EPTOn March 13 2011 21:32 slimshady wrote:
The thread title says 9.0 magnitute quake, while local news said 8.9.
Is 9.0 rounded?
The thread title says 9.0 magnitute quake, while local news said 8.9.
Is 9.0 rounded?
No, the quake was re-evaluated as 9.0
Crisis in Japan - Page 96
| Forum Index > General Forum |
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. | ||
|
sqrt
1210 Posts
No, the quake was re-evaluated as 9.0 | ||
|
monkh
United Kingdom568 Posts
so hasn't been 2nd 9.0 quake got be scared when saw title changed | ||
|
ALPINA
3791 Posts
 | ||
|
fanta[Rn]
Japan2465 Posts
| ||
|
icystorage
Jollibee19350 Posts
| ||
|
maahes`ra
United States255 Posts
I've been checking http://www.world-nuclear-news.org but they aren't exactly a breaking-news place. | ||
|
yndi
Germany18 Posts
https://morgsatlarge.wordpress.com/2011/03/13/why-i-am-not-worried-about-japans-nuclear-reactors/ /Edit: There have been several critical voices about the article. Especially this comment. https://morgsatlarge.wordpress.com/2011/03/13/why-i-am-not-worried-about-japans-nuclear-reactors/#comment-93 Really hard to get objective information on the subject... | ||
|
furymonkey
New Zealand1587 Posts
How do they even replace the fuel rod in the first place without releasing all those radiation within the reactor? As far as I know, there isn't any protective clothing thats could withstand heavy amount of radiation right? Since they decided to pump in seawater inside Unit 1, that means they will have to decommission the containtment reactor, how would they decommission it if there isn't any safe way to do it? Do they just buried it at it's place? Don't mind my noobness  | ||
|
TimeOut
Germany1277 Posts
On March 13 2011 22:04 Alpina wrote: Anyone knows what would happen if one of the reactors melts down? I mean how far radiation would go? Most likely there will be no impact to the environment at all. I've said it multiple times in the thread already: The reactor types that we are talking about are a completely different design from those that were in use in Chernobyl. It is impossible for the same accident to occur in a BWR/X reactor. The media is tearing this story apart like wolves right now. Most information, even if it is factually correct at times, is presented in a horrible and sometimes even deliberately misleading way. Although I don't really want to use the term, because it doesn't mean what it actually means in the conception of the general public: Yes, there was at least a partial meltdown in multiple reactor cores due to decay heat. That doesn't mean that the reactor is going to explode or that there is radiation all over the place. It does mean that the reactor core is heavily damaged and most likely beyond repair. Remember that the reactor has been shut down a long time ago. They are only dealing with decay heat right now. Since they are filling the containment vessel with seawater, the reactor cores are already lost. It is correct that this is a "last ditch"-effort, because no matter what has happened before, it will irreparably destroy the reactor. That is a huge economic loss, no matter if the reactor was supposed to be shut down in March or not (we are talking about multiple billion dollar losses here). What is incorrect, even though it is reported often in the media right now, is that there is danger of a runaway reaction, or that cooling the reactor with seawater leads to some sort of chain reaction. The control rods are in place. Even though there is at least partial core damage, the reactor is in a stable situation. Edit 1: On March 13 2011 22:22 yndi wrote: Interesting article. Wonder how accurate this is. https://morgsatlarge.wordpress.com/2011/03/13/why-i-am-not-worried-about-japans-nuclear-reactors/ That's finally a good article and should be pretty accurate. I disagree with some assessments (especially the damage figure at the end), but overall that's pretty much correct. | ||
|
Piski
Finland3461 Posts
On March 13 2011 22:04 Alpina wrote: Anyone knows what would happen if one of the reactors melts down? I mean how far radiation would go? These are light water reactors so the possible meltdown shouldn't be as bad as chernobyl but in worst case scenario it will wreck some havoc anyways. It depends too much on the winds etc to say accurately how will it spread. Edit: That is in worst case scenario that isn't really likely to happen here right now. The link posted is a good read ^^ | ||
|
No_eL
Chile1438 Posts
| ||
|
sighco17
Australia47 Posts
