12 ms·
A lot of folks are probably wondering "why the heck would they put a nuclear power plant there?". If you look at the distribution of Japan's nuclear power plan
by jofer 13y ago
A lot of folks are probably wondering "why the heck would they put a nuclear power plant there?".
If you look at the distribution of Japan's nuclear power plants, they actually tried to put them in the safest areas: http://www.oecd-nea.org/press/2011/NEWS-02.html http://www.oecd-nea.org/press/2011/NEWS-02.html
Where there are nuclear power plants along Japan's eastern coast (close to the subduction zones), they're mostly in the north.
Japan has two subduction zones. The Japan Trench in the north, where the Pacific plate subducts, and the Nankai Trough in the south where the Philippine Sea Plate subducts.
These two subduction zones are very different. They're on opposite ends of the spectrum in terms of earthquake behavior.
Before the Tohoku earthquake in 2011, we had never observed a magnitude 9 earthquake on a subduction zone like the Japan Trench in the north of Japan. (The Japan Trench usually has frequent magnitude 7's. Damaging but not devestating.) All of the previous magnitude 9's were on subduction zones similar to the Nankai Trough in southern Japan.
Furthermore, southern Japan has a 1300 year written historical record of large earthquakes and tsunamis occuring every ~200 years (they're not regular, but that's another story). The last two were in 1944 and 1946. In contrast, northern Japan has just as long of a record, but no records of very large earthquakes and tsunamis. (There's some sedimentological evidence of a very large tsunami in northern Japan ~2000 years ago, but prior to this, we assumed that it must have originated somewhere else.)
Therefore, southern Japan has the highest hazard for large tsunamis, and northern Japan has a much lower risk. Northern Japan's risk is now higher than we thought it was, but southern Japan is still more likely to have the next big tsunami.
Notice that there are very few nuclear power plans on the east coast of southern Japan. Instead they're on the west coast, away from the main tsunami hazard. That's why.
At any rate, the Tohoku earthquake really turned what we thought we know about very, very large earthquakes on its head.
- afterburner 13y agoFolks might be wondering that, but they might be wondering with a different emphasis: "why the heck would they put a nuclear power plant there?" Not sure what their power options were at the time it was built though.
- timtadh 13y agoJapan has very few natural energy resources which is the main reason they embraced nuclear power in a big way. Otherwise, they would have to import many more tons of hydrocarbons.
- legitsource 13y agoI would rather live next door to a nuclear plant in an earthquake and tsunami that to live next door to a coal plant during the same catastrophe. The ash is more radioactive than most nuclear waste is and there's a whole lot more of it to contain.
- pessimizer 13y ago>The ash is more radioactive than most nuclear waste is and there's a whole lot more of it to contain. The question is if it's safer to be next to a nuclear meltdown or a burning coal plant, not whether portions of the waste of both plants during normal operations are more or less radioactive than each other.
- legitsource 13y agoIt's not a burning coal plant that's the problem. A tsunami would spread the ash from the coal plant everywhere. Heavy metals from the ash would be a lot more hazardous in the short term than the radiation unless you were standing on top of the reactor.
- timr 13y ago"Japan has very few natural energy resources" Except that the place is covered in geothermal hotspots. I don't know if any are sufficiently large to reduce the need for nuclear, but Japan is a country where the greatest natural energy resource appears (to an outsider) to be dedicated to providing really nice baths.
- jofer 13y ago
- gtani 13y agoThat's a great summary. I remember having the first WTF of my life at around age 4 or 5, sitting in the ofuro in Tokyo (giant wooden bathtub) when a very minor temblor hit. I used to keep up with research in the area, mostly from a friend who did time at the Lamont-Doherty lab in upstate New York. For people who like to dig into academic papers, some slightly watered down for general consumption but most not, their website is great http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/research/topics/earthquakes http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/research/topics/earthquakes