TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Canada - Toronto & Southern Ont.
-- Japan's Tsunami 2011
Pages (26): « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 »

quote:

Originally posted by E2EK1EL Wow everyone is fleeing Tokyo, streets are dead.

Best time for some real life Tokyo Drift???

The operator of the Fukushima Daiichi plant at the centre of the crisis has had a rocky past in an industry plagued by scandal.

quote:

Originally posted by boundbysound bumped into this video of Tokyo that was just uploaded

this vid is so odd. When he's showing himself, he looks like he's floating or on some sort of floating/rotating device while recording.

Similar to a Spike Lee movie effect.

quote:

Originally posted by VDub My heart goes out to the Japanese... This is ten times worse than Indonesia a few years ago...

quote:

Originally posted by infinity HiGH this isn't worse at all than the 2004 at all. its not even close!

Back from the first page..

Still believe it??

quote:

Originally posted by E2EK1EL The operator of the Fukushima Daiichi plant at the centre of the crisis has had a rocky past in an industry plagued by scandal.

Like, you totally forgot to say, "pass it on..."

I heard the head of TEPCO is a dolphin...


seriously.

very interesting!
Japan Has Not Asked For Fund Financial Assistance

quote:

WASHINGTON (Dow Jones)--Japan has not requested any financial assistance from the International Monetary Fund and Tokyo has the resources it needs to handle the current crisis, a fund spokeswoman said Thursday. Caroline Atkinson said the Japanese government was correctly focusing on the highest priorities: "Restoring the economy as quickly as possible to its full growth potential is the most important contribution that policy can make now and that on the fiscal side, the focus should be on providing the humanitarian assistance, rebuilding critical infrastructure, and of course, addressing the nuclear situation." "The Japanese economy is a strong and wealthy society and the government has the full financial resources to address those needs," Atkinson said. A devastating 9.0-magnitude earthquake and ensuing tsunami ruined cities and villages in northern Japan last Friday. Japanese authorities raised the death toll Thursday to 5,457, with another 9,508 missing, though the numbers are expected to climb. An early estimate by National Australia Bank put the total damage cost as high as $200 billion. On Thursday, the Bank of Japan announced the provision of emergency funds for a fourth straight day, continuing its effort to calm concerns about the disaster's impact on the economy. The comments come as the Group of Seven largest economies plan to hold a teleconference later Thursday on the Japanese crisis to discuss both potential ways to help Tokyo and the impact on the global economy. Given that the strong yen may weigh further on the beleaguered economy, markets are anticipating the Bank of Japan may intervene to weaken the currency, and are awaiting to see whether the G-7 will support such a move publicly or even possibly coordinate intervention. At this point however, a raft of economists said it's unlikely for the U.S and Europe to actively coordinate in the foreign exchange markets. Ms. Atkinson declined to comment on the strength of the yen--which hit historically strong levels against the dollar this week--or on whether the authorities should intervene in their exchange rate to soften the economic impact following the disaster. The fund is watching the longer-term trend, she said. She pointed out that after the 1995 Kobe earthquake there was a similar strengthening, and said the yen's movement is possibly due to expectations of repatriation of capital to Japan. She said that while second-quarter growth in Japan would obviously be hit hard--particularly industrial output--and Japan's economic problems are likely to affect the region, it's difficult to determine the longer-term impacts. She added there's uncertainty about how long it may take to resolve the nuclear problem, restore power and basic infrastructure. "It's a very complicated situation to analyze especially given that we don't quite know yet what the impact in the short-term will be and what the reconstruction needs will be over the longer term," Atkinson said. The economic impacts of the catastrophe will be factored into the IMF's World Economic Outlook due out in April, balancing the short-term damage with longer-term grow from reconstruction. Prior to the disaster, the IMF had already expressed concerns about Japan's mounting fiscal deficits and public debt problems. While the crisis certainly will boost public spending in the near-term, it could also end up boosting growth as infrastructure is rebuilt. The key question is how quickly can the country get its production back up: if it takes too long, a temporary shift of manufacturing elsewhere in the region to meet the gap left by the Japanese could become a more fundamental migration of production. Although the Kobe earthquake didn't involve a nuclear crisis, Ms. Atkinson said that historically growth can rebound quickly and strongly given the reconstruction efforts. But she added, "There is a lot of uncertainty, actually, I'm not sure that anybody knows quite when the power situation will be resolved." -By Ian Talley, Dow Jones Newswires, 202-862-9285; [email protected]

