots of food, not to mention the higher level impact of all those workers not putting in their usual hours.

A lot of firms that have the possibility of relocating employees to other places have done so. Most people who have a choice to relocate will do so, not because of their own interests, but because of the fear of possibly causing their children to suffer cancer decades from not. It may not be 100% rational, but there it is, none the less.

So, I guess most of this supports your point, but again, the real issue is what will replace the power that nuclear energy now provides?

[Edited 2011-04-11 23:34:23]


Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8289 posts, RR: 26
Reply 18, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1553 times:

Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 16):
I think we all really need to re- think our use of nuclear energy. This disaster should be a warning, and a BIG one at that.

Sigh, I just don't buy that, and neither do a lot of my friends who live in Tokyo and refuse to relocate.

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2988/is-nuclear-power-safe

Food for thought.



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlineTheCommodore From Australia, joined Dec 2007, 3014 posts, RR: 8
Reply 19, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 1530 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 17):
So, I guess most of this supports your point, but again, the real issue is what will replace the power that nuclear energy now provides?

This is the problem isn't it ?

I guess you and I will have to leave that up to brainier people to work out, but if we can split atoms, send people up to the moon etc, then I think there are other alternatives to be discovered.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 18):
Sigh,

Well I read the article with interest and I was starting to learn a lot until the part where is says, "An irregularly shaped "exclusion zone" of about 1,700 square miles around the plant remains off-limits to human habitation, 220,000 people had to be permanently relocated, and agriculture is restricted, but vegetation and wildlife for the most part have thrived.

I understood that authorities were conducting guided tours in and around Chernobyl now, but yet the article states otherwise ?

I'm sorry, but it makes me suspicious as to ALL the "other" called facts, are they really correct or just plain wrong, or even half wrong, dose nothing for the credibility of the article.

Although maybe its just they way I'm reading it, please correct me if wrong ???

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 18):
Food for thought.

It is indeed, and maybe the jury's still out on this one, but wouldn't you think its better to err on the side of caution ?



Flown 905,468 kms or 2.356 times to the moon, 1296 hrs, Longest flight 10,524 kms
User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8289 posts, RR: 26
Reply 20, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 1527 times:

Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 19):
I understood that authorities were conducting guided tours in and around Chernobyl now, but yet the article states otherwise ?

They are doing so but that doesn't mean people are living there.

Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 19):

It is indeed, and maybe the jury's still out on this one, but wouldn't you think its better to err on the side of caution ?

Well yes, which would mean that plants in tsunami zones should have backup power systems resistant to water infiltration - namely the issues at Fukushima with the diesel generators being the last line of defense when the plant's independent power sources could have been used (i.e. the reactors themselves) to provide backup power for the coolant system. The bottom line is nuclear power generation has killed virtually nobody, with the notable exception of Chernobyl. Compared to mining and the regular effects of particulate air pollution from coal burning, I'll take those odds.



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlineTheCommodore From Australia, joined Dec 2007, 3014 posts, RR: 8
Reply 21, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 1520 times:

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 20):
They are doing so but that doesn't mean people are living there.

But yet the article clearly says there is an exclusion zone, I understand that to mean no entry.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 20):
The bottom line is nuclear power generation has killed virtually nobody,

People keep saying this, yourself included. So why then bother to have, No go area's, in and around Fukushima, if it's as safe as you make out, then why all the fuss and worry ? No one's going to die, thyroid cancer is successfully treated (according to the article) I just don't buy it.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 20):
Fukushima

Fukushima Plant was built in a known risk area near the sea. Why build such a reactor almost on the edge of the coast, close to water, where any contamination, if it occured and it has, would be impossible to contain, sounds pretty naive and green behind the ears to me !

[Edited 2011-04-12 00:39:53]


Flown 905,468 kms or 2.356 times to the moon, 1296 hrs, Longest flight 10,524 kms
User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8766 posts, RR: 3
Reply 22, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 1506 times:

Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 21):
Why build such a reactor almost on the edge of the coast, close to water, where any contamination, if it occured and it has, would be impossible to contain, sounds pretty naive and green behind the ears to me !

As you know... it was SIX reactors.... a mega nuclear plant complex totaling... what, 5 GW?.... one of the world's larger facilities.... and a large amount of stored nuclear waste on site as well. In an extreme earthquake zone, in a known mega tsunami zone.

With all that said, they would have been ok if their diesel gen sets were robust. Which they were not. This was, while not a worst case scenario, a situation with many outlandishly bad things coming together.

Edit: Interesting to note that, if you combine Fukushima - I (Daiichi) and II (located elsewhere, 7 mi away), the two complexes are about 9 GW and qualify as the world's largest nuclear plant complex. Of course, they are separate. But, still, 10 big reactors in one town. That is a ton of power.

