Find solution
Are there any natural or man made threats to the Pantheon in Rome?

Was it man-made or a natural disaster?

  • some say that the fukushima daiichi nuclear disaster man made and some say natural. both the claims can be debated.it can be said to be a natural disaster as it took place because ...show more

  • Answer:

    Man-made, obviously. Whoever says it was a "natural disaster" is trying to unload responsiblities. All nuclear plants are "accidents waiting to happen". All it takes is for the cooling water pumps to stop - for whatever reason - to start a meltdown. Since a man-made process - keeping cooling water pumps running - is not as reliable as a natural one, ie., radioactivity, it is a matter of time before this occurs. This is called a non fail-safe system, ie, one which will self destruct in the right conditions. In addtion, in the particular case of Fukushima, there were many recorded unsafe situations. TEPCO, the operator had been warned by the IAEA, but they failed to act upon them. Now, they apologize on national TV! Boy, the responsible managers should go into the reactor to cool it down, instead of sending others to fix their blunders. .

CSIFRC6VJRMLYBWDXJDCMWFMXQ at Yahoo! Answers Visit the source

Was this solution helpful to you?

Other answers

It was a natural disaster. If there was no earthquake and tsunami, none of this would have happened. That said, it was a preventable disaster because if the designers of the plant had properly accounted for the impacts of an earthquake and tsunami it wouldn't have caused the radiation problems.

Jason

Natural. Then it was exacerbated by the piss-poor planning of the engineers and management on site who put in the emergency power systems in a vulnerable location. If they'd properly analyzed and performed bona fide risk assessments, they would have realized that if the main power fails and the emergency power generators are flooded, they would be in deep doo doo.

thegubmint

I think it was both mad-made and natural because it was Japan's use of fossil fuels that caused the disaster, but it was the natural disaster that distroyed the nuclear power plant. So both.

Muna

Men knew that an earthquake can destroy the nuclear reactor and bring to the present condition. Even though they knew they didn't take any precautions. What do u say about this?

bibash

It's both. If the design had been better, the reactors wouldn't have failed.

archolman

it is nature strike baby u all think too much what happen if earthquake comes and u die deep under collapsed building think than it is nature or man

Anurag C

Im not sure what that is exactly..

Related Q & A:

Just Added Q & A:

Find solution

For every problem there is a solution! Proved by Solucija.

  • Got an issue and looking for advice?

  • Ask Solucija to search every corner of the Web for help.

  • Get workable solutions and helpful tips in a moment.

Just ask Solucija about an issue you face and immediately get a list of ready solutions, answers and tips from other Internet users. We always provide the most suitable and complete answer to your question at the top, along with a few good alternatives below.