LINK

Reactor #4 before



And after

quote:

The International Monetary Fund said on Thursday that Japan has the financial means to recover from a devastating earthquake and ensuing massive tsunami. As the official toll of the dead and missing after Friday's quake and tsunami flattened Japan's northeast coast topped 15,000, the IMF stressed that Japanese authorities were taking the right steps to deal with the disaster. "The most important impact on Japan is the humanitarian one," Caroline Atkinson, an IMF spokeswoman, said at a news conference. "The most important policy priority is to address the humanitarian needs, the infrastructure needs and reconstruction and addressing the nuclear situation," she said. "We believe that the Japanese economy is a strong and wealthy society and the government has the full financial resources to address those needs." In addressing the issues of the impact of the disaster on the world's third-largest economy, the direction the Japanese authorities has taken "is the appropriate policy," she said. On the fiscal side, the most important goals were to "revive the Japanese economy and get growth." Asked whether Japan had asked for IMF assistance, Atkinson said: "Japan has not requested any financial assistance from the IMF."

(Courtesy of AFP)

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...tml?ref=science

press play..

quote:

Japanese engineers conceded on Friday that burying a crippled nuclear plant in sand and concrete may be the only way to prevent a catastrophic radiation release, the method used to seal huge leakages from Chernobyl in 1986. Officials said they still hoped to fix a power cable to at least two reactors to restart water pumps needed to cool overheating nuclear fuel rods. Workers also sprayed water on the No. 3 reactor, one of the most critical of the plant�s six.

(Courtesy of the Globe and Mail)

nothing to worry about, eh Nick?

This is a heart warming story.......

Ultimate loyalty

Of course this will be tl;dr for those with 30 second attention spans, but for those who've had enough hyperbole and conjecture from the media and your FB friends, here's the wikipedia entry on Fukushima I

quote:

Originally posted by geroin nothing to worry about, eh Nick?

Nope...

Not yet G...

What I'd like to know is why is it so challenging to restore power??

I really do hope that people show more trust in nuclear power. It took the biggest earth quake in over a 100 years, and tsunami, to bring this reactor remotely close to a melt down.

The reactor was built to withstand an earthquake of 8.5, and this was 9. That is roughly 3 times more powerful than it was designed for. So an earthquake 3 times as powerful, and a tsunami, and it still has not 'melted down'.

That is pretty impressive engineering if you ask me.

quote:

Originally posted by Orko The reactor was built to withstand an earthquake of 8.5, and this was 9. That is roughly 3 times more powerful than it was designed for. So an earthquake 3 times as powerful, and a tsunami, and it still has not 'melted down'. That is pretty impressive engineering if you ask me.

where did you read this information?

it was built to withstand an earthquake with a maximum surface magnitude of 7. This is the main concern. Most nuclear power plants are built on a location that has the least seismicity in the area, most are not even built if the possibility of magnitude 8 earthquake and if they are, they are built to withstand an 8. In Japan they don't have this privilege of choosing a very good location but still there is a possibility of an earthquake at any time including the tsunami hence they must have measures to prevent such a catasrophe. For a nation that is the most advanced in the world this was a massive fuck up on behalf of the whole engineering team + officials that are responsible for the safety and proper building codes.

quote:

Originally posted by Orko I really do hope that people show more trust in nuclear power. It took the biggest earth quake in over a 100 years, and tsunami, to bring this reactor remotely close to a melt down.

it was not the most powerfull in 100 years.

there have been at least 4 more powerful earthquakes before.

and no there is no trust in nuclear power as it is extremely dangerous and could potentially kill thousands/millions. We have to find alternative ways to generate energy or slowly move towards that route.

quote:

Originally posted by geroin where did you read this information? it was built to withstand an earthquake with a maximum surface magnitude of 7. This is the main concern. Most nuclear power plants are built on a location that has the least seismicity in the area, most are not even built if the possibility of magnitude 8 earthquake and if they are, they are built to withstand an 8. In Japan they don't have this privilege of choosing a very good location but still there is a possibility of an earthquake at any time including the tsunami hence they must have measures to prevent such a catasrophe. For a nation that is the most advanced in the world this was a massive fuck up on behalf of the whole engineering team + officials that are responsible for the safety and proper building codes.

