Can we have an update on the situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anela

They ARE designed to withstand floods and earthquakes, up to a certain point of "reasonable expectation". In this case, I suspect that they experienced a bit above their design specs. But we digress, this string is about requesting updates from SE, not about flaming he operators of a reactor plant, nor debating the safety of Nuclear Power.

Again, no offens intended

---

No if this would have happened at any reactor that was up to the current legal standards this woudn't have happened. If you are operating a nuclear reactor saftey should be your number 1 concern, and it wasn't with them. They have a poor safety record and because no one shut them down sooner this is the result. All the signs were there.

Also, maybe i'm dumb, but if you live on a volcanic island in a part of world actually called the Ring of Fire due to all the volcanic activity, I don't think it's that unreasonable to think an earthquake and tsunami might just happen. In fact, common sense might would have told them it was likely to happen.

If you are going to build power plants near fault lines make sure they are earthquake proof, or just don't build them. Period.

And if you don't like the topic i'm talking about just don't respond to my post and let it die

Also, I'm not flaming anyone. Flaming is a forum term that used when you attack someone personally over a disagreement. I'm not calling Tepo names, i'm holding them responsible for what they did.

In the words of a great man...

"Life will find a way" -Ian Malcolm Jurassic Park

I heard a statement saying they were only required to maintain a level of readiness/preparedness of around an 8.0 quake.

been trying to find the thread, but someone had posted an application that was an overlay of before/after pics where you pulled a line across the pic and it replaced the pic as you wiped it. It had a good shot of the huge storage tanks for fuel and you could see the transformers that were taken out. The tsunami ripped the fuel tanks out of the ground. A massive 13 meter wave the length of the entire prefecture will tend to have that kind of effect on smaller structures like that I guess....so regardless of where what was installed, they pumps were going to be out of commision without any power source.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tsukino_Kaji

I heard a statement saying they were only required to maintain a level of readiness/preparedness of around an 8.0 quake.

---

True, but the quake was not what took out the backup systems... it was the tsunami.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RAIST

True, but the quake was not what took out the backup systems... it was the tsunami.

---

Right.





Superfluous text added to meet forum standards.(And you didn't Raist again. ^^)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dinh

In the words of a great man...

"Life will find a way" -Ian Malcolm Jurassic Park

---

LIfe didn't find a way.

If the reactor had been maintained properly this woudn't have happened. It was a shoddy reactor that should have been shut down.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RAIST

been trying to find the thread, but someone had posted an application that was an overlay of before/after pics where you pulled a line across the pic and it replaced the pic as you wiped it. It had a good shot of the huge storage tanks for fuel and you could see the transformers that were taken out. The tsunami ripped the fuel tanks out of the ground. A massive 13 meter wave the length of the entire prefecture will tend to have that kind of effect on smaller structures like that I guess....so regardless of where what was installed, they pumps were going to be out of commision without any power source.

---

Are you looking for this http://www.abc.net.au/news/events/ja...eforeafter.htm

The nuclear disaster currently unfolding is a man-made disaster that could have been prevented. Talking heads for the nuclear industry appear on TV and imply that the nuclear meltdown is akin to aliens landing on planet earth, something that could not have been planned for. This is simply not the case. In 1923 Japan experienced an 8.3 earthquake that generated a 30 to 40 foot tsunami, yet the Fukushima plant was not built to withstand the effects of a similar earthquake and tsunami.

Listening carefully to the nuclear industry’s experts the reason is clear. As happens daily under capitalism, profits are put before people. Making nuclear plants designed to withstand a worst case scenario and protecting the surrounding population is deemed too costly by the profit driven system.

This profit driven decision making is rubber stamped by regulators that are closely tied with the industry they are supposed to regulate. Steff Yorek, a spokesperson for Freedom Road Socialist Organization said, “Allowing the nuclear industry to regulate itself is like letting the kids set the rules for the candy store. The same process that led to the BP oil spill a year ago is the cause of the disaster at Fukushima. We cannot allow the health of people and the safety of the environment to be discarded in favor of maximum profit for a handful of wealthy people.”

