Any Bets on What the Quake Costs US Taxpayers?

That been said, I know it doesn't help to pay the bills today.[/QUOTE]

and that is at the heart of the world problem. Most, damn near all, are worried about the short term issues. If we would take a longer view on the stste of the world, I bet we would find that things would stabilize out and get a hell of a lot better in short order
 
David,
I'm not sure which side of the discussion you're on after reading that. Could be either or. Fyi, the USA's short term issues, ARE long term issues and have been for decades. After we've thought long term for so long, it's time to start thinking short term now.

James G, I did a google search and read an article about Katrina. Never have I heard any of that in the mainstream news, not that I'm a news buff or anything. Enlightening to say the least. One thing I noticed, and it didn't surprise me, was that they estimated that about 5% of aid offered was actually collected. Things like not wanting mad-cow meals, or military assistance from countries we'd just as soon not have military contact with, or whatever. It did say that Canada was probably the largest contributer and the only one contributing military assistance. Mostly because you're the only ones we weren't worried about getting nuked by probably! :D The list was long, so on that I stand corrected. Thanks for the headsup. And the tax dollars!

Btw, it also said most of the money never made it to relief efforts there. A huge percentage. Anyone surprised... The thing that really surprised me was an offer from Iran for 20M barrels of oil Wow, who'da guessed. Course, it was never sent, but, didn't say who's fault that was either.
 
4Mesh said:
David,
I'm not sure which side of the discussion you're on after reading that. Could be either or. Fyi, the USA's short term issues, ARE long term issues and have been for decades. After we've thought long term for so long, it's time to start thinking short term now.

James G, I did a google search and read an article about Katrina. Never have I heard any of that in the mainstream news, not that I'm a news buff or anything. Enlightening to say the least. One thing I noticed, and it didn't surprise me, was that they estimated that about 5% of aid offered was actually collected. Things like not wanting mad-cow meals, or military assistance from countries we'd just as soon not have military contact with, or whatever. It did say that Canada was probably the largest contributer and the only one contributing military assistance. Mostly because you're the only ones we weren't worried about getting nuked by probably! :D The list was long, so on that I stand corrected. Thanks for the headsup. And the tax dollars!

Btw, it also said most of the money never made it to relief efforts there. A huge percentage. Anyone surprised... The thing that really surprised me was an offer from Iran for 20M barrels of oil Wow, who'da guessed. Course, it was never sent, but, didn't say who's fault that was either.
Click to expand...

4Mesh, whoever you are,

my issue that damn few folks today take a lond view on ANY of the fixes for ANY of the problems we have in the world today. If it can't be dealt w/ in a 24 hour news cycle it is "unworthy". I'm sorry, there are NO problems we have that are that simple.And the rest of your post just adds to the evidence to support my view. If you pledged, why did you not pay?
 
4Mesh, I appreciate you taking the time to search the information for yourself. I to wonder what happens to the money, particularly the personal donations that are colleted for disaster relief here and abroard? Not wanting to sound like Canadians are more giving than any other country, that is not my intention. I am educated in regards to the very long list of sacrifices the American people and military have made to the world when in need. Unfortunately another part of the world needs us again!
 
I think we have all seen that the entire Haitian thing is a big joke. My God, you could have rebuilt the entire island from the ground up for what the World has shoveled into what amounts to a dump. It was that before the Quake, and that is what it will be in the future.

Baby Boc, Aristad, all the old roaches are crawling out of the woodwork. Why? They have heard that there are riches to be skimmed, and they are very good at that.

I cannot see that happenning in Japan........jackie
 
Al

I was listening to "Walton and Johnson" this morning, a hillarious FM talk radio duo, and they were wanting to see all of the Television coverage of the looters with shopping carts full of Flat Screen TV's, high dollar Sneakers, and lamenting how "george bush" hates them and caused all of this........jackie
 
The forces of nature are mind boggling. Japan regularly feels earthquakes... small ones weekly that do no damage... and then this happens.

The coast of Japan has been moved 8 feet and earth has shifted on it's axis.

It must be a terrifying country to live in.
 