[Edited 2011-04-12 00:58:03]

User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8289 posts, RR: 26
Reply 23, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 1507 times:

Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 21):
But yet the article clearly says there is an exclusion zone, I understand that to mean no entry.

That's not what it means. It means no residence or food production.

Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 21):
No one's going to die, thyroid cancer is successfully treated (according to the article) I just don't buy it.

Why expose people to heightened risk of thyroid cancer when it can be avoided? It's called being pragmatic.

Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 21):
So why then bother to have, No go area's, in and around Fukushima

Because of the immediate danger of short half-life elements like Cesium-137.

Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 21):
People keep saying this, yourself included

Because it's true. The Chernobyl accident was gross incompetence. The Fukushima accident was the worst confluence of circumstances - lack of data when the plant was constructed, combined with the largest earthquake and tsunami the country has seen in over 100 years. If everybody built and planned around so-called "100 year events", not much would be affordable would it? Are you meaning to tell me every Australian community has been planned with adequate protection against 100 year floods? That obviously hasn't been the case in Queensland the last couple years now has it?

Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 21):
Why build such a reactor almost on the edge of the coast, close to water, where any contamination

Nobody had good data on tsunami propagation in the 1960s, much less a monster tsunami of 15 meters' height. They built seawalls with adequate protection against typhoons, a far more regular and oft-occurring threat than tsunami in any case. You conveniently forget that these plants were built at a time when TEPCO was a pubicly-owned company at a time when the Japanese GDP was growing at 10-12% per annum.



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlineTheCommodore From Australia, joined Dec 2007, 3014 posts, RR: 8
Reply 24, posted (3 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 1491 times:

Quoting Flighty (Reply 22):
With all that said, they would have been ok if their diesel gen sets were robust. Which they were not. This was, while not a worst case scenario, a situation with many outlandishly bad things coming together.

Flighty, we know this.

In disaster's unfortunately, a lot of things always seem to "come together" !

That's why I say we shouldn't tempt faith, we will never win against mother rnature, ever !

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 23):
It means no residence

But yet people can go visit, even though they can't live there ?

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 23):
confluence of circumstances -

Evey disaster that occurs these days, from fire to flood to Tsunami, seems to be bigger and better than the last that's taken place. And with climate change raining down on us, expect more "bigger and better disasters" and more frequent 1 in a 100 year events.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 23):
Are you meaning to tell me every Australian community has been planned with adequate protection against 100 year floods? That obviously hasn't been the case in Queensland the last couple years now has it?

Your spot on !

Its bad.

You will get no argument out of me about the QLD floods and the disastrous state Gov planning laws that permitted building homes and business on low lying lands. The Royal Commission of inquiry has started this week, so stay tuned, but I'm sure you can guess the end result, buck passing !

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 23):
Nobody had good data on tsunami propagation in the 1960s,

Japan has a long history of Tsunamis, as it dose earthquakes.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 23):
much less a monster tsunami of 15 meters' height. They built seawalls with adequate protection against typhoons, a far more regular and oft-occurring threat than tsunami in any case.

Actually the wall was only 5.2 meters high. Japan has experienced Tsunamis higher than this in the past.
And the sea wall they did build, didn't even surround the entire plant, there was a massive opening in the middle of it !

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 23):
You conveniently forget that these plants were built at a time when TEPCO was a pubicly-owned company at a time when the Japanese GDP was growing at 10-12% per annum.

Not sure how that has any bearing on this issue ?

[Edited 2011-04-12 01:36:46]


