View previous topic | View next topic

Japanese Earthquake

Page 4 of 8
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

Neotenic
796023.  Mon Mar 14, 2011 11:25 am Reply with quote

I can't believe it either - all those status updates, and not one of them can spell 'harbour'.

Tsk.

But, as to it's provenance, I think the odds are tipped slightly in favour of it being a confection.

 
Sadurian Mike
796024.  Mon Mar 14, 2011 11:28 am Reply with quote

I am inclined to agree, to be honest (hey, it happens occasionally). There can't be that many twats out there who all posted the same outrageous sentiment within such a short time.

Maybe a handful, but surely they would have been swamped by vitriolic protest by slightly more rational thinkers.

 
Neotenic
796028.  Mon Mar 14, 2011 11:38 am Reply with quote

The other thing to consider is why the people who compiled it all had access to enough news feeds to harvest them - if it was supposedly from Twitter, I may believe it - but a google search limited to Twitter does not yield any actual tweets espousing such sentiment.

I can't help but notice, though, how quickly the composite has zipped round the web, spurred on by outrage at stupid americans.

Oh yes, and when it comes to karmic retribution for PH, then I think the events of August 45 probably squared that off.

 
'yorz
796040.  Mon Mar 14, 2011 12:09 pm Reply with quote

Amen to that.

 
brunel
796136.  Mon Mar 14, 2011 4:54 pm Reply with quote

Neotenic wrote:
Ah, there's nothing like piggybacking on a horrendous natural disaster to peddle one's own agenda, is there?

Icky.

Edit to add:
From that Morning Star article;

Quote:
Ccampaign group Kick Nuclear spokeswoman Nancy Birch said: "Only last December Cumbria was hit by an earthquake. The quake hit an area that has been earmarked by the government to store decades-worth of cancer-causing, high-level radioactive waste.

"The disaster in Japan clearly demonstrates that nuclear energy is too dangerous to be considered a sustainable form of energy in the 21st century."



This is just the worst kind of bandwagon jumping. The earthquake that 'hit' Cumbria last year had a magnitude of 3.6.

Ongoing Japanese Seismic activity reports don't even bother to record quakes with a magnitude of less than 4, as they as much a part of everyday life as the Northern line running with severe delays.

This should really be proof enough that British nuclear power stations really have little to fear from earthquakes.

It is true that a nuclear power station in the UK would have a very limited seismic risk, but it is still the case that a nuclear reactor within the UK would have to be built to withstand a possible earthquake.

True, most of the earthquakes in recent memory are relatively small magnitude events. For example, take that event in Cumbria - to put it bluntly, all that earthquake could have done was level a shed or two.
Structural damage for unreinforced masonry structures, which are normally the most susceptible to earthquake damage, rarely occurs below events of about magnitude 4.5, since most buildings are normally designed to withstand fairly substantial wind loading. That is why the Japanese, for example, do not take much notice of what goes on below magnitude 4 - anything below that should basically have very little effect on a building.

Still, instrumentation records, along with analysis of historical records and geological surveys, do show that there have been moderately large earthquakes in the UK and surrounding areas. One of the more recent large events was recorded out in the North Sea in 1931, and was in excess of magnitude 5 (I think it may have been about 5.3).
So, although moderately large earthquakes are unlikely to occur within the UK, if you were designing a nuclear power plant within the UK, you would still need to carry out a seismic hazard analysis before designing your facilities.

I know it sounds strange, but it is something that has to be considered, and not just in the UK (it is fairly standard practise for nuclear power plants in France and Switzerland, for example). Perhaps the only place you could get away with it would be in Ireland, which appears to be seismically almost inert, with even micro-tremors uncommon.

 
AlmondFacialBar
796138.  Mon Mar 14, 2011 5:00 pm Reply with quote

ALMOST inert, there was a 2,6 quake in Clare last year, and a 5.5 one in Dublin in 1984. Granted, it's not exactly what Japan is dealing with right now, but I still wouldn't want a nuclear installation on top of it.

And while we're at nuclear installations - today someone tried to order a Geiger Counter from us, because of the situation with Fukushima. Quite apart from the fact that we don't sell them (in contrast to Amazon, who do) - that person was about 9000 kilometres away from Japan. If she'd been talking to me I'd have recommended investing in a map instead.

:-)

AlmondFacialBar

 
suze
796147.  Mon Mar 14, 2011 5:56 pm Reply with quote

AlmondFacialBar wrote:
Quite apart from the fact that we don't sell them (in contrast to Amazon, who do)


Oh dear. Your customer appears not to be the only person who has just decided that she must have a Geiger counter - Amazon are fresh out right now! A website called anythingradioactive.com is also sold out.

Another site has them, but wants 600. Anyone who actually knows about these things, is that rather more than they were selling for a week ago? (That site also notes that any Geiger counter you might buy on eBay for very much less is probably thirty years old and made in the USSR. It may have some small value to a collector of curios, but is not to be relied upon as a scientific instrument.)

