j_b Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 total destruction of everything within 7 miles (or more) of the beach and who knows how many people died and the spray machine at cc.com continues with the same BS. You guys are priceless. I am kind of curious to know what changing BS would do? At least, some of us are focusing on earthquake mitigation efforts and how that would work here if the current crop of loonies in the US congress have their way with scientific funding, hazard monitoring and the regulatory apparatus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivan Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 I could go for a tsunami roll right about now. i've settled for several sake bombs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crux Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 BBC: Japan wakes up to tsunami devastation How the earthquake unfolded Tsunami surge destroys settlement Tsunami sweeping inland Huge blast at nuclear power plant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murraysovereign Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Estimates are that the main island (Honshu?) moved 2.5 metres to the east. Holy crap that's a lot of energy being released. And does that mean the entire island has to be re-mapped to correct all the lat - long points? As of Friday, every legal survey, every property marker is off by about 8 feet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-spotter Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Estimates are that the main island (Honshu?) moved 2.5 metres to the east. Holy crap that's a lot of energy being released. And does that mean the entire island has to be re-mapped to correct all the lat - long points? As of Friday, every legal survey, every property marker is off by about 8 feet. only with respect to GPS. most surveys are with respect to a control point and since the control points moved too, the relative positions may not have changed much. so not a big deal really. resurvey control points only, good enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 2.5 m is probably an average over an arbitrary region (smaller than Honshu). The distribution of coseismic displacements: http://www.unavco.org/community_science/science_highlights/2011/M8.9-Japan-images/M8.9-Japan-Sendai_GPS_coseismic-large.gif[/img] From here: more graphics Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 this breaks my heart...death toll at or above 10000 and climbing, nuke plants unstable, infrastructure decimated, homes destroyed...terrible...this sucks...so saddened... Seattle is not going to fare much better either when our turn comes... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Indeed, the bad news keep piling up for the Japanese people. There are tsunami deposits on the shores of Puget Sound. The most recent dated at ~1100 y.b.p. Satellite photos pre and post tsunami: satellite-photos-japan-before-and-after-tsunami Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted March 14, 2011 Share Posted March 14, 2011 Puts things in perspective. Whatever day-to-day headaches you have they are trivial. Grim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 and now, reactor #4 is on fire. I bet there are lots of very nervous people in Japan, and down-wind from there ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivan Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 and now, reactor #4 is on fire. I bet there are lots of very nervous people in Japan, and down-wind from there ... easy to sympathize w/ them - depend on oil that you import or nuclear energy you make yourself (well, w/ a little bit of help from the round-eyes)? the current nuke disaster should be understood vis a vis the recent bp gulf debacle i think - both industrial accidents, and both the result of an insatiable need for power for modern industrial economies - compare and contrast? would, for example, you'd be more or less nervous if the boys of bp were in charge in japan at the moment? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prole Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 the current nuke disaster should be understood vis a vis the recent bp gulf debacle i think - both industrial accidents, and both the result of an insatiable need for power for modern industrial economies - compare and contrast? would, for example, you'd be more or less nervous if the boys of bp were in charge in japan at the moment? Both finding "experts" almost completely out of control of Nature's elemental forces: Welcome to the Anthropocene, it's not going to be much fun... From what I've read about TEPCO, there doesn't seem to be much difference in the way any of these companies operate: Lacking in transparency, prone to corruption, and ultimately self-serving. That anyone in the States is willing to entertain the notion of expanded nuclear given the depravity of our business class and the real likelihood of people like Michelle Bachmann and Rand Paul cast in the role of enabler is a sick joke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pink Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 and now, reactor #4 is on fire. I bet there are lots of very nervous people in Japan, and down-wind from there ... easy to sympathize w/ them - depend on oil that you import or nuclear energy you make yourself (well, w/ a little bit of help from the round-eyes)? the current nuke disaster should be understood vis a vis the recent bp gulf debacle i think - both industrial accidents, and both the result of an insatiable need for power for modern industrial economies - compare and contrast? would, for example, you'd be more or less nervous if the boys of bp were in charge in japan at the moment? you can always do your part by not driving out to beacon anymore Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivan Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 you can always do your part by not driving out to beacon anymore i always carpool in a prius w/ lesboes w/ hairy armpits - we climb on cruelty-free gear too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Right, since Ivan is aware of the consequences of having an oil-based economy while regressives and their pols refuse to fund mass transit and alternatives energies, Ivan should only do things for which he can walk/bicycle and he should live in a shack too just so that his energy consumption is entirely consistent with his knowledge. Regressives, on the other hand, claim they don't know anything about an oil problem so they can keep wasting the stuff as if there were no tomorrow. [/snark] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivan Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 it would be a mistake to think of me, or practically any other person, as a rational being Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-spotter Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 When there's a problem at a nuclear plant everyone's like ZOMG RADIATION DEATH WAAH but when coal-fired plants kill somewhere like 10,000 to 50,000 people per year, that's OK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlpineK Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Basically everything humans do is fucked up. Off hand I'd say nuke power is slightly less fucked up than burning coal. Over the long run that is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivan Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 When there's a problem at a nuclear plant everyone's like ZOMG RADIATION DEATH WAAH but when coal-fired plants kill somewhere like 10,000 to 50,000 people per year, that's OK. what about when windmills chop up pretty, pretty birdies? when dams keep the fishies from fucking? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivan Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 or oil-sands firfuksakes?!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Indeed, lobbies, their bought pols and media pretend we have to choose between the plague or cholera. A little like for presidential elections: "do you want the neo-fascist or the corporate tool"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 it would be a mistake to think of me, or practically any other person, as a rational being Sure, but I am not sure that you'd be rational to live in a cave because there is no alternative to oil guzzling in the current infrastructure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Choada_Boy Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Horrific, but catastrophism doesn't mean we need "big government" regulating the construction industry or spending money on "overlord" government scientists to monitor tsunami hazard. Let the "free market" rule, cut the public budget, deregulate some more and it'll be fine (the free market tooth fairy told me). You're a fucking moron. I'm sure you'd spend the time spewing your dumb ass ideas at the Japanese mother searching the ruins of civilization for her lost children. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prole Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 When there's a problem at a nuclear plant everyone's like ZOMG RADIATION DEATH WAAH but when coal-fired plants kill somewhere like 10,000 to 50,000 people per year, that's OK. Committed to closing the gap! Up to last weekend, most Republican energy strategies included a larger role for nuclear power. Legislation introduced this month by Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) would mandate construction of 200 new reactors by 2040, and would pressure the NRC to complete new reactor licensing on a fixed schedule. "New streamlined regulations and a system to manage waste will help drive private sector investments in these facilities, which today are mired in red tape, lawsuits and the liability associated with the storage of used fuel," he said in a statement. --from here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 wtf? either irony doesn't translate well in the written word or choada is some kind of free market zealot? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.