blackaeronaut Wrote:Don't be too sure. IIRC, standard protocol is that the states have to request help from FEMA first. From there, it should take 72 hours for FEMA to respond. And if the request process gets fouled up for whatever reason you care to name, the response time gets longer. That's why when you're planning for an emergency, plan for at least 3 days of emergency supplies. Though I think 5-7 days is more appropriate.dark seraph Wrote:Also Berk is right, some of the other stuff thats happend is a bigger worry than the reactors, like that city that vanished off the map.When a city vanishes off the map, there isn't much you can do except to look for survivors. The city is already gone and if what's been said about Japan sinking is true, then there's absolutely nothing that can be done to fix that anytime soon.
Right now there are reactors that are threatening to blow their stacks - one has even partially melted down. This is not an issue that goes away if you ignore it (in fact, it only gets worse if you do). The worst can be mitigated, or even outright avoided, but only if you start throwing the right sort of resources at the issue. Portable industrial generators or pumps would have done wonders after the first eight hours. The instant the word got out that the cooling system failed, someone, anyone, should have done something. I know that there are companies in Japan that lease these things out - that would have been a huge boon to their advertising campaign: "The generator that saved Fukushima can be yours!"
Honestly, there is something wrong here. Had something similar happened off the coast of California you can bet that FEMA would be all over it like flies on shit. But apparently, despite all the preparedness and drills they have, they are lacking in something that resembles FEMA.
Japan is doing as well or even better right now than say Haiti (or us) to the disaster response.
@ Berk: TMI was bad enough. It's a 5 on the 7 nuclear incident scale that the IAEC uses. Reactor fuel partially melted but contained. On one reactor .Chernobyl was a 7. Release of radioactive materials into the environment. I don't envy these guys on the ground. You're trying to contain a potential runaway reaction in one reactor the aftermath of a major earthquake, trying to move men and materials over a badly damaged transportation infrastructure and with major continuing aftershocks of at least 6.4 that has the potential of knocking the safety systems of the other 2 reactors. Which just happened yesterday. And you're trying to contain three reactors now. Now you're looking a 3 TMI incidents....if you're fortunate. Which is why I broke out the worry beads yesterday. And the reason why I cracked that joke about the engineer and the stewardess. Sometimes, ignorance is bliss.
__________________
Into terror!, Into valour!
Charge ahead! No! Never turn
Yes, it's into the fire we fly
And the devil will burn!
- Scarlett Pimpernell