|
Thread is about the various issues surrounding Japan in the aftermath of the recent earthquake. Don't bring the shit side of the internet to the thread, and post with the realization that this thread is very important, and very real, to your fellow members.
Do not post speculative and unconfirmed news you saw on TV or anywhere else. Generally the more dramatic it sounds the less likely it's true. |
On March 11 2011 20:11 NExt wrote:
I don't know how to ask this question...
I understand Japan is really prepared when it comes to Quakes as they are so prone... but the images im seeing of this Tsunami are catastrophic. So what I want to ask is... were Tsunamis part of the worst case scenario? I don't believe (unless my mind is slipping) I've experience a tsunami affecting Japan as heavily as this in my lifetime.
Just really concerned on how well the government / nation can recover. Were Tsunami's part of the worst case scenario?
You can't really prepare for a wave of water that's 10 meter high with an enormous amount of kinetic energy contained in it. Building 10m high dikes along the entire coastline that are thick and heavy enough to break the wave is not feasible.
|
On March 11 2011 20:11 NExt wrote:
I don't know how to ask this question...
I understand Japan is really prepared when it comes to Quakes as they are so prone... but the images im seeing of this Tsunami are catastrophic. So what I want to ask is... were Tsunamis part of the worst case scenario? I don't believe (unless my mind is slipping) I've experience a tsunami affecting Japan as heavily as this in my lifetime.
Just really concerned on how well the government / nation can recover. Were Tsunami's part of the worst case scenario?
They said that most of the Japanese cost has walls to prevent the sort of damage cause by the tsunami, but it seems they just weren't effective enough.
|
On March 11 2011 20:09 Ghad wrote:Show nested quote +On March 11 2011 19:59 Zystra wrote:
Its not nearly as big as the 2004 tsunami but its still pretty large. The 2004 tsunami was 9.1, this doesnt sound like much of a difference but it actually means that the 2004 one was 3 times bigger. " It this correct? I thought the scale means that 9 is twice as strong as 8?
The richter scale is logarithmic. a 5.0 would have 10 times the magnitude of a 4.0. a 6.0 would be 100 times stronger than a 4.0 and so on.
There is more than the magnitude to consider though, there is the distance from the location in question (in this case 80 miles away from japan), and the depth at the epicenter.
|
On March 11 2011 20:11 NExt wrote:
I don't know how to ask this question...
I understand Japan is really prepared when it comes to Quakes as they are so prone... but the images im seeing of this Tsunami are catastrophic. So what I want to ask is... were Tsunamis part of the worst case scenario? I don't believe (unless my mind is slipping) I've experience a tsunami affecting Japan as heavily as this in my lifetime.
Just really concerned on how well the government / nation can recover. Were Tsunami's part of the worst case scenario?
Tsunamis are top priority, yeah. They're usually more dangerous, because it's easier to prepare buildings for earthquakes than it is for tsunamis.
This is the 7th largest earthquake in history and the largest one in Japanese history at least since the early 20th century.
|
On March 11 2011 20:11 NExt wrote:
I don't know how to ask this question...
I understand Japan is really prepared when it comes to Quakes as they are so prone... but the images im seeing of this Tsunami are catastrophic. So what I want to ask is... were Tsunamis part of the worst case scenario? I don't believe (unless my mind is slipping) I've experience a tsunami affecting Japan as heavily as this in my lifetime.
Just really concerned on how well the government / nation can recover. Were Tsunami's part of the worst case scenario?
Yes, but there is a limit to what you can do to reduce the damage. A close tsunami with that incredible force will always deal huge damage.
Without all the disaster prevention and earthquake security, many many more people would have died in the initial quakes already.
Edit: AJE reports that Iwate has been hit by aftershocks and that 300 buildings and homes have collapsed and were washed away by additional waves.
|
what a question. tsunami's a japanese word, so i'd believe that they were obviously prepared for it?
User was warned for this post
|
|
|
On March 11 2011 20:16 shadymmj wrote:
what a question. tsunami's a japanese word, so i'd believe that they were obviously prepared for it?
srry
|
Comparing the 9.3 or 9.1 quake from 04, theres a substantial difference. You also have to factor in the depth of the earthquake, this one was pretty shallow so it created powerful tsunami waves.
