Q-C Posted March 24, 2015 #1 Share Posted March 24, 2015 4 stories tall 400km long cost of 6.8 billion (U.S.) http://rt.com/news/243045-japan-sea-wall-critics/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+DieChecker Posted March 25, 2015 #2 Share Posted March 25, 2015 I kind of like the "Forest Wall" idea. It will look a lot better then a four story concrete wall. Japan will appear to be ready for the giant Kaiju to rise from the depths. Shades of Pacific Rim.... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
back to earth Posted March 25, 2015 #3 Share Posted March 25, 2015 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raptor Witness Posted March 25, 2015 #4 Share Posted March 25, 2015 (edited) They will need to withstand 50' waves. It can't hurt, but it would be cheaper to self insure, investing the money. Then if something bigger comes, and it will, you'll have the funds to rebuild. Assume that the iceberg was made for the Titanic. Edited March 25, 2015 by Raptor Witness 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucas Cooper Merrin Posted March 25, 2015 #5 Share Posted March 25, 2015 That money isnt for a wall! They are building a Jaeger 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cionaodh Posted March 25, 2015 #6 Share Posted March 25, 2015 a wall in japan ha! next earthquake will bring it down before its even completed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atuke Posted March 25, 2015 #7 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Dumb dumb dumb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ancient astronaut Posted March 25, 2015 #8 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Japan is calling it the Kaiju stay away fence. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aquatus1 Posted March 26, 2015 #9 Share Posted March 26, 2015 A practical solution, that can be feasibly and relatively quickly implemented. However, it simply isn't realistic. Taking into consideration that it was a knee-jerk proposal made shortly after the actual disaster, when the people when people were demanding action, it might have seemed like a good idea, but now that we have had time to cool down, it bears reconsideration. For starters, it would be a massive eyesore. No matter how well it would be decorated (and no Japanese neighborhood is going to allow a concrete monstrosity like that stand around naked for long), the fact remains that it would still be a man-made wall standing between them and the ocean, and there is inherently something oppressive about that to a culture which is so bound to the sea. Second, it defeats the purpose of its own construction. Presumably, it is to protect existing neighborhoods. The amount of money, however, as well as the resultant reduction in property values of the neighborhood it shelters, is going to damage the neighborhood every bit as effectively. The end result, people moving out of the area into higher ground, would occur regardless. Granted, this is still a better way to accomplish that than simply requesting or mandating them to do so, but it still leaves you with a bill to pay and an eyesore to deal with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moon tide Posted March 26, 2015 #10 Share Posted March 26, 2015 Just start moving to higher ground and be done with it. A giant wall . Could you be more primitive. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atuke Posted March 26, 2015 #11 Share Posted March 26, 2015 This has to be a joke, especially coming from very bright people like the Japanese. They should know more than anybody, in the end Mother Nature always wins. This idea is a complete waste of resources...its a 19th century type idea. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aquatus1 Posted March 26, 2015 #12 Share Posted March 26, 2015 Yeah! Holland has proven that it is impossible to fight the ocean for land! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Br Cornelius Posted March 26, 2015 #13 Share Posted March 26, 2015 (edited) Just start moving to higher ground and be done with it. A giant wall . Could you be more primitive. Not possible in one of the most densely population areas on the planet. Much of Japan is uninhabitable mountain and that leaves the coastal plains. If a wall was feasible (which I am not certain it is) then an investment of 7billion dollars seems like a very good use of resources considering the cost of clearing up after a tsunami. Br Cornelius Edited March 26, 2015 by Br Cornelius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moon tide Posted March 26, 2015 #14 Share Posted March 26, 2015 Not possible in one of the most densely population areas on the planet. Much of Japan is uninhabitable mountain and that leaves the coastal plains. If a wall was feasible (which I am not certain it is) then an investment of 7billion dollars seems like a very good use of resources considering the cost of clearing up after a tsunami. Br Cornelius No, there are plenty of sites available at higher ground. The biggest problems for potentially affected residents are how to reach a consensus on relocation and also resolving land entitlement issues. But moving to higher ground is very possible. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jarjarbinks Posted March 26, 2015 #15 Share Posted March 26, 2015 probably a better idea to invest in a CERN like accelarator to produce a Flash dude to run along to coast like to stop the tsunami Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myles Posted March 26, 2015 #16 Share Posted March 26, 2015 I hope they do it. It would be pretty cool to see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hartmut Posted March 26, 2015 #17 Share Posted March 26, 2015 Gee, is there no limit to stupidity. Besides being giant eyesore and the huge expenses, it would be much better to tackle climate change to stop the ever increasing natural forces of nature which have gone haywire because of our equally stupid polluting the planet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug1029 Posted March 26, 2015 #18 Share Posted March 26, 2015 They will need to withstand 50' waves. They had walls at Fukushima supposed to withstand 10-meter waves. In the earthquake, the land surface dropped, leaving them with walls only a meter or so above sea level. I think they had better plan on 25-meter walls. Doug 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aquatus1 Posted March 26, 2015 #19 Share Posted March 26, 2015 They had walls at Fukushima supposed to withstand 10-meter waves. In the earthquake, the land surface dropped, leaving them with walls only a meter or so above sea level. I think they had better plan on 25-meter walls. Doug FYI, the walls at Fukushima Daichi were only 19 feet high, and the land level only dropped from 1 to 3 feet, depending. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trancelikestate Posted March 26, 2015 #20 Share Posted March 26, 2015 how about putting that money into researching more tsunami proofed buildings and infrastructure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aquatus1 Posted March 26, 2015 #21 Share Posted March 26, 2015 Because no one who lives in tsunami areas could afford to live in one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aquatus1 Posted March 26, 2015 #22 Share Posted March 26, 2015 Gee, is there no limit to stupidity. Besides being giant eyesore and the huge expenses, it would be much better to tackle climate change to stop the ever increasing natural forces of nature which have gone haywire because of our equally stupid polluting the planet. You think climate change caused the tsunami? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myles Posted March 26, 2015 #23 Share Posted March 26, 2015 The Japanese have been very good engineers, so I have no reason to think this wall would be unsuccessful. It would be interesting to see what types of things would be incorporated into the wall. Wave powered generators would be one I could see. Seems like, in theory at this time, it is a good idea. They are investigating ways to protect their people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucas Cooper Merrin Posted March 26, 2015 #24 Share Posted March 26, 2015 (edited) i read an article that it is theoretically possible to drop a nuke/several nukes infront of a tsunami, basically counteracting one energy with another! I suppose the kink in that chain would be the devastation to marine life, Edited March 26, 2015 by Father Merrin 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Greenman Posted March 26, 2015 #25 Share Posted March 26, 2015 I thoughts too, Father M, it is an ecological disaster in the making. Their ancestors left warnings not to build to close to the coast. Better to listen them, I think and move off the coast. But then I live in coastal Florida, so I am also in a danger zone. The sentence on the tablet is as follows :The homes on higher places will guarantee the comforts of the descendants, Remind the horror of the tsunamis, do not build homes below this point. We suffered tsunamis in 1896 and also in 1933, only 2 villagers in the former disaster and 4 in the latter survived. Keep on your guard even years pass by. http://www.megalithic.co.uk/article.php?sid=34248 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now