| Submit your comments on this article |
| -Short Attention Span Theater- |
| Speculation over Japanese Nuclear Plant Woes |
| 2011-03-13 |
| Preliminary assessments of the Fukushima Daiichi accidents suggested that too little attention was paid to the threat of tsunami. It appeared that the reactors at first withstood the powerful earthquake, but the tsunami damaged generators and backup systems, harming the ability to cool the reactors. Reminiscent of the New Orleans Charity Hospital disaster after Hurricane Katrina. The best & brightest hospital architects put the emergency generators at a very low point in the structure, which guaranteed power failure in the event of a levee failure with flooding. Hospital administration decided no helicopter pad at the site was needed, since there was another facility a few blocks away which did have a helipad. No plans were ever made for a total evacuation of the building in the event of a levee failure. |
| Posted by:Anguper Hupomosing9418 |
| #11 'There were two explosions at Reactor 3, the operator Tepco says' -kyodo news |
| Posted by: linker 2011-03-13 23:15 |
| #10 Why I am not worried about JapanÂ’s nuclear reactors |
| Posted by: abu do you love 2011-03-13 20:52 |
| #9 Most of the CNN, FOX NEWS + RUSSIAN PERTS believe Japan will avoid any CHERNOBYL-STYLE NUC INCIDENT. IIRC JAPAN'S DISASTER MANAGEMENT PLANS > were based mostly on the infamous Pre-WW2 TOKYO-YOKOHAMA QUAKES, + the 1945 ATOMIC BOMBINGS OF HIROSHIMA + NAGASAKI. I could be wrong, but I believe I read time back that Japan's NucPlants are designed to withstand up to a MAG 9.0 Quake??? Tokyo is well-known for ensuring that Japan's various disaster management schemas exceeds world standards, as due to Japan being prone histor to such [natural]disasters. * PRAVDA > CHERNOBYL-STYLE DISASTER IN JAPAN IMPOSSIBLE, RUSSIAN SCIENTISTS SAY, due to Japanese Nucplants' BWRS not using any Graphite like Russia does. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2011-03-13 20:35 |
| #8 I like to drive to get to water. Leave it at that. |
| Posted by: Fi 2011-03-13 20:12 |
| #7 If you want to see where the San Andreas is, draw a line through the reservoir lakes for the Hetch Hetchy water district and Bolinas Bay. That's it. SF, or more likely Burlingame, may get a flash flood depending on how the dams break. More interesting is the Hayward fault on the East Bay. To find it, draw a line connecting the hospitals and schools along Rt 13, The Earl Warren Freeway to Hollister, where the Hayward and San Andreas meet. Many more people will die here. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2011-03-13 20:06 |
| #6 SF is on the North American (I think) Plate, not the Pacific Plate. So it will remain attached, alas. Bolinas and Pt Reyes will head north to submersion in the Pacific where the fault runs under the (I think) San Juan plate, giving the Cascades magma for the explosion of Mt Hood. Anyone remotely interested in earthquakes should take the earthquake trail at Pt Reyes Nat. Seashore. The visitors' is in a barn that was moved 18' in the 1906 earthquake. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2011-03-13 19:59 |
| #5 Lucky for San Franscisco and other towns south along the San Andreas fault, they are in a strike slip zone, so they will probably only get a 12 ft north trip trip north on the west side of the fault. and some devastating shaking. That is about all. |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2011-03-13 19:15 |
| #4 The coast of Washington and Oregon get the same sort of quakes as the one that just happened in Japan (subduction zone megathrust quakes) and about the same magnitude. Those pictures of what some of those coastal towns look like in Japan could be what is in store for Seattle and other towns near the water when it happens again there (last time was in January, 1700). |
| Posted by: crosspatch 2011-03-13 19:00 |
| #3 Just hoping people are taking precautions on the West Coast and Canada. |
| Posted by: tipper 2011-03-13 18:29 |
| #2 I was going to read more at the link until I saw the headline was - Crisis Underscores Fears About Safety of Nuclear Energy. Oh. The New York Times. Never mind. Thanks for the summary, AH 9418! |
| Posted by: Bobby 2011-03-13 10:50 |
| #1 ...usually because there was something more 'sexy' for the administration to spend their dollars on than fundamentals. Sort of like PBS and NPR. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2011-03-13 10:17 |