Courage of the Fukushima 50. True Heroes.

[Ronin4hire]

Originally Posted by GoNative

Got any link to the exact wording of this supposed warning? I've kind of lost trust in anything being reported by western media recently.

Japan syndrome shows why we need WikiLeaks | The Australian

Not an exact wording though.

IN December 2008, an official from the International Atomic Energy Agency pointed to "a serious problem" with nuclear reactors in areas of Japan prone to earthquakes.

Recent earthquakes "have exceeded the design basis for some nuclear plants", he told a meeting of the Nuclear Safety and Security Group of the Group of Eight countries. Moreover, safety guides for seismic activity had been revised only three times in the past 35 years, he added.

The information was recorded in a US diplomatic cable and comes to us courtesy of WikiLeaks. So do other cables, including one two years ago in which American officials described Tomihiro Taniguchi, a senior IAEA nuclear safety official and former head of the Japanese agency responsible for nuclear plant security following earthquakes, as "a weak manager and advocate, particularly with respect to confronting Japan's own safety practices". A few months earlier, Japanese MP Taro Kono told US diplomats the government was covering up nuclear accidents and obscuring the true costs and problems associated with the nuclear industry. The following year, the government reversed a court ruling that a nuclear plant in western Japan had to be closed because it could withstand an earthquake of only 6.5 magnitude.

[evanny]

Originally Posted by termogard

Actually, Japan has well-developed armed forces called SDF.

it is not about well developed. it is about mandatory. since CCCR army was mandatory and rather horrible place to be people chose to spend 2 minutes next to nuclear reactor core on a meltdown instead of serving 2 years.

[tokusatsufan]

So have they saved the plant?

[GoNative]

Originally Posted by Ronin4hire

Japan syndrome shows why we need WikiLeaks | The Australian

Not an exact wording though.

Considering that the reactors actually survived the earthquake mostly intact I can't really see the validity of this little leak. Doubt they warned of a 10m tsunami

[termogard]

Originally Posted by evanny

it is not about well developed. it is about mandatory. since CCCR army was mandatory and rather horrible place to be people chose to spend 2 minutes next to nuclear reactor core on a meltdown instead of serving 2 years.

Yes, they chose rooftop of the edge of meltdown instead of two years of service.
Check this video more attentively, please. They had even less time than two minutes and moved enough fast in suits armoured by lead shields.

[Ronin4hire]

Originally Posted by GoNative

Considering that the reactors actually survived the earthquake mostly intact I can't really see the validity of this little leak. Doubt they warned of a 10m tsunami

Eh? The two are related obviously.

[JohnBraden]

Originally Posted by Ronin4hire

Eh? The two are related obviously.

In this case, yes, they are. But I don't recall a tsunami warning in the Great Hanshin earthquake. I've gone through numerous earthquakes in the Tohoku region and most had no tsunami warning and those that did were less than 50cm....

This one was the equivalent of The Perfect Storm....

[Ronin4hire]

Originally Posted by JohnBraden

In this case, yes, they are. But I don't recall a tsunami warning in the Great Hanshin earthquake. I've gone through numerous earthquakes in the Tohoku region and most had no tsunami warning and those that did were less than 50cm....

This one was the equivalent of The Perfect Storm....

Earthquake with an epicenter in the ocean is almost always going to be followed by a tsunami warning dude.

[GoNative]

Originally Posted by Ronin4hire

Eh? The two are related obviously.

No they are not obviously related at all. Not all earthquakes here are just off the coast and cause massive tsunamis that wipe out whole towns. Can you actually recall the last time that occurred in Japan? Most earthquakes here don't do that at all. Many occur inland with no effect on the ocean or sea at all. Many that occur out in the ocean also do not cause tsunamis. Was there a massive tsunami in the Christchurch earthquake? So a report from years ago about Japan reactors and their ability to withstand a high magnitude earthquake may not have made any mention at all of the potential risks of tsunamis. The reactors themselves operated exactly as designed and withstood the earthquake. An earthquake far greater than I believe the warning was about. So Japan just proved that these reactors can actually survive earthquakes of far greater magnitude than they were designed for. That's good news and a testament to their construction. The design didn't take into account a wave of that height though and that is something that I doubt any reactor in the world regardless of if they are near major earthquake zones or not would have design features to withstand.
So I disagree with the assertions of The Australian (as I usually do, it being a mouthpiece for the right side of politics in Australia ).

[Ronin4hire]

Originally Posted by GoNative

So a report from years ago about Japan reactors and their ability to withstand a high magnitude earthquake may not have made any mention at all of the potential risks of tsunamis.

Or it may have. Which is quite conceivable since the 2 phenomena are related.

Furthermore inland EQs don't usually have tsunami warnings.

Not to mention that the tsunami in SE Asia was caused by an EQ. That wasn't too long ago.