Japan, a drama!

[Alban Berg]

Yes we do, Colin; and it seems to be getting more vicious and hostile all the time!

This is becoming horrific! Calm down guys...Enjoy life...it's probably not our turn yet...Eat some crap...it will help you to forget the mysery...LOL

About me, I felt "depressed" yesterday and I have ordered 6 Black Russian caviar jars on ebay... I love Caviar!...and Russian caviar, it is something!
It is impossible to buy this here, in Montreal...it's around 70$ a jar! On ebay I paid 110$ for the 6! I bought some from them 6 months ago. No bad surprises.



Martin

[Chi_townPhilly]

(and to steer things back on topic somewhat):

I noticed late last week that Japan's lies at one of the world's most impropitious tectonic conflurences... maybe the most impropitious-

The area near the recent earthquake lies at the triple-intersection of the Pacific Plate, the Eurasian Plate and the Philippine Plate. Now, the Pacific Plate is the fastest-moving Plate in the world- trending Northwest in that area at over 10 inches a year, average. The Philippine plate also trends Northwest, at a less brisk (but not insubstantial) 7 inches (to the nearest inch) average a year. Contrarily, the Eurasian Plate is (comparatively speaking) slow-moving in that area, managing about an inch a year average- but here's the kicker- It is moving in direct opposition (i.e.: collision course) to the Pacific Plate (→←).

By contrast, the San Andreas fault system of the Western US has the Pacific Plate moving at a little over 8 inches a year average, Northwest, and the North American Plate moving Southwest at an average of about 2½ inches a year. (↑←) My source says that the entire West Coast of the US has as many 7.5+ magnitude earthquakes every 100 years as Japan has in about 25. (Source: Goode's World Atlas.)

In spite of this technical digression, I can't begin imagine the scope of the disaster and loss involved. Let's also save a thought for those who've made progess in lowering the water-temperatures in two key nuclear reactors.

[Snow White]

Mr chi most school children in the Pacific know this I am surprise you have just found out

[teddy]

I suppose where you live has an effect on what you consider relevant. Most of us are most concerned with ourselves and our own people. I only became really interested in the San Andreas Fault when my cousin went to live in that area. When they experienced the last earthquake I spent a lot of time on the telephone and Internet checking up on them and exploring the situation. Although we do not shrug our shoulders when we hear of these situations, not many of us really do any thing to help, apart from donating a few pound. I knew of one couple who were so distraught over an emergency in Africa that they sold all their possessions and travelled out there to help, spending all their spare money to help the victims. That was real caring. How many of us would do that? Not me I know. I am too selfish and hold MY family in too high regard.

[OLDUDE]

What I find difficult to understand is why a country with their history of major quakes
has based such a high proportion of their energy requirement upon nuclear power.
Surely this is asking for major trouble eventually (if not immediately).
Although quakes are unlikely to be a factor in the UK's policy for nuclear power, for me there is additionally the nightmare prospect for future generations of dealing with the vast amounts of contaminated materials when the plants eventually close down, as indeed is inevitable.

Cheers John

[teddy]

I think the only alternative John would be wave powered generation. I believe they do not have much in the way of fossil fuels, and do not have the room for the millions of windmills it would require for the electricity they consume. I presume that nuclear plants are built near the sea for the access to water for cooling and that it is not viable to place them near rivers.

With all the volcanoes they have geothermic power would seem to be an obvious answer. Maybe this will encourage them to explore it.

teddy

[JHC]

What I find difficult to understand is why a country with their history of major quakes
has based such a high proportion of their energy requirement upon nuclear power.

Teddy answered this very well now add in Japans population approx 127million and you can see their problem, personally I am against nuclear generation as the technology stands at the moment even if you could make it 99% safe you still have two major problems, the horrendous cost of decommissioning a plant at the end of life, and the storage of the highly dangerous spent fuel rods (if that is the correct term) during the life of the plant, and a further point about Japans plate structure I thought it was sitting on 4 plates
The North American Plate
The Eurasian Plate
The Philippine Sea Plate, and The Pacific Plate. but I am not an expert?