Home Politics & Debate
Come and join our Support Circle, every Tuesday, 8 - 9:30pm! Limited spaces available! Sign up here
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

Fukushima reactor explosion

2»

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Yes, but if you do it your way, you can get 50 into 1000 far more different ways than sequentially, but each one of those ways still carries a 1 in 20 chance of having the 1000 year event in it. The maths comes out the same in the end.

    Look at in another way. This might be easier to make sense of. Each year, there's a 1 in 1000 chance of event happening, if you're running a plant for 50 years, then you've got 50 years worth of that 1 in 1000 years. Which is 50 in 1000, which is 1 in 20.

    If theres a 1:1000 chance of something happening one year, then if you dont know when the event is going to happen, its going to be the same for the next year.

    Say you toss a coin and it lands on heads 99 times, you go to toss it again, that individual toss is still going to be 50% chance of going either way, regardless of what has happened before. As with the plant, a 1 in a 1,000 year occurrence still has a 1:1000 chance of occuring each year.

    So in 10,000 years ten events happen, but they all happen in the first 2,000 years, now looking over a short period thats a 1 in every 200 years, longer period its 1 in every 1,000. Depending on how you look at the data you can work out the potential permutations in whatever way you want. However on any given day/time the chance of something happening will remain the same.

    So many times ive seen "omg its the worst flooding in 70 years", i could make any rain storm the worst rain fall in x period if i wanted to. Looking at it another way, why are people so shocked when something rare happens if it was due an occurance anyway?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Because people are really bad at getting their heads around probability and risk.

    As all this is proving.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Understanding nuclear risk... do you *really* want that CT scan?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Forget the nuclear facilities, according to Fox News, not only has Sendai moved to the opposite end of the island but the real threat is a nightclub.
  • SkiveSkive No discipline. No morality. No respect. New ForestPosts: 15,194 Skive's The Limit
    Look at in another way. This might be easier to make sense of. Each year, there's a 1 in 1000 chance of event happening, if you're running a plant for 50 years, then you've got 50 years worth of that 1 in 1000 years. Which is 50 in 1000, which is 1 in 20.

    :confused: Dodgy maths.
    If the chance of something happening is 1 in 1000 then at any moment in time it is still 1 in 1000 no matter what has happened before.
    History has no effect on probability.

    And the design of this plant did allow for tsunami's, a 5m wall. Unfortunately the tsunami reached a hight of 6m, which is why generators were knocked out.
    Yesterday is history
    Tomorrow is a mystery
    But today is a gift
    That’s why it’s call the present
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    If ever you questioned the power of a tsunami, this picture should make a few hair stand on the back of your neck:

    http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/03/19/article-1367870-0B3ACB9B00000578-676_964x531.jpg
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Is Fukushima About To Blow?
    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article27778.htm
    Disturbing reading!




    And this from the New York Times:

    "A senior nuclear executive who insisted on anonymity but has broad contacts in Japan said that there was a long vertical crack running down the side of the reactor vessel itself. The crack runs down below the water level in the reactor and has been leaking fluids and gases, he said....

    “There is a definite, definite crack in the vessel — it’s up and down and it’s large,” he said. “The problem with cracks is they do not get smaller.” (Thanks to Washington's Blog)

    The media has switched into full "BP Oil Spill-mode", making every effort to minimize the disaster and to soothe the public with half-truths and disinformation. The goal is to conceal the scale of the catastrophe and protect the nuclear industry. It's another case of profits over people. Still, the truth is available for those who are willing to sift through the lies. Radiation has turned up in the Tokyo water supply, imports of milk, vegetable and fruit from four prefectures in the vicinity of Fukushima have been banned, and the evacuation zone around the plant has widened to an 18 mile radius.

    So, volatile radioactive elements are already being lofted into the jet stream and spread across continents. What's different here is that the quantities are much larger than they were at Chernobyl, thus, the dangers are far greater. According to the same group of scientists "the Fukushima plant has around 1760 tonnes of fresh and used nuclear fuel on site" (while) "the Chernobyl reactor had only 180 tonnes." The troubles at one nuclear facility now pose a direct threat to humans and other species everywhere. Is this what Obama meant when he called nuclear power, "Safe and green?"
Sign In or Register to comment.