General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsCan anyone explain to me why there isn't a massive attempt underway to contain Fukushima...
like there was for Chernobyl?
hollysmom
(5,946 posts)containing water is much harder than containing land.
tk2kewl
(18,133 posts)you can excavate to build seawalls and groundwater containment walls
hollysmom
(5,946 posts)what suicide team do you send. Many of the Russians who volunteered to flyover died soon afterwards, this is much worse than a fly over. You need someone in it for long periods of time. I suppose they can fake fix it loke BP tried in the gulf, with half a heart.
We are not only talking surface water, but the aquifer underneath.
Yes, it would be good if they tried something, but if they are looking to Tepco, they did not do enough to contain it from the start - they thought they could lie it away - what can you expect. People in Japan are still not even dealing with the consequences, there is a lot of denial about it.
I just stopped buying any pacific fish.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)It's really that easy.
Also we've evolved in such a fashsion that certain problems, especially long term problems are almost impossible to look at.
Eddie Haskell
(1,628 posts)I guess it's cheaper to raise allowable radiation limits and let the sea disperse the radiation.
flamingdem
(39,319 posts)because from what I remember Tepco spurned offers of help. Also, the management was trying to limit information due to lawsuits
longship
(40,416 posts)I have not kept up with this issue at Fukushima, but I suspect radiation levels are high enough that working in the shadows of the reactors may be extremely hazardous to ones health regardless of protective clothing, etc.
Just spitballing here. But that's something to consider.
Eddie Haskell
(1,628 posts)Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)Right wing, CT, and anti-Semitic...