Can we have an update on the situation.

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.