4 ms·
I am unsure about Fukushima being a buggy design. To me it has sounded more like mismanagement and negligence than anything else. Case in point - the plant dis
by bostik 9y ago
I am unsure about Fukushima being a buggy design. To me it has sounded more like mismanagement and negligence than anything else.
Case in point - the plant disaster happened because the tsunami was higher than what the sea walls had been designed for. From what I have learned, Japan has plenty of evidence that magnitude-9 earthquakes and the following tsunamis have happened in the past. The protections in Fukushima (and Daichii) were designed against less.
To fail under expected peak load is bad engineering. To ignore evidence and go with insufficient safety margins is something worse.
- skookumchuck 9y agoThere were numerous design errors that enabled the flooding to destroy the plant. For example, venting the hydrogen gas into an enclosed area, which resulted in an inevitable explosion. There's plenty more, if you read a step-by-step account of the disaster. Engineers iterate their designs based on past failures just like software engineers do. It's just that the life cycle is so much shorter for software, the iterations come thick and fast.
- bostik 9y agoThank you, those details definitely make a case of consistently bad engineering.