She added, “The natural disaster by itself would have been difficult enough to cope with, but in five years or so life could have returned to normal. Even in the best case scenario, the working people of Japan will now face radioactive seafood and soil and contaminated ground water for the next 300 years. Capitalism has doomed another Japanese generation to cancer and birth defects. The only question now is in how large of an area will be impacted and how high the dosage of radiation will go.”

Coudn't have said it better myself

And in the Fukushima plant, emergency generators were in place, but not on high enough ground. So the backup system itself was vulnerable, making catastrophic failure possible. The spent fuel is stored next to the reactor, so damage to the reactor can damage the stored rods too. The “comparatively smaller and less expensive containment structure” makes the reactor more vulnerable than other designs.

And here is a quote explaining what i was talking about earlier about how they didn't have their back up systems properly placed.

Also here is a much more apt quote for this situation than the one that was quoted from a Jurassic park.

"The love of money is the root of all evil" The Bible

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dale

No if this would have happened at any reactor that was up to the current legal standards this woudn't have happened. If you are operating a nuclear reactor saftey should be your number 1 concern, and it wasn't with them. They have a poor safety record and because no one shut them down sooner this is the result. All the signs were there.

Also, maybe i'm dumb, but if you live on a volcanic island in a part of world actually called the Ring of Fire due to all the volcanic activity, I don't think it's that unreasonable to think an earthquake and tsunami might just happen. In fact, common sense might would have told them it was likely to happen.

If you are going to build power plants near fault lines make sure they are earthquake proof, or just don't build them. Period.

And if you don't like the topic i'm talking about just don't respond to my post and let it die

Also, I'm not flaming anyone. Flaming is a forum term that used when you attack someone personally over a disagreement. I'm not calling Tepo names, i'm holding them responsible for what they did.

---

My bad,
As you can see from my posts #, I am new to the forums. Wrong use of terms.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anela

My bad,
As you can see from my posts #, I am new to the forums. Wrong use of terms.

---

That is ok, look at the two earlier posts if you want direct quotes from online sources. I found you some

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RAIST

True, but the quake was not what took out the backup systems... it was the tsunami.

---

True.
Just a personal opinion here, but I would never build, nor allow to be built, a reactor facility anywhere on the shoreline of the east coast of Japan. Given the history of quakes and tsunamis for that region, I just cant justify the risk. The facility, and all its backups should have been at least 50 feet above mean sea level due to the risk of flooding.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dale

LIfe didn't find a way.

If the reactor had been maintained properly this woudn't have happened. It was a shoddy reactor that should have been shut down.

---

The life of the sea~ ...or something, t'was a joke.

I completely agree with you. Sticking a nuclear reactor in a place prone to numerous "Acts of god", as the insurance companies put it, is a horrible idea. Personally I think SE should move the servers to Wyoming... when was the last time you have ever heard of ANYTHING bad happening there? I forgot it was a state to be honest.

Just to clear up any misconception are you referring to the debate in this article? http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/19_23.html

If so the entire source of information is more useful than a quick quote in discussing such topics even though the entire political debate is off-topic.

I am really, really, really hoping that the next update we get from SE, is that they will be going back online at JP midnight on March 22nd. Just wishful thinking I know.. ; ;

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dale

The nuclear disaster currently unfolding is a man-made disaster that could have been prevented. Talking heads for the nuclear industry appear on TV and imply that the nuclear meltdown is akin to aliens landing on planet earth, something that could not have been planned for. This is simply not the case. In 1923 Japan experienced an 8.3 earthquake that generated a 30 to 40 foot tsunami, yet the Fukushima plant was not built to withstand the effects of a similar earthquake and tsunami.

Listening carefully to the nuclear industry’s experts the reason is clear. As happens daily under capitalism, profits are put before people. Making nuclear plants designed to withstand a worst case scenario and protecting the surrounding population is deemed too costly by the profit driven system.

This profit driven decision making is rubber stamped by regulators that are closely tied with the industry they are supposed to regulate. Steff Yorek, a spokesperson for Freedom Road Socialist Organization said, “Allowing the nuclear industry to regulate itself is like letting the kids set the rules for the candy store. The same process that led to the BP oil spill a year ago is the cause of the disaster at Fukushima. We cannot allow the health of people and the safety of the environment to be discarded in favor of maximum profit for a handful of wealthy people.”

