[mistermann]

I'd like to see one in Japan before they reopen this reactor. Would you argue against that recommendation? A reactor is a billion dollar capital project, I think you can include a "tall" tower into the budget without making it uneconomical.

[Turing_Machine]

Dude, it was a 9.0 earthquake, so yes, I think requiring that the infrastructure be designed to withstand it would have been unwarranted.

The structure was clearly adequate to withstand any earthquake that could reasonably be expected over the life of the plant, and didn't do all that bad even when a drastic, catastrophic, unprecedentedly large earthquake struck. Once again: no one died.

What do you think is going to happen if a 9.0 earthquake hits near (say) the Three Gorges Dam in China, or the Grand Coulee Dam in the United States? I guarantee you that the number of fatalities is going to be a lot higher than zero.

[mistermann]

The logic being since you can't earthquake proof the 3 Gorges Dam (genuinely financially impractical), therefore don't put backup power on a high tower?

I understand the "who woulda thunk?" angle, except I bet someone did think about it and likely got overpowered in the discussion.