What better way to become self-sufficient as Americans once again than to not have anyone to rely on. What happened in Japan is truly a tragedy but we've relied on them for certain industries for a while. Now is the time to get back to producing GDP and putting local folks back to work.
 
Nuculer Incidents:

Looks to me like not much was learned in the Three Mile Island Incident. Seems to be the cooling system in this situation that has failed again. Ever wonder why one of the many Nucuer Weapons in the world haven't inadvertently gone off? There is a compelling reason for it. Redundancy in safety systems. That lesson seems to have eluded Industry, for some reason. Perhaps it's a COST thing, I don't know but it is certainly the problem. Nuculer reactors should be made Fail Safe. It appears they are not.
 
Well, all these reactors were hit by a major quake and tsunami and nothing is gonna come of it other than some rebuilding. I'd say that was pretty failsafe. They are near the sea specifically so they can get water in if the cooling systems fail, along with having the prevailing wind carry away contamination. I'm not sure how failsafe it can get. Especially considering, there is no such thing as fail safe against nature.

On a side note, I see there's one US carrier there and another will show up in a couple days for them to plug in the extension cords :D
 
4Mesh said:
Well, all these reactors were hit by a major quake and tsunami and nothing is gonna come of it other than some rebuilding. I'd say that was pretty failsafe. They are near the sea specifically so they can get water in if the cooling systems fail, along with having the prevailing wind carry away contamination. I'm not sure how failsafe it can get. Especially considering, there is no such thing as fail safe against nature.

On a side note, I see there's one US carrier there and another will show up in a couple days for them to plug in the extension cords :D
Click to expand...

They are not near the sea to take water in in the event the cooling systems fail. Having worked on one in Zion IL. for 3 yrs., I can tell you ...the reason they are all built next to water is because they take in water on a constant basis to cool. There are intake tunnels, discharge tunnels, and cooling towers. If you have ever looked at the large cooling towers on a power plant, you will see steam rising. That is from hot water being recirculated from the reactor.
 
I believe the plants in discussion are in the 40yr old range,what upgrades who knows. But you really have to give credit to the Japanese people for their resilioncey(sp) and calmness. What other country could have such a disaster and you hear/see nothing about looting/ganges etc. In 70 years is it their culture or ours that's changed, makes you wonder hhhmmmmmmmm.
 
I for one think the UNIONS should pay for all the disasters, They took all my money for forty some years. And their slogan is Workers of the World UNIT! 4Mesh is right about the nuke plants, our three here in Oswego sit on top of a fault and there is no such thing as fari safe against mother nature. I understand perfectly about water cooling them down but what if the earth quake cuts off the water supply? God have mercy on us all.

Joe Salt
 
Fred J said:
Sea water must be de-salted & Deionized before it can be used for cooling in those plants.
Click to expand...
However it is not being now. It's being used straight from the ocean, and they hope, with no permanent damage being caused in the short term.
 
Fred J said:
Sea water must be de-salted & Deionized before it can be used for cooling in those plants.
Click to expand...

Not in the short term. Eventually, the minerals will deposit and interfere with heat transfer, but I'm sure the hope is they will have the fuel under control and switched back to FW by then.
 
Japanese skeptical that government is telling the truth about nuke plants
As many people here are well aware, the company, known as Tepco, has a history of not being forthcoming about nuclear safety issues, particularly those surrounding earthquake-related dangers. In 2003, all 17 of its nuclear plants were shut down temporarily after a scandal over falsified safety-inspection reports. It ran into trouble again in 2006, when it emerged that coolant-water data at two plants had been falsified in the 1980s.

Critics have long expressed deep concern about safety at many of Japan's nuclear facilities, some which date back to the 1970s and 1980s. Fukushima has long been on critics' radar, but so has the Hamaoka plant, just 100 miles southwest of Tokyo, which perches on an active fault line.

"I have been warning about Japan's possibility of a genpatsu shinsai — a nuclear disaster," said Katsuhiko Ishibashi, a seismologist and professor emeritus at Kobe University. He said Fukushima was only one of a number of nuclear complexes in seismically unsafe locations.
 
A fourth reactor has problems now... a fire has broken out...

This is a terrible situation. I feel very sorry for those involved. The pictures tonight on Anderson Cooper were horrific to watch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top