Jump to content

Turks To Go Nuclear....


THOTH

Recommended Posts

Good thinking on their part that it is being built to withstand quakes up to 6.5....wasn't the last one there about a 6.8? Don't remember...but heck yeah...good thinking eh? ...and a plutonium plant too...from the look of it... ...and more to come along the Black Sea....just upwind from Armenia...

 

http://www.power-technology.com/project_pr...p?ProjectID=136

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, you are right, I just browsed the article. But one would have expected a comment like "the last one being 6.8" to come along with the relevant geographic information. That plant and environmentalists (including Greenpeace) running around it happen to be a decade-long story, nearly. My only expectations regarding such a plant at this point are reading plenty of dumb Laz jokes centred around the plant. I was half-serious in my "stood corrected" comment - earthquakes happen just about everywhere, but do you heed them?

Certain conclusions about the "benefits" of nuclear plants notwithstanding, certainly even corrupt and incompetent Turkish establishment can't be that lame, with today's technology, can they? They've got one almost on their border, across in Armenia, to fear, and it's not even 180 km from a fault line, it is almost smack on it from anything I've read so far, no kilometer quotes, so I take it as "0" or dangerously close. (How come Greenpeace aren't there - can't take a boat and get a sun tan on land, can they? Never mind all the people living ten kilometers within range of the Metsamor plant.) It is the nuclear nature that is frightening, but if you look up literature about any controversial environmental/social issue like this, you are going to have arguments, counter-arguments, counter-counter-arguments, counter-...-counter-arguments, etc., not many of them about whether it is a time bomb or not. Certainly those who are going to run it ought to have enough savvy to decide whether taking 6.5 for 6.2 should be safe, and it should be more than just calculating how many times stronger one is from the other. Difference of one integer on the Richter scale makes it ten. Then of course there are all the probability calculations for the worst-case scenario (i.e., destructive earthquake), but if I know about these certainly others actually know how to make them. What's left is whether you trust the decision-makers or not. If they are after making contractors rich just like Bush Baby is after making his buddies in the oil industry rich (yes, I see it now, it is not about oil for the U.S., it is about oil for his buddies), then everyone is in deep crap.

 

At some point I would like to do proper research and read up on what world practice is, what the standards are, etc., rather than rely on this "he said, she said" about this Akkuyu and Metsamor. Not that it makes a difference or is going to.

If it were my decision to make, I'd not allow it, but then I'd ban all machines and we'd go back to horse-back riding (I don't even want the wheel!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course it mentions such in the article. Thought you might have been more interested to perhaps have bothered to read it...oh welll...

Well, if you had bothered to read the article then you also would have realised that it mentioned it, and you would not have made your "those earthquakes were way to the west" comment!

 

The strength of any potentual earthquake is not the only important aspect - the geology of the region is often what does the damage. The Adana earthquake killed many people and destroyed many buildings because Adana is built upon a sandy plain that starts to "wobble" for a long time during any earthquake. If Adana had been built on a solid site, i.e. on bedrock, then the damage would have been much less. The geology of the proposed site at Akkuya will thus be important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh! I just realised having forgotten to answer this thread and have been reminded after watching the Parlement debate.

 

The Nuclear project is a joke, each time there is a debate on the chamber recognising the genocide the Turks bring this thing and start out negociating with Canada to bough our reactors, and everytime we take those motions out, Turkey finally never keep its words... and now the same story come back, and now they add up so-called train wagons they will allegedly buy from us. Cheap tricks. :angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...
  • 4 weeks later...
Good thinking on their part that it is being built to withstand quakes up to 6.5....wasn't the last one there about a 6.8? Don't remember...but heck yeah...good thinking eh? ...and a plutonium plant too...from the look of it... ...and more to come along the Black Sea....just upwind from Armenia...

 

http://www.power-technology.com/project_pr...p?ProjectID=136

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

This is very bad for Armenia :(

First Turks will have access and thus ability to create nuclear weapons in the future. Location of the plants will destroy Armenia 100% in case of an accident. Armenia will depopulate so fast that there wont be anyone left to turn the lights off in Zvartnots airport. Genocide recognition would be much harder since Turks are investing in western Armenia this means they are starting to think of the land as theirs. Its widely known that eastern turkey is alot more developed then west. This is partly due to kurds and mostly to Armenians. If they are going to give some land back why develop it?

 

My 2 Cents

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this means they are starting to think of the land as theirs.  Its widely known that eastern turkey is alot more developed then west.  This is partly due to kurds and mostly to Armenians.  If they are going to give some land back why develop it?

 

My 2 Cents

style_images/master/snapback.png

Where in tarnation do you get your info from?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where in tarnation do you get your info from?

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

 

Bro its widely known fact why do u think 90% of investment and development is on the coast ..... what do u think armos are doing by trying to settle people and building infrastructure in Karabak?? Why is it that Azeris take the settlement and development of lands to UN?? when it comes to giving back you have some rights over that land ... its basic international law... you will need to be reimbursed for all the investments which will take many years to settle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since when is it "common knowledge" that the Turkish government has only recently realised it has land to the east, which happens to be "a lot more developed" in your words when most of the investment is in the west? And since when would a bunch of Kurds amount to anything? :rolleyes:

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

lol I stand corrected i think i mixed up east west ... ur absolutely right no one gives a shit about kurds especially not turks. Building Nuke plant there still very bad for armo interests single meltdown means end to armenia and armenians as we know it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...