She added, “The natural disaster by itself would have been difficult enough to cope with, but in five years or so life could have returned to normal. Even in the best case scenario, the working people of Japan will now face radioactive seafood and soil and contaminated ground water for the next 300 years. Capitalism has doomed another Japanese generation to cancer and birth defects. The only question now is in how large of an area will be impacted and how high the dosage of radiation will go.”

Coudn't have said it better myself

---

Nice.. propogandists to combat propogandists... (spokesperson for Freedom Road Socialist Organization )--go figure.

At the time, the Kanto earthquake was the worst recorded one to date I think...and they hadn't seen an event parallel to it since. 8.3 earthquake and the waves were recorded at 10 meters (about 32 feet) And Kanto wasn't just the earthquake/tsunami--it also had aTYPHOON in the area at the same time--people were literally burned to death while fleeing because of whirlwinds of fire racing through the streets. This one was still considerably worse and 88 years later. There have only been 4 or 5 other incidents world wide that are on par with or worse than this incident.. and they weren't in the Japan region. So, if anything, they would have made things to withstand (as mentioned earlier) around an 8.0 level event. Again, this wasn't the fault of the quake. The shutdown rods were injected automatically when the quake hit, so they were already going into standby. Backup systems DID engage (granted, one stalled at first, but then kicked in). It was when the deluge of multiple tsunami pounded the shoreline that the support systems were taken out completely.

Have to remember, Japan has some of the best (if not THE best) engineering for designing things to withstand this kind of stuff. The fact that they have lost entire cities should be enough to support that this was just an unforseeable event fror which no one could have been fully prepared.

Raist

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dinh

The life of the sea~ ...or something

---

Dinh, this has nothing to do with life finding a way.

It had to do with a misguided corporation that put profit before safety. We had the technology to easily prevent this from happening. The company just chose not to do it because it would have cut into their bottom line, and when you are dealing with something as dangerous as nuclear power that's just not acceptable.

In Jurassic Park that quote is talking about when life finds a way despite science's best efforts to control it. Well, this was not one of those cases - cause this was hardly one of science's best efforts. This could have been easily prevented, and the fact they have some heroic workers who are now risking their lives to control a crisis their bosses made doesn't change this.

Again, i'm not trying to take away from the courage their workers they are showing. But let's not let the heroics cloud the fact this corporation needs to be held responsible for what they did, because this is serious business.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anela

True.
Just a personal opinion here, but I would never build, nor allow to be built, a reactor facility anywhere on the shoreline of the east coast of Japan. Given the history of quakes and tsunamis for that region, I just cant justify the risk. The facility, and all its backups should have been at least 50 feet above mean sea level due to the risk of flooding.

---

Unfortunately, these things have to be built near large bodies of water, as that water is used as a cooling medium. Look up the history of Nuclear reactors, and you will see the pattern. Granted, their may have been better sites and what not, but that is kind of mute when you are talking about Japan...topography and industry may not have allowed a viable site on the western side.

Raist

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RAIST

Nice.. propogandists to combat propogandists... (spokesperson for Freedom Road Socialist Organization )--go figure.

At the time, the Kanto earthquake was the worst recorded one to date I think...and they hadn't seen an event parallel to it since. 8.3 earthquake and the waves were recorded at 10 meters (about 32 feet) And Kanto wasn't just the earthquake/tsunami--it also had aTYPHOON in the area at the same time--people were literally burned to death while fleeing because of whirlwinds of fire racing through the streets. This one was still considerably worse and 88 years later. There have only been 4 or 5 other incidents world wide that are on par with or worse than this incident.. and they weren't in the Japan region. So, if anything, they would have made things to withstand (as mentioned earlier) around an 8.0 level event. Again, this wasn't the fault of the quake. The shutdown rods were injected automatically when the quake hit, so they were already going into standby. Backup systems DID engage (granted, one stalled at first, but then kicked in). It was when the deluge of multiple tsunami pounded the shoreline that the support systems were taken out completely.

Have to remember, Japan has some of the best (if not THE best) engineering for designing things to withstand this kind of stuff. The fact that they have lost entire cities should be enough to support that this was just an unforseeable event fror which no one could have been fully prepared.

Raist

---

Raist, you should really find something better to be an apologist for.

This was not unforeseeable. It was - in fact - predictable.

