[ExI] Two Japanese reactors on red alert
rpwl at lightlink.com
Wed Mar 16 13:36:59 UTC 2011
Mirco Romanato wrote:
> Il 15/03/2011 20.48, Richard Loosemore ha scritto:
>> Then why was it designed to withstand something 16 times weaker than a
>> realistic quake? A quake of this magnitude, followed by a tsunami, was
>> an *easily* expected event in the lifetime of these reactors. This is
>> not emotional thinking (what is emotional about describing a gross
>> mismatch between planning and a likely event?).
> Easily expected for who?
> I don't remember you making this claim anytime before the earthquake
> happened. Do you have anyone making the claim and supporting it with
> data before the earthquake?
If you think that emergency planners in Japan, putting a nuclear plant
on an active fault line, would make the prediction that a 9.0 quake with
tsunami was so unlikely that they need not plan for it, you are
descending to a level at which meaningful conversation is impossible.
More information about the extropy-chat