Flown 905,468 kms or 2.356 times to the moon, 1296 hrs, Longest flight 10,524 kms
25 Post contains images AustrianZRH : . Chernobyl has released about 70,000 TBq of radioactivity, Fukushima is estimated at 7,000 TBq. Plus, the fallout is way more localized than in Cher
26 Klaus : The distribution of the contamination is uneven. It is substantially higher in certain areas even at a larger distance form the reactors. Highly sele
27 tu204 : Radiation is cumulative. You can hang around for a day and get a month's worth of exposure, nothing to worry about, but if you live there constantly,
28 Aaron747 : That's not the point - at the time of construction, there was no reliable propagation data for that area. Even towns in Miyagi that were wiped out by
29 Klaus : No, that conclusion is a mistake. You cannot enumerate the specific causes of specific accidents or near-accidents and then draw the conclusion that
30 tu204 : You must have mistaken my post. I agree with you completely. What I was trying to point out is that all nuclear tragedies to this day have been mainl
31 AustrianZRH : Sure. However, you always do a risk assessment and build the structures accordingly. They thought a 6-m-Tsunami would be the worst at Fukushima and t
32 NoUFO : While Greenpeace is indeed not the IAEA, the latter one isn't exactly unbiased as well. Many people seem to stick to the funny idea the IAEA was some
33 Post contains images Baroque : I thik the phrase is "Busy as a Beirut bricklayer". Very like the anti warming crowd if I may alter that. Happily, the net flow of groundwater is OUT
34 Post contains images connies4ever : Quite. There are as of this year, not sure of the date, short-length tours of the exclusion area. This does get the visitors really close to the sarc
35 Aesma : About the 5-6-7 levels, the problem is that everybody can claim it's such or such level, so Japan was saying for weeks it was a 5 while the IAEA was s
36 pylon101 : Talking about Chernobyl I would suggest that you guys read more about 1986. Wiki is a good start. Incompetence? And you are talking about the first c
37 Northstardc4m : First country that opened the era of nuclear POWER plants FEEDING A POWER GRID... Obninsk shut down in 2002. It is being slowly defuelled, but that p
38 pylon101 : O, that is exactly what would call the knowledge. I am not going to go into discussion about turbine test in Chernobyl. We have a lot of stuff here th
39 Post contains links and images connies4ever : Perhaps you haven't actually read the IAEA mission statement: From http://www.iaea.org/About/mission.html The IAEA Mission Statement The Internationa
40 NoUFO : I have - even 'between the lines'. Actually, you don't need to dechiffer the 'mission statement', as it clearly states that the IAEA promotes "using
41 Post contains images TheCommodore : That's exactly the point Come now, are you saying they should have built it a little to the left ! But my POINT is, that Japan has a history of Tsuna
42 Aaron747 : But no Japanese person in the last 100 years has seen one 15 meters high, so how were they supposed to know for sure? Engineers like to have data ava
43 TheCommodore : Um, remind me again how many schools were closed in South Korea the other day because of High radiation levels ??? That's what I meant when I said we
44 connies4ever : The above statement is an interpretation (on your part) of a published mission statement by an agency of the United Nations, entirely subjective. The
45 Aaron747 : Government CYA. The Korean government is highly sensitive to the extreme reactions they get from the populace over any minor instance of perceived or
46 Post contains links Flighty : It seems like Fukushima was a failure to think clearly about that issue. What to do to make SURE the cooling pumps will operate. While some here impu
47 TheCommodore : You were the one who stated boldly that this Japaneses incident, has not affected anyone. I am merely pointing out to you that your wrong. It has aff
48 NoUFO : "Enshrine" is entirely your interpretation which I consider wrong, sorry. "Enshrine" would mean that all the IAEA does is to retain or preserve nucle
49 Aaron747 : I'm talking about real effects - health, economic, or otherwise. The only thing you have cited that I accept as a real effect is Apple's inability to
50 TheCommodore : Aaron747, these are "real effects" arent they ? Japan need all the exports they get get at the moment (actually they have for years now really) So th
51 Post contains links Baroque : Aaron, not sure if TheCommodore remembers the great barramundi substitution scam, but I do. http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200212/s751535.htm A
52 Aaron747 : I sincerely doubt it. In the short term, yes, the Nikkei will be down, and exporters will take a hit. But they will be back. This is in many ways the
53 Post contains images TheCommodore : Well, living life with one's head in the sand is not for me either. Sorry Aaron747, but we will have to agree to disagree on this one. When it comes
54 Post contains links Baroque : I am confident you have much much more experience of Japanese restaurants and their practices than I do. And I do hope I will not end up being able t
55 Post contains images Aaron747 : The most crucial part of that article: According to the man, one possible lead to the fraud might be his visit to a bar in Roppongi with a friend aft
56 Revelation : And the failure of the hydrogen flares to work greatly amplified the problems. Seems like one of those omissions that is painfully 100% clear in hind
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
UK Terror Threat Level Raised To 'Severe' posted Fri Jan 22 2010 15:17:30 by OA260
Could We Go To Threat Level RED? posted Wed Dec 24 2003 23:29:49 by Bistro1200
Bill Clinton Turns To Plant-Based Diet posted Thu Sep 23 2010 07:32:54 by MadameConcorde
NHK: Japan Pm Hatoyama To Resign Over Okinawa Flap posted Tue Jun 1 2010 18:40:47 by Aaron747
DOE Removes 'how To Attack Nuclear Plant W/plane posted Tue Apr 27 2010 07:47:26 by fxramper
AUS Tells Japan To Stop Whaling posted Thu Feb 18 2010 22:24:13 by NIKV69
What To Do In Tokyo, Japan? posted Wed Oct 21 2009 19:41:18 by United Airline
American Jailed In Japan Trying To Get Kids posted Tue Sep 29 2009 12:45:43 by Tsaord
Japan's New First Lady: "I Rode UFO To Venus" posted Fri Sep 4 2009 16:32:52 by Aaron747
New First Lady Of Japan Abducted To Venus posted Thu Sep 3 2009 10:35:47 by AAORY