And they could have easily been prepared for it. In fact, all competent reactors are prepared for it. They even had people resigning from the project before this even happened because they said the reactor design was not safe. Just go check the facts.

If you are going to build a nuclear reactor on the coast in a volcanic area known for huge earthquakes and tsunamis, anyone remotely intelligent would know to put their emergency back up systems high enough to where flood waters can't wash it away, and certainly "the best engineers and designers" as you claim we are dealing with here would. In fact, even the regulations required them to do so.

This is just another typical example of corporations putting greed for profit above public safety, and this time it just about cost Japan their entire country. So you better take this crap serious and fix it and stop making excuses for them, or next time it may be your country that gets hit next.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RAIST

Unfortunately, these things have to be built near large bodies of water, as that water is used as a cooling medium. Look up the history of Nuclear reactors, and you will see the pattern. Granted, their may have been better sites and what not, but that is kind of mute when you are talking about Japan...topography and industry may not have allowed a viable site on the western side.

Raist

---

Wow you are just full of excuses to defend these people. Now it's the topography to blame :)

...Nuclear plants need to be build near water, that's how the technology works.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dale

Dinh, this has nothing to do with life finding a way.

It had to do with a misguided corporation that put profit before safety. We had the technology to easily prevent this from happening. The company just chose not to do it because it would have cut into their bottom line, and when you are dealing with something as dangerous as nuclear power that's just not acceptable.

In Jurassic Park that quote is talking about when life finds a way despite science's best efforts to control it. Well, this was not one of those cases - cause this was hardly one of science's best efforts. This could have been easily prevented, and the fact they have some heroic workers who are now risking their lives to control a crisis their bosses made doesn't change this.

Again, i'm not trying to take away from the courage their workers they are showing. But let's not let the heroics cloud the fact this corporation needs to be held responsible for what they did, because this is serious business.

---

I guess you read that before I added onto that with the edit. It was just a joke, don't look too much into it. :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coldbrand

...Nuclear plants need to be build near water, that's how the technology works.

---

You are missing the point Coldbrand....

The Point is if you are going to build a nuclear plant in an area known for huge earthquakes and tsunamis you build them to withstand earthquaks and tusanamis. This is something they could have easily done simply by putting thier emergency generators on higher ground and incorporating a safer reactor design, neither of which they bothered to do - either because they thought it was too expensive or they just didn't care.

The fact they have to be built near water is irrelevant. If they aren't going to build it to be safe, then they are better off not building it at all. Living in a tent with no power what so ever is better than building an unsafe reactor in a volatile zone. The consequences are too vast. Do it right or don't do it at all. It's not the worth the risk.

not making excuses.. just trying to provide facts that have been left out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RAIST

not making excuses.. just trying to provide facts that have been left out.

---

Unfortunately this forum is the black hole that devours them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RAIST

not making excuses.. just trying to provide facts that have been left out.

---

Well they looked like excuses to me.

I don't see how the topography of western japan in any way justified what this company did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dale

Well they looked like excuses to me.

I don't see how the topography of western japan in any way justified what this company did.

---

Eastern...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tsukino_Kaji

Unfortunately this forum is the black hole that devours them.

---

OH really?

Please point out these "facts" that have been devoured? I would like to hear them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RAIST

not making excuses.. just trying to provide facts that have been left out.

---

lol do not bother unless you want him to keep going its a political debate he apparently does not want to hear about the why, just like most people who want to discuss politics in a non-political forum. I looked up some of his quotes and the articles that contain them work against his points, as well as failing to acknowledge the why discredited him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tsukino_Kaji

Eastern...

---

Um...no, he was talking about the western side actually

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dubberrucky

lol do not bother unless you want him to keep going its a political debate he apparently does not want to hear about the why, just like most people who want to discuss politics in a non-political forum. I looked up some of his quotes and the articles that contain them work against his points, as well as failing to acknowledge the why discredited him.

---

This has nothing to do with politics lol

But I love how you claim to have descredited everything i said without saying anything, that was interesting :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dinh

I guess you read that before I added onto that with the edit. It was just a joke, don't look too much into it. :P

---

Yeah i responded before your edit.

