Jesus Christ! An 8.9 Earthquake struck near Japan, 10m Tsunami followed

well from what i have understood from Swedish media is that the cooling have stopped in all reactors from the power-outage. When the existing water in the tanks heat up they start to release hydrogen and the pressure builds up. And then they have to vent it manually and when the hydrogen mix with the oxygen in the air it ignite and explode. That has happened in reactor 1 and 3. And those explosions blew the roof of the buildings. And tonight an explosion in reactor 2 happened which damaged some vital part (condensation-pool is a direct translation from the Swedish word). The fear is that once the water have evaporated the uranium-staffs will be exposed and they will start to melt. After a while they will melt though the bottom of the reactor tube.

Also i heard that the winds have changed towards Tokyo and they now fear radioactive fallout blowing in. They have already measured in increase in radiation in Tokyo. I just hope they all get out of this relative unharmed. Earthquake and tsunami is bad enough. A new Chernobyl would make that look like a picnic. So close to population dense locations.

Agree with KitKat though. Always thought we should pour money in to nuclear power research. Make the plants safer and more efficient and learn how to handle the nuclear waste better. Coal and Oil will never be much cleaner and wind and water just don't provide enough. But as someone have said, "Sure we all want nuclear power, but would you want to live next to one?".

You know what's bad with this reactor? according to professor, who teaches my group MatLab -his specialization are earthquakes - Japanese nuclear plants are designed to withstand two types of earthquakes - first group is similar to this one - very strong ones that can happen once for 100 years(approx), and the second group - for earthquakes so strong that they can theoretically happen only once per 1000 or close years.
So this reactor shouldn't be so damaged.

Live next to one? no. but only because it's likely to be in loud industrial area. I have no problems with plant, just the noise and/or smell.

What do you mean, is this reactor supposed to take it, or isn't it?

I was under the impression the quake wasn't the problem but the tsunami that ruined their diesel backup generators. And the power company had decided to save a few yens and had nothing beyond those couple of diesel generators, unlike good and responsible nuclear plants.

Apparently the diesel generators themselves were secured, it's just that their fuel tanks were not and they were the units which got swept away from the tsunami. So generators got the back up cooling pumps going but simply ran out of fuel due to the missing tanks.

It was supposed to withstand such earthquake without any damage.
and i didn't know about diesel generators being the main problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xelbair

It was supposed to withstand such earthquake without any damage.
and i didn't know about diesel generators being the main problem.

---

I don't think anything man-made can withstand an earthquake of that magnitude.

I am appalled at how little help the Japanese are getting from the international community (particularly the United States). All I hear from the American media is complaints about Japan's mishandling of the situation. Are they completely ignoring the fact that the US is part of a treaty under which they are obligated to both defend and assist Japan in crisis situations? Japan doesn't have the military resources needed to carry out large scale rescue and relief operations but the US forces in the vicinity are more than capable. Also in terms of expertise in handling the nuclear problem, I can't imagine anyone being more qualified to help than the world's largest nuclear power. How does the leader of the greatest nation in the world, who btw happens to be a Nobel Peace Prize winner, spend his day? Oh Right!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Animeniax

I don't think anything man-made can withstand an earthquake of that magnitude.

---

From what I understand, most of the nuclear reactors in the world, including these ones in Japan, rely on 20 year old designs. Newer designs are apparently alot more resilient, but governments just aren't willing to spend the capital needed to upgrade.

Thanks for the thinly veiled attempt to slam Obama by using the tragedy in Japan as your springboard. Please google search for "Operation Tomodachi" and realize there at 50,000 US troops stationed in Japan at 3 or 4 bases and some of them are helping in relief efforts. US nuclear engineers are also assisting with the nuclear power plant crisis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Animeniax

Thanks for the thinly veiled attempt to slam Obama by using the tragedy in Japan as your springboard.

---

I make no attempt to hide my distaste for Obama as well as others who just talk and never act.

Quote:

---

Please google search for "Operation Tomodachi" and realize there at 50,000 US troops stationed in Japan at 3 or 4 bases and some of them are helping in relief efforts. US nuclear engineers are also assisting with the nuclear power plant crisis.

---

Yes there are lots of troops stationed at Japan and always have been. That doesn't mean they have contributed a great deal. Up until now, the Japanese have been pretty much left to their own devices. The US isn't supposed to be a just a friendly nation offering *some* help when it comes to Japan. Under treaty, they are supposed to be the most active participant in averting this crisis.

If its not the US, I hope the European nations do a bit more. Although it will take a bit longer for adequate support to get there all the way from Europe. Either ways, Japan really could use alot more help.

Initially Japan declined most of the help, because, they said, they can't guarantee the safety of outside helpers nor can they assist them in getting to the disaster zones. Nevertheless, some expert teams from a number of countries are there already, helping them. From what I've learned, the US army is helping quite a lot, having granted even a carrier to be used as a helicopter base near the affected areas. Needless to say, those helicopters and the carrier itself have already been irradiated as well...

