EVE Search - Japan hit by 8.9 earthquake

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Out of Pod Experience

Japan hit by 8.9 earthquake

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Grimpak Gallente Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.03.11 10:23:00 - [1] 8.9 mag is... well, one of the top3 biggest quakes ever registered? --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Grimpak Gallente Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.03.11 11:34:00 - [2] Originally by: Louis deGuerre Edited by: Louis deGuerre on 11/03/2011 10:59:22 Originally by: Grimpak 8.9 mag is... well, one of the top3 biggest quakes ever registered? An 8.9 quake would make it the 8th heaviest quake ever recorded. actually 5th, because of the 3 top ones, the first is a starquake, the second is the theoretical magnitude of the Yucatßn impact and the third is magnitude 10, never recorded by mankind. that means, the 4th strongest earthquake registered is the Lisbon earthquake in 1755 (mag. 9), 3rd is the 1964 Anchorage quake with 9.3, second is the 9.4 quake that caused the 2004 tsunami, and the first is the 1960 Valdivia quake that hit the 9.5. check the last table --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Grimpak Gallente Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.03.11 16:02:00 - [3] Originally by: Louis deGuerre Actually, no, it is the 8th. 1. May 22, 1960 Valdivia earthquake 9.5 2. March 28, 1964 Alaska earthquake 9.2 3. December 26, 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake 9.1 4. January 26, 1700 Cascadia earthquake 9 5. November 25, 1833 Sumatra earthquake 8.8-9.2 6. August 13, 1868 Arica earthquake 9 7. November 4, 1952 Kamchatka earthquakes 9 I'm not counting 1755 Lisbon as it's listed as 8.7 magnitude elsewhere so the number is not reliable and 9 + 8.7 / 2 = 8.85. But yeah, big bastard of a quake. As with real estate the impact of a quake is location, location, location. Much weaker quakes have caused much greater loss of life and destruction (I hope). EDIT : I hope there is not a much death and destruction is what I mean of course, altough the livefeed is not looking that great. now that's interesting tbh. anyways, this quake by itself wasn't really the one that caused most of the destruction and death. first death count was on the 20's, this was at... 9AM GMT or so. as soon as people would get accounted for, atm I would say that death toll would be on the 500-600, and I'm damn sure that nearly 80-90% of the deaths were caused by the tsunami and not the quake itself. so yeah, location really determinates the impact of the quake, which, in this case, it being on the sea, meant that tsunamis would be the main problem. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Grimpak Gallente Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.03.11 22:25:00 - [4] Originally by: Vogue Lag Indeed a travesty. As lame as this may sound an earthquake of similar magnitude at the heart of Tokyo would have been far far worse. It could have been a lot worse. indeed I have to say that if the epicentre was located on the mainland closer to Tokyo, the damage and life loss would be far, far worse. Even if the structures in Japan are built to whitstand earthquakes, a 8.9 mag is pretty much the upper limit anything bigger than a 3-story building that is not a bunker can whitstand, even if it's earthquake resistant. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Grimpak Gallente Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.03.12 14:03:00 - [5] Edited by: Grimpak on 12/03/2011 14:05:11 Originally by: Hoya en Marland Btw residents of Tokyo and some other coastal cities are reporting "weird looking clouds" high up on the sky strong earthquakes can create weird weather patterns on a small area, mostly because of smoke. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Grimpak Gallente Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.03.14 21:21:00 - [6] Originally by: Barakkus Knowing little to nothing about the technical aspects of nuclear energy, I found this explanation helpful: http://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear_power/nuclear_power_risk/safety/clarifying-japans-nuclear-disaster.html so from what I understand, the only way that the nuclear accident becomes something even close to a Chernobyl or a Three Mile is, stuff needs to go down south very fast, very dirty and must obey to a certain amount of pre-existing conditions? --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Grimpak Gallente Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.03.14 21:44:00 - [7] Originally by: Barakkus Originally by: Grimpak Originally by: Barakkus Knowing little to nothing about the technical aspects of nuclear energy, I found this explanation helpful: http://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear_power/nuclear_power_risk/safety/clarifying-japans-nuclear-disaster.html so from what I understand, the only way that the nuclear accident becomes something even close to a Chernobyl or a Three Mile is, stuff needs to go down south very fast, very dirty and must obey to a certain amount of pre-existing conditions? I read elsewhere that Chernobyl was using something like graphite or some ** that was flamable for something which made the whole thing pretty much just blow up making it much worse...but I don't know what that's all about though. From what I can gather the reactors in Japan are completely different and wouldn't produce a Chernobyl like effect. Chernobyl reactors used graphite rods to stop fission yes. That and a badly trained personnel and a multitude of human errors, bad maintenance and obsolete equipment (graphite rods were considered very obsolete even for the date of the Chernobyl accident), made the issue escalate into what it's known today, afaik. Atm if I'm not mistaken, the damaged reactor is still on fire inside the concrete sarcophagus that was built at the cost of the life of pretty much all the ones that went there to cover it up. Also, there are reports that the concrete sarcophagus is starting to display some cracks. --- Quote:** The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Grimpak Gallente Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.03.14 23:30:00 - [8] Originally by: Mutant Caldari I think this is relevant so I'll just leave this here. thank you for showing me yet again that my utter lack of faith on mankind is not unfounded. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Grimpak Gallente Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.03.15 11:19:00 - [9] Originally by: Cpt Advile ...unless a new disaster hits, in which case we can just cross Japan off the map (and I'm not trying to be funny) at this moment I can only think of either volcanic eruptions or a meteor crashing there. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Grimpak Gallente Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.03.15 12:05:00 - [10] Originally by: Cpt Advile another earthquake is also an option well yeah, considering the number of faults on the area, altho if a quake happens it will be further north. perhaps near Kamchatka. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.