I agree with what you wrote in there after the edit. "Sticking a nuclear reactor in a place prone to numerous "Acts of god", as the insurance companies put it, is a horrible idea." Well said

That about sums it up. It's even worst when they build them recklessly as well, which is what happened here. Not only did they pick a bad spot, but they picked a bad way to build it as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dale

This has nothing to do with politics lol

But I love how you claim to have descredited everything i said without saying anything, that was interesting :)

---

I never said I did. Plenty of other people on the other hand have already told you why nuclear plants are built by water though. Not knowing something is one thing, but ignoring information is another.

By the way your posts are a political standpoint against capitalism and the evil it brings to the world. Therefore it is a political argument the moment you started quoting political organizations viewpoints rather than factual data by an unbiased source. Being an issue that is a popular political debate topic you may or may not have done it intentionally, I shall give you that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dale

Well they looked like excuses to me.

I don't see how the topography of western japan in any way justified what this company did.

---

you left out the second contributing factor--industry. if you actually looked at country, it's land formations, how it's cities/population/industries have devoloped and positioned themselves it should pretty evident...but I'm not feeding this trolling anymore. We had been doing a pretty good job of focusing on what is going on over there for a couple nights now until this started up.. It's 5:30 AM here now, and I need to get some sleep.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RAIST

Unfortunately, these things have to be built near large bodies of water, as that water is used as a cooling medium. Look up the history of Nuclear reactors, and you will see the pattern. Granted, their may have been better sites and what not, but that is kind of mute when you are talking about Japan...topography and industry may not have allowed a viable site on the western side.

Raist

---

Often times my personal opinions fail before logic and reality.. lol

Believe me, I am fully aware of the requirements for large bodies of water for cooling. I used to live in Japan, so I know how tight land is for any form of development/facility. In hindsight, there are things they could have done to prevent this. But hindsight is always 20/20.. hehe

I think they are reacting to this as best as they can, and I am sure they will learn from it. I'll leave it at that..:)

one last tweet beefore I crash:

Quote:

---

Ibaraki News: Jouban Highway is now opened for anyone up to Iwaki !

---

more good news for people to the northern portion of the disaster region

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dubberrucky

I never said I did. Plenty of other people on the other hand have already told you why nuclear plants are built by water though. Not knowing something is one thing, but ignoring information is another.

By the way your posts are a political standpoint against capitalism and the evil it brings to the world. Therefore it is a political argument the moment you started quoting political organizations viewpoints rather than factual data by an unbiased source. Being an issue that is a popular political debate topic you may or may not have done it intentionally, I shall give you that.

---

Nuclear power plants and why they are built on the water have absolutely nothing to do with anything i have been saying. That nuclear power plant should never have been built there. I don't care if it needed to be by water or not. They can find some other water to build it by or build it better or don't build it at all. You don't build crappy unsafe reactors in dangerous areas prone to tsunamis and earthquakes. That's not a controversial stance, and deffinitely not political.

And i haven't even mentioned the word capitalism, and my posts have nothing to do with capitalism. I have no problem with capitalism. One of the sources I printed had an issue with it, but that was just me finding online sources cause people asked me to, so i was just trying to be nice and took some time to find some.

I have a problem with corporations putting profit above saftey, but that isn't capitalism. Any corporation is capable of doing that, i dont' care if it's private owned or publically owned, so you accusing me of being political for that statement is ridiculous.

Don't confuse me with the some of the sources i take the time to quote.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RAIST

one last tweet beefore I crash:



more good news for people to the northern portion of the disaster region

---

Awesome!! The "Road" to recovery continues.....




*sorry, couldn't resist, especially when my post was too short.. hehehe*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anela

Often times my personal opinions fail before logic and reality.. lol

Believe me, I am fully aware of the requirements for large bodies of water for cooling. I used to live in Japan, so I know how tight land is for any form of development/facility. In hindsight, there are things they could have done to prevent this. But hindsight is always 20/20.. hehe

I think they are reacting to this as best as they can, and I am sure they will learn from it. I'll leave it at that..:)

---

This wasn't hindsight. People knew there were problems with that reactor. They were warned about it in advance. It wasn't up to regulation standards. And there had been massive earthquakes and tsunamis in that area before.

And the topography of western japan or lack of developing land in no way excuses it.

This company does not deserve your sympathy.