len, please stop talking out of your ass.
please get your head out of the sand.
now, can we get back to more polite
discussion without the off-point verbal pyrotechnics?
this is neither the largest earthquake
(yes, largest near Japan, measured with seismographs),
nor the largest tsunami in Japan's history.
domino effect? not an unknown one.
when there is a large earthquake in many places, a tsunami results.
In the Japan Trench, it hits Japan shortly thereafter.
this appears to have been known and taken into account with these
reactors. it's not designing for the maximum possible
domino effect that is the problem.
it's designing for the 'most likely' disaster instead of the
maximum possible that killed those 180+ workers.
how many more deaths happen will depend on just how much
worse this disaster gets.
(100,000s of cancer deaths over the years are likely.)
as will how much land is unuseable for a century+.
how long radioactive fish are pulled out of the sea.
how long until people can come back inside the evacuation zone.
reactors should not be built, if they can't survive the maximum possible
natural disaster, and non-nuclear terrorism.
the costs are much too high.
oh, the maximum possible earthquakes and tsunamis
can be deduced from geologic principles, as well as
careful analysis of of eyewitness reports from Feudal Japan.
the differences can and have been accounted for in those reports.
'unknown' domino effects can be designed for.
just list the maximum possible kind of each disaster for a locale,
and see what happens if two, three, four of them all happen,
in all orders,
while a reactor is operating, or down/broken by the first one.
(what happens if a nuclear bomb goes off too close to a nuclear
reactor, just can't be stopped by any design we can afford to build.)