 
CB27
796201.  Mon Mar 14, 2011 7:43 pm Reply with quote

As I understand it, the main earthquake in Japan was some 8,000 times stronger than the one in New Zealand, which was 6.3, so anything we see in the UK or Ireland is even weaker.

Add to that the fact that Japan has suffered hundreds of aftershocks, many stronger than anything the UK has seen, plus the damage the tsunami caused, the circumstances are far different from what we have in the UK or many other parts of the world.

 
otyikondo
796204.  Mon Mar 14, 2011 7:50 pm Reply with quote

CB27 wrote:
As I understand it, the main earthquake in Japan was some 8,000 times stronger than the one in New Zealand, which was 6.3, so anything we see in the UK or Ireland is even weaker.

Add to that the fact that Japan has suffered hundreds of aftershocks, many stronger than anything the UK has seen, plus the damage the tsunami caused, the circumstances are far different from what we have in the UK or many other parts of the world.


Did you see the comparison seismographs of Haiti, Christchurch, and the Japanese one? They were something else.

Haiti - and particularly Christchurch - looked like a flat-line reading of a dead person's heart-beat, while the Japanese one was all over the place. It was like chalk and cheese.

I'll try to dig it out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Ij-EW7EBuI

 
Celebaelin
796213.  Mon Mar 14, 2011 9:31 pm Reply with quote

The '10,000 feared dead' figure that's being bandied about may be optimistic I fear; certainly the middle two places are thought to have suffered 50% casualties each and Yuriage is described as "wiped from the map" by the Beeb reporter. The tsunami rather than the earthquake did the majority of the damage in these instances.

Yuriage - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12740339 ("no longer there" pop. ~7,500)
Ōtsuchi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%8Ctsuchi,_Iwate ("devastated" pop. ~17000)
Minamisanriku http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minamisanriku,_Miyagi ("destroyed" pop. ~18000)
Kesennuma http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kesennuma,_Miyagi ("ravaged" pop. ~73,000)

I doubt this list is exhaustive.

 
cherrycoke
796248.  Tue Mar 15, 2011 1:15 am Reply with quote

Is it ok to start making jokes now, or is it too tsunami?

 
AlmondFacialBar
796255.  Tue Mar 15, 2011 3:06 am Reply with quote

suze wrote:
AlmondFacialBar wrote:
Quite apart from the fact that we don't sell them (in contrast to Amazon, who do)


Oh dear. Your customer appears not to be the only person who has just decided that she must have a Geiger counter - Amazon are fresh out right now! A website called anythingradioactive.com is also sold out.

Another site has them, but wants 600. Anyone who actually knows about these things, is that rather more than they were selling for a week ago? (That site also notes that any Geiger counter you might buy on eBay for very much less is probably thirty years old and made in the USSR. It may have some small value to a collector of curios, but is not to be relied upon as a scientific instrument.)


600 is definitely exploiting the situation, they're usually about 150. God, hysteria, you've gotta love it.

As for the actual situation, apparently the radiation levels around the plant are now dangerous to human health and they're asking people to stay indoors. :-( On the upside, what the expert from Imperial College called "the nasty stuff" on the radio this morning is (as yet) safely contained and that probably won't change. It's not gonna be a Chernobyl, ever, and while I never thought it would be because of the fundamental differences in reactor design and the fact that the plant was shut down at the time of the quake, it's still a huge relief to hear someone more versed in such things agree. Hm... Still not happy for the Japanese here, though.

It's not safe, people, for fuck's sake!

:-)

AlmondFacialBar

 
Neotenic
796264.  Tue Mar 15, 2011 4:05 am Reply with quote

Quote:
I know it sounds strange, but it is something that has to be considered, and not just in the UK


Oh, absolutely - but the point I was making was that as the biggest recorded earthquake hasn't caused a complete and total catastrophic meltdown, it was a particularly grubby form of opportunism to look at the events in Japan and think they can be used as 'evidence' to support a personal agenda on the belief that there should be no nuclear power in the UK. I eagerly await the Morning Star's imminent switchover to running their computers and printing presses on fairy dust and good intentions.

It's like someone in Japan looking at crowd violence at Premier League matches and using it as an excuse to suggest they ban football in Osaka.

 
Starfish13
796267.  Tue Mar 15, 2011 4:44 am Reply with quote

cherrycoke wrote:
Is it ok to start making jokes now, or is it too tsunami?


Oooh, you're a bad man. See me in my office.

 
Arcane
796284.  Tue Mar 15, 2011 5:58 am Reply with quote

There was a 4.0 earthquake off Innisfail, North Queensland today.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/small-earthquake-detected-off-the-coast-of-innisfail/story-e6freon6-1226021991823

Daughters response was "Mum, they're getting closer".

 

Page 4 of 8
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group