Im not 100% on the formula used but it should be similar to the Richter scale. Anyway, when the tsunami waves from this quake hits countries like New Zealand, there would barely be any effect since the tides will be low.
edit: Im still amazed, this happened less than 6 hours ago.
|
Well. A friend of mine wished that the authors of Bakuman and Naruto doesn't get killed by the Tsunami. Just saying ..
Hoping for the best for the victims QQ
|
On March 11 2011 20:26 aimaimaim wrote:
Well. A friend of mine wished that the authors of Bakuman and Naruto doesn't get killed by the Tsunami. Just saying ..
Hoping for the best for the victims QQ
Yeah well, you might call me stupid but i thought of that as well! There are just some things you don't wanna miss. =(
|
"Japan has declared a state of emergency because of the failure of the cooling system at one nuclear plant, according to the Associated Press. Officials say there has been no leak of radiation"
From BBC news, thats really not good.... Going to hit the pacific coast of America in about 3 hours.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12307698 For reliable updates.
|
On March 11 2011 20:13 moopie wrote:Show nested quote +On March 11 2011 20:09 Ghad wrote:On March 11 2011 19:59 Zystra wrote:
Its not nearly as big as the 2004 tsunami but its still pretty large. The 2004 tsunami was 9.1, this doesnt sound like much of a difference but it actually means that the 2004 one was 3 times bigger. " It this correct? I thought the scale means that 9 is twice as strong as 8? The richter scale is logarithmic. a 5.0 would have 10 times the magnitude of a 4.0. a 6.0 would be 100 times stronger than a 4.0 and so on. There is more than the magnitude to consider though, there is the distance from the location in question (in this case 80 miles away from japan), and the depth at the epicenter.
An increase of 0.2 means 10^0.2 larger magnitude, which is about 1.58
|
On March 11 2011 20:13 ryanAnger wrote:Show nested quote +On March 11 2011 20:11 NExt wrote:
I don't know how to ask this question...
I understand Japan is really prepared when it comes to Quakes as they are so prone... but the images im seeing of this Tsunami are catastrophic. So what I want to ask is... were Tsunamis part of the worst case scenario? I don't believe (unless my mind is slipping) I've experience a tsunami affecting Japan as heavily as this in my lifetime.
Just really concerned on how well the government / nation can recover. Were Tsunami's part of the worst case scenario? They said that most of the Japanese cost has walls to prevent the sort of damage cause by the tsunami, but it seems they just weren't effective enough.
I honestly don't think you can do much to stop a literal wall of water from just destroying everything it touches unless Japan finds out the secret to Gundanium alloy or something.
Tsunami waves are more like a wall of water than an actual wave. It's sort of misleading. The crest of the "wave" is in many cases several tens of miles long so it just swamps over everything.
|
On March 11 2011 20:21 NExt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 11 2011 20:16 shadymmj wrote:
what a question. tsunami's a japanese word, so i'd believe that they were obviously prepared for it? srry
You don't have to apologize to someone that is being a dick.
|
On March 11 2011 20:28 Benjef wrote:"Japan has declared a state of emergency because of the failure of the cooling system at one nuclear plant, according to the Associated Press. Officials say there has been no leak of radiation" From BBC news, thats really not good.... Going to hit the pacific coast of America in about 3 hours. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12307698 For reliable updates.
At this point I'm more worried that the state of nuclear emergency is a political move. It's been said quite a few times already that the reactors are okay.
|
Osaka27156 Posts
My brother-in-law (firefighter) is en route to Sendai from Osaka. Part of a mass migration of rescue workers from around the country I imagine. Hopefully other nations can step up as well.
|
Osaka27156 Posts
On March 11 2011 20:16 shadymmj wrote:
what a question. tsunami's a japanese word, so i'd believe that they were obviously prepared for it?
There is no preparing for a 10 meter wall of water that travels at 100 km per hour. Sorry.
|
Osaka to Sendai is a pretty far, need all the help they can get.
|
I still can't imagine the magnitude of this incident. Simply Surreal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