Hard to say about the nuclear plant fiasco, though. They have receiver plenty of advice but since nobody can anymore get anywhere near the worst reactors due to radiation, it's not like it makes any difference if they get the advice from on site or via video streams... At least they think they are getting the electricity back, finally. According to our Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority the failure to restore power for so long was unforgivable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kraco

From what I've learned, the US army is helping quite a lot, having granted even a carrier to be used as a helicopter base near the affected areas. Needless to say, those helicopters and the carrier itself have already been irradiated as well...

---

That's not really that much of a problem. Our Navy is very experienced with nuclear technology and proper care with radiological materials. They're trained. The USS Reagan (CVN-76) is a Nimitz class after all.

CVN = Carrier Vessel Nuclear

There's very little proper in this particular nuclear case. Every day we learn something new about how poorly TEPCO has been maintaining the place.

Besides, it is a problem. Maybe not to the carrier as such but it did demonstrate finely how bad the situation is over there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buffalobiian

The safety concerns I have with nuclear energy is not the plant blowing up, but the storage and disposal of nuclear waste that results from it. Concern at a reasonable level that is, as opposed to the said propaganda.

I learned that I can actually benefit from Japan's crisis. Just walked past a foreign currency exchange booth and learned that I can now sell my JPY for 85:1 instead of the previous 90:1. That's a big difference considering I'm holding onto 100K+ JPY in notes that are useless in Australia.

The buy rate hasn't changed all that much though.

edit:hmm, wait.. that means JPY actually went u compared to AUD.. what the?

---

Should sell it soon. There are expectations that the Japanese currency will be weakened against other markets in order to help their exportation industry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Splash!

I make no attempt to hide my distaste for Obama as well as others who just talk and never act.

Yes there are lots of troops stationed at Japan and always have been. That doesn't mean they have contributed a great deal. Up until now, the Japanese have been pretty much left to their own devices. The US isn't supposed to be a just a friendly nation offering *some* help when it comes to Japan. Under treaty, they are supposed to be the most active participant in averting this crisis.

If its not the US, I hope the European nations do a bit more. Although it will take a bit longer for adequate support to get there all the way from Europe. Either ways, Japan really could use alot more help.

---

I see your from Canadia so I'll forgive you for not knowing how things work in the US of A. Obama is not a dictator-like PM like you have up there. He made promises yes, and has delivered on some of them (during the lame duck session in Congress no less). But he's fighting a resurgent GOP, in-fighting in his own party, impatient and short-sighted yahoos among voters who want instant answers and results, all while trying to fix the problems created by his predecessors but placed on his shoulders to resolve.

And the US troops stationed in Japan are helping out with humanitarian relief and search and rescue. I've always been an opponent of US bases and troops in Japan. But for this one type of disaster I'm very happy to eat my words and thank the gaijin soldiers for helping.

As others have said, Japan is an independent nation. They refuse help, if just for the foolish need to save face and appear ready and able to the rest of the world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Animeniax

I see your from Canadia so I'll forgive you for not knowing how things work in the US of A. Obama is not a dictator-like PM like you have up there. He made promises yes, and has delivered on some of them (during the lame duck session in Congress no less). But he's fighting a resurgent GOP, in-fighting in his own party, impatient and short-sighted yahoos among voters who want instant answers and results, all while trying to fix the problems created by his predecessors but placed on his shoulders to resolve.

---

Off-topic, but I can't let this one stand.

If by, "not a dictator-like PM," you mean horribly indecisive leader, then yes, I agree (see Gulf oil crisis where he only got involved after people started questioning why there had not been any government action, his current lack of decision on Libya, his previous waffling over Egypt, and refusing to make a firm stand on Guantanamo Bay until last week...which turned out to be the opposite of his campaign promise).

If by, "all while trying to fix the problems created by his predecessors but placed on his shoulders to resolve," you meant throughly expanding nearly every provision created by the PATRIOT Act, expanding warrant-less wiretapping, expanding the jurisdiction of the Department of Homeland Security while requiring less oversight than ever, refusing countless FOIA requests (denying the Birther's pointless garbage requests is justified however) while trumpeting that his administration would be one of the most transparent, then yes, I agree to that one too.

Let's not mention his condemning of the Supreme Court decision to allow corporations to contribute unlimited funds to campaigns...and then vowing his re-election campaign will seek to raise $1 Billion dollars.

Yeah...what a spectacular leader. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. Oh wait, this one is more happy to invite college basketball teams to the White House or talk to the media about his NCAA bracket than make actual decisions.


Though I can't say Japan is doing all that much better at finding a useful leader right now.

Like I said, he isn't one man alone to make decisions and carry them out on the force of his will regardless of what anyone else wants. He has his platform and his agenda, but he has to compromise with his own party and with the Republicans. Add to that the economy, continuing war in Iraq/Afghanistan, strife and unrest in some parts of the world, humanitarian and disaster relief in other parts, and you wonder why he seems to waffle on some issues?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Animeniax

I see your from Canadia so I'll forgive you for not knowing how things work in the US of A. Obama is not a dictator-like PM like you have up there. He made promises yes, and has delivered on some of them (during the lame duck session in Congress no less). But he's fighting a resurgent GOP, in-fighting in his own party, impatient and short-sighted yahoos among voters who want instant answers and results, all while trying to fix the problems created by his predecessors but placed on his shoulders to resolve.

---

I am not so delusional to think that Canadian governance is in any way more decisive than that of the United States. That being said, I dont see how that has anything to do with Obama. I don't need to have a deep understanding of how things work in the US to realize when someone is full of it. Obama is very eloquent speaker who can argue his way out of a situation, but he definitely isn't a man of action. All he does is make excuses about things are complicated and how there are too many obstacles to get anything done.

Japan may be an independent country but unfortunately, dealing with a disaster relief situation like this is one of those cases where it really does pay to have military power (which Japan never heavily invested in). Japan's solution to their lack of defense spending is to sign a treaty with the US to make them their protectors. This is the cause of America's large military presence in the area.

What is needed to effectively delegate relief is an abundance of military class air, land and sea vehicles. Japan may have initially refused help from other international sources but I do not believe for a second that they would reject US help. As I have already suggested, the two countries share a special relationship when it comes to matters of defense and disaster relief. I was entirely expecting the US jump in within the early hours of incident taking place.

Although I must admit, I have heard alot more about the US military actively stepping in within the last few days, even sending in UAV's to closely monitor the situation of the nuclear reactors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Splash!

I am not so delusional to think that Canadian governance is in any way more decisive than that of the United States. That being said, I dont see how that has anything to do with Obama. I don't need to have a deep understanding of how things work in the US to realize when someone is full of it. Obama is very eloquent speaker who can argue his way out of a situation, but he definitely isn't a man of action. All he does is make excuses about things are complicated and how there are too many obstacles to get anything done.

Japan may be an independent country but unfortunately, dealing with a disaster relief situation like this is one of those cases where it really does pay to have military power (which Japan never heavily invested in). Japan's solution to their lack of defense spending is to sign a treaty with the US to make them their protectors. This is the cause of America's large military presence in the area.

What is needed to effectively delegate relief is an abundance of military class air, land and sea vehicles. Japan may have initially refused help from other international sources but I do not believe for a second that they would reject US help. As I have already suggested, the two countries share a special relationship when it comes to matters of defense and disaster relief. I was entirely expecting the US jump in within the early hours of incident taking place.

Although I must admit, I have heard alot more about the US military actively stepping in within the last few days, even sending in UAV's to closely monitor the situation of the nuclear reactors.

---

I'm not some big supporter of Obama's, but I think the criticism given is a bit much. He is young and idealistic and made some promises, but he is a politician and they tend to do that to get votes from the fickle voters. But there are indeed a lot of obstacles at every turn. Look at his healthcare bill. The Republicans are still wasting time trying to defeat it even after it's been passed. He accomplished a few of his campaign promises, but there's still work to be done. Now that he has to fight a Republican congress, I guess people will still blame him for doing nothing for the next 2 years.

Sorry but you don't seem to know what you are talking about in regards to Japan. As part of the treaty they signed to end WWII, they gave up the right to have a military. So now they have a defense force that numbers around 235,000. They do maintain a protective alliance with the US, but that's more because they want a relationship with the US, and the US wants to maintain its presence in Southeast Asia. They also invest heavily in technology, some of which is used by their military.

The US couldn't jump in during the early hours because it takes time to mobilize and what with the aftershocks and tsunami, what did you expect them to do exactly? Military power can't stop a tsunami.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Animeniax

Sorry but you don't seem to know what you are talking about in regards to Japan. As part of the treaty they signed to end WWII, they gave up the right to have a military. So now they have a defense force that numbers around 235,000. They do maintain a protective alliance with the US, but that's more because they want a relationship with the US, and the U [S wants to maintain its presence in Southeast Asia.

---

I don't see how that contradicts what I said. I wasn't blaming them for their lack of military spending (more than aware of the situation they were in after WWII), just stating that heavy spending wasn't there. Their defensive policy clearly outlines moderation, even in the build up of defensive capabilities. Also, it isn't a simply matter of good relations with the US, what other choice do they really have if they can't have their own military? It is obvious they felt that setting up a medium sized defense force wouldn't be enough to protect their nation in the long term.

Quote:

---

The US couldn't jump in during the early hours because it takes time to mobilize and what with the aftershocks and tsunami, what did you expect them to do exactly? Military power can't stop a tsunami.

---

The earliest stages are the most critical when it comes to damage control (both with regards to the nuclear crisis and rescue operations). Also, it doesn't take a whole lot of time to mobilize if your forces are right there....

"Military power can't stop a tsunami" -> And just who said that it can? But it can definitely help in the immediate aftermath of one. Clearly something can be done early on. I am sure the Japanese weren't just standing around going "Oh My!".