Jump to content

Talk:Fukushima nuclear accident

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 165.228.225.195 (talk) at 00:47, 23 October 2012 (Misnomer!). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Energy portal news Template:Copied multi


very long article

This is not a long article but a short book. Even Tolstoi would have written something shorter. --Ciroa (talk) 06:49, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Error in File:Power Grid of Japan.svg

In the image of the 50Hz/60Hz power grid in the section "After the tsunami", the ledgend shows the green area as "Chubu" and the light blue area as "Kanto".

These need to be swapped: the green area is the Kanto region, and the light blue area is the Chubu region.

See any description of the regions of Japan for confirmation, e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_regions_of_Japan — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.183.81.120 (talk) 02:37, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Misnomer!

I think calling it a "nuclear disaster" is a huge misnomer something like incident would be far more appropriate. The disaster was caused by the tsunami, which destroyed many things besides the power plant. The only nuclear part was some radioactive material released and "2 workers taken to hospital with radiation burns". Histeria killed more people — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dqeswn (talkcontribs) 12:05, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think your reasoning is seriously flawed, and "some radioactive material released" does not describe the severity of the situation (either initial or ongoing). Having said that, I agree that titling the article with "disaster" is perhaps not appropriate - not because the situation is not a disaster, but simply because it's such an emotive term.

Forgot Canada

" Increased anti-nuclear sentiment has been evident in India, Italy, Germany, Spain, Switzerland, Taiwan, and the United States." they should add Canada - Thomas Lavoie — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.48.18.170 (talk) 23:40, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The grid

While it is good to see the loss of connection to the power grid is mentioned so early in the article, all the focus on the various plant failures hides the fact that down the coast, the Fukushima 2 units, which did not lose a connection to the grid, were shut down without incident. Where, why, and how these many connections (four sets of towers, and twice as many circuits) were useless has been overlooked. This is a factor that I suspect that some work has been done on, but I have not run across it. Anyone else? ( Martin | talkcontribs 20:10, 21 September 2012 (UTC))[reply]