That's terrifying. It also makes it clear why the Greeks were terrified of the Gods Hades and Poseidon (one of whose epithets was "Poseidon Earth-Shaker): anything that can shove a piece of land as large as Honshu some eight feet has got to be one scary mofo, as the homeboys put it!
People seem to expect "somebody to do something about this," i.e., "make it didn't happen," or it least make it not happen in future. Good luck. About the best we can do is not build near any place that might treat us to a tectonic upheaval that large -- but then, who knew that the ocean off Sendai was going to do that? They knew it was seismically unstable, and built well to make their installations and homes as stable and strong as possible. But earthquake preparedness, like the military of just about any nation, usually fights the last war, not the next one, and as so often happens, Japan was caught unprepared by a monstrous series of quakes far larger than anyone had anticipated. Which will happen again and again and again, the world over, because the Earth is far bigger than we are, and can always trump whatever preparations against her tantrums we put up -- and, eventually, will.
The powerplants were designed for an 8.2 earthquake -- and since they were a hundred-plus miles from the actual fault, the earthquake stresses at the plant were likely much less.
All of the plants made it through the quake intact. All SCRAMed as a matter of course, I understand -- and it was only the tsunami (which washed away the emergency cooling diesel engines, fuel tanks, and so on) that created the situation they're in now -- which so far is a tiny thing compared to the effect of the quake on tens of thousands of others.
I think that this backup cooling aspect can be addressed, and new reactors will be of more modern design. And those issues will be looked at carefully before the Japanese install new nuclear reactors, and restart existing ones -- but they will be rebuilding nuclear plants, I'll wager.
I hope so. They need those plants. The modern versions are far safer than older models, and as long as they're propery maintained, they work very well. That it was the tsunamis which caused the problems they're now having to deal with at those power-plants rather than the earthquakes (there have been quite a few now in that area) doesn't surprise me. The Japanese build well when it comes to earthquake safety, because of their long acquaintance with just what quakes can do and how much damage they can cause. But nobody anticipated a tsunami of that magnitude, not because of lack of foresight, but because of lack of experience. And in the wake of the Boxing Day tsunami of 2004 they were putting in walls to hold back big tsunamis; but as one announcer put it, the tsunami came through where the walls weren't. If it had held off another year, the walls might have prevented the worst of it. Things take time to build, and time was the problem here.
The nature of tsunamis makes "walls" not all that useful. The reactors are in massively reinforced, closed boxes -- and that was what was needed for the generators and external pumps as well.
Many buildings much taller than the waves were simply swept away by the force of that water.
They found one fellow, still on his house and still alive, nine miles out at sea.
The nature of tsunamis makes "walls" not all that useful. The reactors are in massively reinforced, closed boxes -- and that was what was needed for the generators and external pumps as well.
I think it depends on where you put the walls and how high they are. But you're dead right about what should have been done for the generators and external pumps.
Many buildings much taller than the waves were simply swept away by the force of that water.
That's true, too. So much water comes in that the sheer momentum -- all that tonnage of water traveling at even seemingly slow speeds -- can undo the mightiest works of man in a minute or two. Kind of like what happens when a 3-trailer rig barreling along the highway gets into a head-on altercation with a compact car: guess which one wins?
They found one fellow, still on his house and still alive, nine miles out at sea.
I saw that! Poor guy -- bet he has nightmares for years over that one.
Chile was hit by a roughly 90-foot tsunami back in 1960, which washed a ship more than a mile up a river, then dragged it back. (The mast is still visible.) It would be interesting to see the specifications for that wall. ];-)
I'm a firm believer in the idea that no matter what we build, mother nature will find a way to knock it down sort of thing. You can only do the best you can, the best you know how to do. Then, if it doesn't work, you aren't to blame. But if you don't do your best, and you get trashed as a result, then you are to blame. As you said, the builders of those reactors should have put the external pumps and the generators inside the same sort of containments in which the reactors were housed. To that extent, they were to blame. Beyond that, though, I can't see how.
People seem to expect "somebody to do something about this," i.e., "make it didn't happen," or it least make it not happen in future. Good luck. About the best we can do is not build near any place that might treat us to a tectonic upheaval that large -- but then, who knew that the ocean off Sendai was going to do that? They knew it was seismically unstable, and built well to make their installations and homes as stable and strong as possible. But earthquake preparedness, like the military of just about any nation, usually fights the last war, not the next one, and as so often happens, Japan was caught unprepared by a monstrous series of quakes far larger than anyone had anticipated. Which will happen again and again and again, the world over, because the Earth is far bigger than we are, and can always trump whatever preparations against her tantrums we put up -- and, eventually, will.
Reply
All of the plants made it through the quake intact. All SCRAMed as a matter of course, I understand -- and it was only the tsunami (which washed away the emergency cooling diesel engines, fuel tanks, and so on) that created the situation they're in now -- which so far is a tiny thing compared to the effect of the quake on tens of thousands of others.
I think that this backup cooling aspect can be addressed, and new reactors will be of more modern design. And those issues will be looked at carefully before the Japanese install new nuclear reactors, and restart existing ones -- but they will be rebuilding nuclear plants, I'll wager.
===|==============/ Level Head
Reply
Reply
Many buildings much taller than the waves were simply swept away by the force of that water.
They found one fellow, still on his house and still alive, nine miles out at sea.
===|==============/ Level Head
Reply
I think it depends on where you put the walls and how high they are. But you're dead right about what should have been done for the generators and external pumps.
Many buildings much taller than the waves were simply swept away by the force of that water.
That's true, too. So much water comes in that the sheer momentum -- all that tonnage of water traveling at even seemingly slow speeds -- can undo the mightiest works of man in a minute or two. Kind of like what happens when a 3-trailer rig barreling along the highway gets into a head-on altercation with a compact car: guess which one wins?
They found one fellow, still on his house and still alive, nine miles out at sea.
I saw that! Poor guy -- bet he has nightmares for years over that one.
Reply
Chile was hit by a roughly 90-foot tsunami back in 1960, which washed a ship more than a mile up a river, then dragged it back. (The mast is still visible.) It would be interesting to see the specifications for that wall. ];-)
===|==============/ Level Head
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment