[Bigiron]

Canada to help South-east Asia go nuclear with new Singapore-based working group | The Straits Times
https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/c...king-group

[Levin]

Hopefully not in Indonesia please. Or Philippines. One is earthquake-prone and the other typhoon-prone.

While nuclear plants are designed to withstand earthquakes and tsunamis, sometimes the design just did not consider future "impossible" events at the point of design (Fukushima). Biggest issue is whether future governments will take action once they discovered the original design is inadequate. 

Fukushima Daiichi and Daini nuclear power plants were affected by a major tsunami in March 2011. The design basis tsunami height was 5.7 m for Daiichi and 5.2 m for Daini, though the Daiichi plant was built about 10 metres above sea level and Daini 13 metres above. Tsunami heights coming ashore were more than 14 metres for both plants, and the Daiichi turbine halls were under some 5 metres of seawater until levels subsided. The maximum amplitude of this tsunami was 23 metres at point of origin, about 160 km from Fukushima. In the last century there have been eight tsunamis in the region with maximum amplitudes at origin above 10 metres (some much more), these having arisen from earthquakes of magnitude 7.7 to 8.4, on average one every 12 years. Those in 1983 and in 1993 were the most recent affecting Japan, with maximum heights at origin of 14.5 metres and 31 metres respectively, both induced by magnitude 7.7 earthquakes.

The tsunami countermeasures taken when Fukushima Daiichi was designed and sited in the 1960s were considered acceptable in relation to the scientific knowledge then, with low recorded run-up heights for that particular coastline. But some 18 years before the 2011 disaster, new scientific knowledge had emerged about the likelihood of a large earthquake and resulting major tsunami of some 15.7 metres at the Daiichi site. However, this had not yet led to any major action by either the plant operator, Tepco, or government regulators, notably the Nuclear & Industrial Safety Agency (NISA). Discussion was ongoing, but action minimal. The tsunami countermeasures could also have been reviewed in accordance with IAEA guidelines which required taking into account high tsunami levels, but NISA continued to allow the Fukushima plant to operate without sufficient countermeasures such as moving the backup generators up the hill, sealing the lower part of the buildings, and having some backup for seawater pumps, despite clear warnings.

https://world-nuclear.org/information-li...arthquakes

[WhatDoYouThink!]

In case of disasters will the canada govt offer help? Sg is too small, rich ppl could take the first flights out, poor ermaos how?