Grimpak Gallente Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.03.15 18:40:00 - [11] Originally by: Alotta Baggage Originally by: Cpt Advile Edited by: Cpt Advile on 15/03/2011 18:22:40 I hope this isn't another pre-shock like the 7.2 one, 1day before the 9.0 one. Seriously, it was said that another even bigger quake might follow soon because the whole stress wasn't released 100% with the 9.0 quake. My main question is, I believe in karma and how everything happens for a reason, but what could be the reason for such torment on Japanese people? All I could condemn are their crazy semi-sick/fetish TVshows, but otherwise they seemed to be highly collective and more or less spiritual people more or less. Or is it a wake-up call for the rest of the world to start thinking and acting more positively? edit_typo Payback for making the Prius so damn ugly that's a good one, and I totally agree. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Grimpak Gallente Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.03.15 19:22:00 - [12] Originally by: Zhim'Fufu Originally by: Cpt Advile My main question is, I believe in karma and how everything happens for a reason, but what could be the reason for such torment on Japanese people? The genocidal japanese invasion of china during ww2 might be a contender. Nasty vicious end of the world stuff with entire city populations being exterminated. hmm... didn't 2 nukes kinda make the numbers sorta even? --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Grimpak Gallente Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.03.15 22:30:00 - [13] good karma or bad karma or whatever, better not exploring this issue further. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Grimpak Gallente Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2011.03.17 13:43:00 - [14] from this it seems that it's serious, but I'm not seeing it reach chernobyl levels yet. ATM I would rate it somewhere at the same level (or a bit higher) than Three Mile. SF Pools seem to be the most critical area atm tho. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point	Posted - 2011.03.20 11:14:00 - [15] Edited by: Grimpak on 20/03/2011 11:14:47 Originally by: Selinate stuff my mistake then. I do agree with you on people crying end of the world about this tho. Radiation was released yes, but this is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay below the levels of chernobyl. Maybe a bit higher than Three Mile, but not much of a difference. also no deaths reported till now, and cases of human radiation poisoning are mild afaik? --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point	Posted - 2011.03.20 19:36:00 - [16] tbh both sides of the argument are being totally bonkers on this --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point	Posted - 2011.03.20 20:07:00 - [17] Originally by: baltec1 Originally by: Grimpak tbh both sides of the argument are being totally bonkers on this Never realised we had so many experts I admit my knowlege is below "basic" on this, but both sides seem to be overreacting on the issue. This is no new Chernobyl, by a long strech, but this isn't really just "a simple accident in a nuclear instalation" either. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point	Posted - 2011.03.21 10:02:00 - [18] saw this. was released yesterday, and it seems that atm the only issue about radioactivity is Iodine-131 in the area. Caesium-134 and 137 seem to be in the air, together with Iodine-132 and 133 but their ammounts are much less than 131. Caesium is the worse isotopes in terms of half-life since the 137 has a 30 year half-life (134 has 2 years) iodine-131, while dangerous has a half-life of some 7 days, while the other two have short half lifes (2 hours and 20 hours respectively to 132 and 133). TL;DR from empyrical data from several sources, atm the only radioactive product that has been released in large ammounts seems to be iodine-131. If the Fukushima accident progresses favourably and manages to release only iodine in amounts above the safety limits, it will take some 2-3 months for the ammount of radioactive material to decay in the area. but this is a big "if". if Fukushima starts to spew Cs-134 and 137 in large amounts, then we will have another Zone in the world that will remain contaminated for quite some time (decades or even centuries). --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point	Posted - 2011.03.21 18:34:00 - [19] Edited by: Grimpak on 21/03/2011 18:34:47 hmm latest update reports that the reactor 5 and 6 SFP cooling capability has been restored. Reactors 1, 2 and 3 seem to have their condition stabilized for the time being, altho there has been a decrease on pressure on the containment vessel of reactor 3. Water spraying on the SFP of reactor 3 seems to have decreased the temperature there too, altho minimally. atm the reactor 3 and 4's SFP's, together with reactor 1, 2 and 3 themselves are the areas that require the most attention, but works to restore AC power on the reactors seems to be going well. They managed to restore power on the reactor 5 already. not out of the woods yet, but the worst is probably long gone. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point	Posted - 2011.03.22 15:42:00 - [20] ...and they have apparently restored power to the cooling systems. they seem to have start to run integrity checks on the instalation, so things seem to be improving now. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.

Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point	Posted - 2011.03.22 20:14:00 - [21] Originally by: Riedle Edited by: Riedle on 22/03/2011 19:03:05 Tokyo is an area of the earth that has 1/3 of the normal background radiation. Some areas of the Earth have more and some have less. Tokyo and area end up being at about 1/3 of the average. The trace amount that they are getting now still makes Tokyo about 1/3 of the average. :) The radiation concerns were WAY overblown on this one. Luckily the majority of the radiation released thus far has been Iodine which has a half life of... 7 DAYS. Hopefully they continue to get a handle on the sitatuation and the media stops trying to scare people that don't understand radiation into thinking it's some sort of China syndrome. I understand why radiation sparks fears because, I suspect, it's odourless, invisible etc etc. But really, radiation is naturally occuring everywhere in the universe. The question is the amount and the kind of radiation and thus far, this situation is a tempest in a teapot in my opinion. think I don't need to say much more --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point	Posted - 2011.03.24 00:06:00 - [22] you know, that seems quite a big number, but you could post a comparision so that one could say how much that really is --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point	Posted - 2011.03.24 12:21:00 - [23] Originally by: Hoya en Marland Edited by: Hoya en Marland on 24/03/2011 11:01:24 Originally by: Grimpak you know, that seems quite a big number, but you could post a comparision so that one could say how much that really is Well, it's been said that up to 100 becquerels of cesium-137 is normal. They've measured 163,000 becquerels, 40 kilometers away from the power plant. I'll leave it to our forum scientists to tell if, and how, this value could affect human health. I wouldn't be too surprised to hear that it's totally okay. ok I ask you then. is it, or is it not ok? sure the value seems to be very high, but you also posted that "could" affect. you also didn't posted where did you came up with this info, so I'm gonna help you a bit here: http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/national/news/20110324p2a00m0na026000c.html Quote: The ministry announced on March 23 that 6,970-1.17 million becquerels of radioactive iodine and 1,260-163,000 becquerels of radioactive cesium were detected per 1 kilogram of soil. The ministry said the radiation from the soil was so minimal that there would be no risk of external exposure, but it said it could not immediately predict how the radiation would affect farm products grown in land nearby. The ministry said it should wait for an assessment of the data by the Cabinet Office's Nuclear Safety Commission. now with that in hand, it's true that the ammount of iodine becquerels seems worrisome, but that can be easily fixed with iodine tablets and a temporary ban for foods for 2-3 months on the area. Caesium-137 is more worrysome because of the longer half life, but what ammount is considered "dangerous"? me being quite the peasant on this issue decided to explore several sources on the internet and woe me, I found the conversion calculations from Becquerel to Curies, which, while not a scientifically accepted number, it provides a better understanding since you can come up with lots of documentation that shows what is the usual levels of curies that can be harmful for health. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curie now from the numbers there, and me being the ignorant I am, decided to use a calculator to convert the Bq's to Ci's, and what did I discovered? aparently the ammount of curies in the area is of about 4.4 microcuries. Now a bit more of search came up with this small pearl: Originally by: http://www.aristatek.com/drjisotopes.aspx From 10 CFR part 20, the annual limit on intake (ALI) of Cesium 137 into the body corresponding to a 5 rem dose is 200 microcuries per year. The ALI takes into account exposure to any daughter isotopes produced in the body (some radioactive isotopes have radioactive daughter species). From the ALI value, the derived air concentration (DAC) for inhalation is computed assuming a worker exposure of 2000 hours per year and a breathing rate of 20 liters per minute. The general public is based on a 0.1 rem annual exposure limit, 24 hours per day and 365 days per year. The drinking water limit is based on 730 liters intake per year. (you need to scroll a bit down to reach it) this means that 4.4 microcuries, while a high value, isn't near of the ALI established by the US, and the ALI presented is for a dose correspondent to a yearly 5 rem. now, considering that 1 rem = 0.01 sievert, that means that 0.1 sievert/year or 100 milisievert/year is considered high, and is pretty much the lower limit for risk of radioactive induced cancer formation (+0.8%). as an example, the background radiation in some locations of the world, like Iran and some areas of Europe are above the 250 milisevert/year. still, there's no harm in being careful. It's still not the end of the world, tho. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point	Posted - 2011.03.24 13:17:00 - [24] Originally by: Lady Skank It wouldn't surprise me if that contamination is unrelated to the accident at fukushima and is simply evidence of longer term contamination from general nuclear industry because most nuclear plants tend to slightly contaminate the areas around them. It was probably not publicized or even noticed until now much the same way as huge portions of the Scottish northern coast have much higher levels of radioactive particles. well yeah. still, while it's ok to be careful and investigate the repercussions about the incident in a very deep manner, the way many people are reporting this is still a wee bit overreacting. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point	Posted - 2011.03.30 16:31:00 - [25] Originally by: Lady Skank You are silly because its all perfectly safe and you can even eat Cesium sandwiches tbh I think you would die faster due to heavy metal poisoning than radiation itself --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.