.- In planning their protection against a tsunami, the directors of the now damaged Japanese nuclear plant dismissed scientific evidence that a giant wave could damage their facilities, according to an Associated Press investigation. The complacency shown by the Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO) was derived from a series of overly optimistic assumptions which concluded that the Earth could not release the amount of force that sparked two weeks ago that put the complex of six reactors Fukushima Dai-ichi to the brink of multiple mergers.
Instead of reactors remain dry, as contemplating the catastrophic forecast the company, the plant was flooded with a water level much higher than that TEPCO said it could arrive, according to an analysis by The Associated Press made from documents, records and statements by investigators, the company and the national nuclear safety agency.
And while TEPCO and government officials have said that nobody could have predicted a tsunami as large, there is ample evidence that waves of that size had already beaten the northeast coast of Japan, and could occur again along the fault line responsible, which runs from north to south about 350 kilometers (220 miles) east of the plant.
TEPCO managers claim that they had a good system of protection against tsunamis, but gave no further details because, they said, were concentrated in the present nuclear crisis. That is clear is that the managers of important readings of TEPCO ruled by a network of GPS units that showed that the two tectonic plates that created the failure were strongly "coupled" over hundreds of kilometers.
The more contact and stiffness between the plates has more tension builds up, experts say, and that tension can be released violently in an earthquake. This evidence, published in scientific journals for a decade, reveals the presence a fault capable of creating the violent earthquake and tsunami € "finally came.
To make matters worse, TEPCO made its tsunami simulation with his own computer program instead of using an internationally validated method. In addition, company engineers decided to make his prediction regardless of earthquakes prior to 1896, which removed a major earthquake that occurred over 1,000 years ago, an earthquake followed by a powerful tsunami that hit many of the same locations that hit two weeks ago.
A reassessment of TEPCO submitted just four months ago concluded that the water pushed by a tsunami would not rise more than 5.7 meters (18 feet) once it hit the coast of complex Dai-ichi Fukushima. The reactor is located in a small cliff, between 4.3 and 6.3 meters (14 to 23 feet) above the maximum water level forecast by the company, according to a presentation made in November by the civil engineer Makoto Takao, TEPCO said during a conference on earthquake safety in Japan.
"evaluate and confirm the safety of nuclear plants," said Takao. However, the wall of water that hit the coast two weeks ago, rose 8.2 meters (27 feet) above the prediction of TEPCO. The flood broke down the backup power generators located in basements or in the early stages, putting in danger the nuclear reactors and spent fuel pools. 
Instead of reactors remain dry, as contemplating the catastrophic forecast the company, the plant was flooded with a water level much higher than that TEPCO said it could arrive, according to an analysis by The Associated Press made from documents, records and statements by investigators, the company and the national nuclear safety agency.
And while TEPCO and government officials have said that nobody could have predicted a tsunami as large, there is ample evidence that waves of that size had already beaten the northeast coast of Japan, and could occur again along the fault line responsible, which runs from north to south about 350 kilometers (220 miles) east of the plant.
TEPCO managers claim that they had a good system of protection against tsunamis, but gave no further details because, they said, were concentrated in the present nuclear crisis. That is clear is that the managers of important readings of TEPCO ruled by a network of GPS units that showed that the two tectonic plates that created the failure were strongly "coupled" over hundreds of kilometers.
The more contact and stiffness between the plates has more tension builds up, experts say, and that tension can be released violently in an earthquake. This evidence, published in scientific journals for a decade, reveals the presence a fault capable of creating the violent earthquake and tsunami € "finally came.
To make matters worse, TEPCO made its tsunami simulation with his own computer program instead of using an internationally validated method. In addition, company engineers decided to make his prediction regardless of earthquakes prior to 1896, which removed a major earthquake that occurred over 1,000 years ago, an earthquake followed by a powerful tsunami that hit many of the same locations that hit two weeks ago.
A reassessment of TEPCO submitted just four months ago concluded that the water pushed by a tsunami would not rise more than 5.7 meters (18 feet) once it hit the coast of complex Dai-ichi Fukushima. The reactor is located in a small cliff, between 4.3 and 6.3 meters (14 to 23 feet) above the maximum water level forecast by the company, according to a presentation made in November by the civil engineer Makoto Takao, TEPCO said during a conference on earthquake safety in Japan.
"evaluate and confirm the safety of nuclear plants," said Takao. However, the wall of water that hit the coast two weeks ago, rose 8.2 meters (27 feet) above the prediction of TEPCO. The flood broke down the backup power generators located in basements or in the early stages, putting in danger the nuclear reactors and spent fuel pools.
- Earthquake / Tsunami / Vulcan in Japan - Please Help (14/03/2011)
- Japan nuclear crisis far from over - UN agency (27/03/2011)
- No Word for It: Imagining the Unimaginable (28/03/2011)
- Radiation from Japan reactor detected in B.C. seaweed, rainwater; no risk to humans (28/03/2011)
- Radiation detected in BC seaweed and rainwater; no risk to humans (28/03/2011)
No comments:
Post a Comment