5 ms·
> Just somewhere where hardening the few existing buildings against small earthquakes etc won't be too expensive. So, expending twice on a bad idea ? Seriously
by Fiahil 5y ago
> Just somewhere where hardening the few existing buildings against small earthquakes etc won't be too expensive.
So, expending twice on a bad idea ? Seriously, what do you think will happen ?
And even it was technically possible, how do you insure a company like that ? Will the plant operator be responsible for the repairs and damages when they destabilize an entire region ?
- eru 5y ago> So, expending twice on a bad idea ? Seriously, what do you think will happen ? What do you mean? A few really minor earthquakes are all that was reported by the comment I was replying to. So I'd assume more really minor earthquakes. > And even it was technically possible, how do you insure a company like that ? The usual way of paying an insurance company? > Will the plant operator be responsible for the repairs and damages when they destabilize an entire region ? Depends on the jurisdiction. But sure, you can make the plant operator responsible for that and responsible for having gigantic insurance coverage. (Just look at whatever liability people who operate dams have today. A breakage of a major dam would also devastate entire regions. So whatever arrangements are good enough for that use case are probably good enough here.)
- Dylan16807 5y agoI don't think the "entire region"s involved would be big enough to make insurance difficult to implement.