On March 13 2011 20:31 Niton wrote: Shinmoedake, a volcano at the southern tip of Japan, has begun erupting. It doesn't seem to be severe, but it definitely creates the image that at this point the gods just installed a new version of Sim City and are fucking with us. + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/KB6Pn) ![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/V4iCd) ![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/POO7P) Also, courtesy of reddit: Nuclear power produces far less outside radiation than Coal power. 5 Volcanoes erupted shortly after the earthquake in japan, in the so called 'Ring of Fire' zone. Not sure how many people believe in the whole end of world/doomsday/2012 theory etc, but there is a lot of overwhelming scientific evidence that points to a huge world wide catastrophic disaster happening soon. It's said that the ring of fire is literally opening up. Volcanoes that erupted: 1/ & 2/ Russia - http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=pl&tl=en&u=http://wiadomosci.dziennik.pl/swiat/artykuly/325753,na-dalekim-wschodzie-trzesie-sie-ziemia-i-wybuchaja-wulkany.html 3/ Indonesia - http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110311/ap_on_re_as/as_indonesia_volcano 4/ Japan - 5/ And Hawaii's Kilauea, even though it's technically been erupting since 1983, it started erupting with greater fury after the quake. It's probably about time the U.S government utilize the free energy it has known about for 50 years, we are living beyond our means and all these natural disaster's in the last years are becoming almost a monthly thing. Where as 10 year's ago it was really rare thing. Oh well let's just keep on keeping on till then. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7896 Posts
That's quite unbelievable. French newspapers are quite alarming with nuclear risk, and also claim that there is 70% chances that there is a smaller earthquake in the next days. 200 000 casualities last year in Haiti, thousands this year in Japan. Apparently our generation will see the next LA eathquake, and it should be absolutely nasty. I hope it's proven wrong. | ||
|
Keniji
Netherlands2569 Posts
On March 13 2011 22:28 TimeOut wrote: Most likely there will be no impact to the environment at all. I've said it multiple times in the thread already: The reactor types that we are talking about are a completely different design from those that were in use in Chernobyl. It is impossible for the same accident to occur in a BWR/X reactor. The media is tearing this story apart like wolves right now. Most information, even if it is factually correct at times, is presented in a horrible and sometimes even deliberately misleading way. Although I don't really want to use the term, because it doesn't mean what it actually means in the conception of the general public: Yes, there was at least a partial meltdown in multiple reactor cores due to decay heat. That doesn't mean that the reactor is going to explode or that there is radiation all over the place. It does mean that the reactor core is heavily damaged and most likely beyond repair. Remember that the reactor has been shut down a long time ago. They are only dealing with decay heat right now. Since they are filling the containment vessel with seawater, the reactor cores are already lost. It is correct that this is a "last ditch"-effort, because no matter what has happened before, it will irreparably destroy the reactor. That is a huge economic loss, no matter if the reactor was supposed to be shut down in March or not (we are talking about multiple billion dollar losses here). What is incorrect, even though it is reported often in the media right now, is that there is danger of a runaway reaction, or that cooling the reactor with seawater leads to some sort of chain reaction. The control rods are in place. Even though there is at least partial core damage, the reactor is in a stable situation. Edit 1: That's finally a good article and should be pretty accurate. I disagree with some assessments (especially the damage figure at the end), but overall that's pretty much correct. Do you study atom physics (or whatever physics you need to study to understand what's going on)? It's a serious question. Where exactly did you get the information from that everything is stable? Well, or more precisely, do you believe everything japan/tecpo says right now? Or do you have other information sources? Also you sound like a hard core business man / student because the only thing you mention is the financial aspect. As if that is any important at all right now (or at least shouldn't be) and nothing about any harm for the environment. Which most certainly even in worst case won't be as bad as chernobyl, but it's not really "nothing". | ||