A massive fuck up in not anticipating a freak event that only happens about once every couple hundred years when the reactor was built like 35 years ago? The earthquake was not the problem. When the earthquake hit, the plant responded exactly how it's meant to. It was the tsunami that caused so much problems when it wiped out power to the backup generators. Japan is dependent on nuclear energy, and they live in an area that is at high risk for earthquakes. Everybody knows that there are risks that come with nuclear power plants, and they had taken every conceivable precaution to prevent anything like this from happening.

I mean come on, a fucking 9.0 earthquake and a 10 meter high tsunami? If the plant was unsafe, or they had any doubts as to its ability to withstand a natural disaster, it would have been shut down a long time ago. Reactors have melted down in the past without any natural disasters whatsoever. You're suggesting that they design a nuclear reactor that has 0% risk of failure, and that's simply not possible with the nature of nuclear energy.

Maybe oil refineries should make fireproof oil too

They did have measures to prevent a catastrophe like this. The thing you're forgetting is that the combination of an earthquake of that magnitude and a tsunami of that size and force is such a freak occurrence that what the reactor was built to withstand actually was reasonable. You can go on and on about "Oh well they should take every conceivable disaster into consideration" but if that's the case, there would be no nuclear power in the world because there's always a risk of something completely unexpected like this happening.

quote:

Originally posted by srussell0018 but if that's the case, there would be no nuclear power in the world because there's always a risk of something completely unexpected like this happening.

Yes but that's what he wants...

He's opposed to nuclear power...

quote:

Originally posted by VDub Yes but that's what he wants... He's opposed to nuclear power...

Well that's just stupid.

quote:

Originally posted by LiquidX Not sure how this driver didn't freak out while filming

holy hell

quote:

Originally posted by srussell0018

you don't know what you're talking about but you always have something to say as i can tell.

this does not happen every couple of hundred years as i have stated in the past, there is a potential of it happening anytime, especially in Japan.

There are scientists called geologists that study earth, volcanic activities, earthquakes and tsunamis. When a nuclear power plant is planned on being built a group of geologists will study and determine where is the safest place to build it and what are the potential consequences of the worst disaster happening at that location. Note that they cannot prevent or tell in advance, even 10minutes before if a 9.0 earth quake is approaching but they what they can tell is what is the worst possible earthquake/tsunami that could happen in that location. If a plant was built 40 years ago with different codes and it does not guarantee safety now up to today's standards then after inspection it must be closed as there is a potential for a big risk.

In terms of "shutting it down a long time ago", that's not how the world works unfortunately. Since it was still operating perfectly there was no need of shutting it down. People always start thinking about this shit after it happens, they never imagined of a disaster on such scale happening close to this plant BUT they should have, that is the reason why there is so much negative attention towards this event.

Again, if a country is dependant on nuclear power/energy and has shitload of nuclear plants all around the country in an extremely unstable location then they must build nuclear plants according to those conditions no questions asked.

I think I trust the judgment of the geologists that you speak of over...you? Thank you captain hindsight for your invaluable observations on what happened. Unfortunately, A) You're not a geologist, B) You're not an engineer, and C) You're not a nuclear physicist, so really all you're doing is talking out of your ass.

Why don't you leave these things up to the people who are actually experts in their respective fields.

Right, but then you wouldn't have anyone to blame. My bad.


Going by your logic nobody should ever be concerned about tornadoes in the Midwestern US because since they're so prone to them, all buildings would be built to withstand any force of tornado fathomable. Be realistic.

quote:

Originally posted by srussell0018 I think I trust the judgment of the geologists that you speak of over...you? Thank you captain hindsight for your invaluable observations on what happened. Unfortunately, A) You're not a geologist, B) You're not an engineer, and C) You're not a nuclear physicist, so really all you're doing is talking out of your ass. Why don't you leave these things up to the people who are actually experts in their respective fields. Right, but then you wouldn't have anyone to blame. My bad. Going by your logic nobody should ever be concerned about tornadoes in the Midwestern US because since because they're so prone to them, all buildings would be built to withstand any force of tornado fathomable. Be realistic.

why did you even reply to me? to say that i'm talking out of my ass and to say that i'm not a geologist? i don't think i've ever claimed that i am nor nowhere in my post i was observing what happened. You have some serious lack of reading comprehension skills, maybe you should stop replying to every single post in this forum?

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.