On Mon, 14 Mar 2016 06:49:30 +0000 (UTC) jim bell <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > From: juan <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > So after s quick search, seems that > the containment of the > general electric designed reactor(s) > failed? Maybe americunts > should be paying damages? > How so? Did you see my previous message? https://cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/2016-March/012590.html > It looks like it worked like it was designed to work. The design was supposed to contain the melted suff in case of a 'melt-down' - but it didn't. So, no, I don't think it worked like it was designed to. > The > problem is, a decision had been made about making a seawall only a > certain height, and putting the switching circuitry in the basement > which could be flooded. Well, yes, more than a few things failed at once. > No doubt both these decisions had been > approved by the Japanese involved. Now, if it had been determined > later that they wanted to protect against much larger earthquakes and > higher tsunamis, they could have increased the seawall height and > sealed the basement of the reactor better. They chose not to do so. > Jim Bell > > > >