|
Vaeila
Netherlands336 Posts
On March 13 2011 22:43 sighco17 wrote: 5 Volcanoes erupted shortly after the earthquake in japan, in the so called 'Ring of Fire' zone. Not sure how many people believe in the whole end of world/doomsday/2012 theory etc, but there is a lot of overwhelming scientific evidence that points to a huge world wide catastrophic disaster happening soon. It's said that the ring of fire is literally opening up. Volcanoes that erupted: 1/ & 2/ Russia - http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=pl&tl=en&u=http://wiadomosci.dziennik.pl/swiat/artykuly/325753,na-dalekim-wschodzie-trzesie-sie-ziemia-i-wybuchaja-wulkany.html 3/ Indonesia - http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110311/ap_on_re_as/as_indonesia_volcano 4/ Japan - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGBq6Z-qFxo 5/ And Hawaii's Kilauea, even though it's technically been erupting since 1983, it started erupting with greater fury after the quake. It's probably about time the U.S government utilize the free energy it has known about for 50 years, we are living beyond our means and all these natural disaster's in the last years are becoming almost a monthly thing. Where as 10 year's ago it was really rare thing. Oh well let's just keep on keeping on till then. This is completely off topic and has nothing to do with the earthquake apart from some stupid speculation. On topic: Latest death and missing persons count as of 22.09 japanese time (40 mins ago): 1352 dead, 1913 missing. I really hope they find the majority of those people alive but its looking grim from the stories that are being told. Source: http://www.fnn-news.com/news/headlines/articles/CONN00195045.html | ||
|
AXygnus
Portugal1008 Posts
On March 13 2011 22:43 sighco17 wrote: 5 Volcanoes erupted shortly after the earthquake in japan, in the so called 'Ring of Fire' zone. Not sure how many people believe in the whole end of world/doomsday/2012 theory etc, but there is a lot of overwhelming scientific evidence that points to a huge world wide catastrophic disaster happening soon. It's said that the ring of fire is literally opening up. Not surprising. There's a correlation between seismic activity and volcanic activity. Another example is Yellowstone. Lots of secondary volcanic traits such as geysers and with round-the-year earthquakes, despite not being localized over a fault area. Wherever there's a fault line, there's a volcano. The energy unleashed by the Sendai EQ was so big, I don't have any problem believing the quake caused volcanic eruptions through the Pacific Ring of Fire. If it had caused an eruption somewhere really faraway and geologically disconnected, such as the Azores, I'd be more worried. | ||
|
Caphe
Vietnam10817 Posts
Many of my gf's colleagues haven't been able to get in touch with their relatives after the EQ but they just keep on working and hope for the best. | ||
|
gerundium
Netherlands786 Posts
Let's just hope they get this situation with the powerplant under control, it is starting to worry me quite a bit now compared to before. | ||
|
Vaeila
Netherlands336 Posts
On March 13 2011 22:59 gerundium wrote: so just saw the news that reactor 3 is now also having problems. According to the expert on TV this is much more dangerous because reactor 3 runs on Plutonium and not on Uranium making a potential meltdown way more dangerous. Let's just hope they get this situation with the powerplant under control, it is starting to worry me quite a bit now compared to before. All three reactors are having problems atm. They are preparing to cool Reactor 2 with sea water and there is rising pressure in Reactor 3, the government sais that it is no immediate threat but who are we to believe them right away? | ||
|
WindOw
Sweden407 Posts
On March 13 2011 21:39 Gingerninja wrote: That was 2 months ago, not long into January that went off, erupted constantly for about a week. Took 3 days for any of the papers here to give a shit (I live in Japan) Anything reporting this now is even slower than the hilariously slow Japanese media. Anyone kicking it around twitter is scaremongering and just trolling. Apparently there is volcanic activity right now according to various news sites | ||
| ||
