Search

pece_annotation_1474904992

seanw146
Annotation of
In response to

1) I followed up on the old safety features of the World Trade Center. Sprinklers were the only feature that stood out from a fire safety video by the New York and New Jersey Port Authority for the World Trade Center (made 1996). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBM9-y8gfHo. However the fire was much too large for them to put out, and may have even made it worse because water, when in contact with molten aluminum explodes.

 

2) Next I looked into why and how the World Trade Center (WTC) collapse happened. The WTC did not have concrete core or outer. Most high-rise buildings have one or the other as concrete is not subject to fire. The WTC steel trusses and columns were fireproofed with spray foam which fell off the building on impact with the airplane. The crash through the building resulted in flammable debris getting pushed to the far walls and corners, the most vulnerable location, and fatally weakening the WTC’s steel core. NIST report never stated that the fire melted the steel beams, steel melts at 2750 degrees F, but looses half its strength at 1100 F. Parts of the WTC fires reached 1800 F on that day. With the weakening, the trusses began to sag, bowing inward causing all of the weight to rest on the perimeter columns which could not bear the load and eventually snapped. After the first floor fell, the “pan-caking” effect resulted in each floor collapsing the one beneath it.

 

3) Lastly I looked at the new disaster prevention features of One World Trade Center. The key features which the Twin Towers were lacking are: a concrete core with stairwells located in center, larger than required staircases, and a separate first responder stairwell. Many experts believe if the WTC had a concrete core, they would not have fallen. 

pece_annotation_1476076757

seanw146
Annotation of
In response to

1) I looked into how other countries that faced significant disaster dealt with their displaced populations. (http://fukushimaontheglobe.com/the-earthquake-and-the-nuclear-accident/situation-of-the-evacuees)

2) Next, I researched the American Psychological Association’s views on mental health and disasters. (http://www.apa.org/topics/disasters/)

3) Lastly, I looked into “price gouging” during and after natural disasters and both sides of the argument. Pros: (http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/peter-mccaffrey/5-reasons-price-gouging-is-okay_b_3487621.html) and cons: (https://www.uvm.edu/~vlrs/doc/pricegou.html)

pece_annotation_1477282435

seanw146
Annotation of
In response to

The main focus of the article is mental health issues resulting in the aftermath of a major disaster. Mental health is rarely discussed in these types of environments but persists long after the dust has settled and the houses rebuilt. This article seeks to explore the current state of mental health care in disaster environments.

pece_annotation_1478469226

seanw146
Annotation of
In response to

The points I followed up on to get a better understanding of disaster aftermaths, especially ones involving nuclear technology were: 1) Fukushima 2) Three Mile Island and 3) more research into the Chernobyl incident through other articles.

pece_annotation_1472749646

seanw146
Annotation of
In response to

How did it happen (complete failure of cooling and reactors exploding)?

                Although the earthquakes killed workers and wreaked havoc on the region, Japans’ nuclear plants were not compromised by the quakes. It was only the tsunami that caused Fukushima Daiichi 1, 2, & 3’s power and backup power to fail, allowing the meltdown to take place. (world-nuclearworld-nuclear.org)

Why was radioactive water released (purposely) into the ocean as stated in the article?

                I found that although radioactive water was never “purposely” released into the ocean, it was known that it would likely end up there due to the failed ocean barrier wall. The water came from the necessity of cooling the overheated plants to prevent further meltdown and further contamination. The good news is that by 2012 the water within the Fukushima area was considered non-toxic to humans and aquatic species that live there. However, less is known about the effects on the ocean floor, where the radioactive matter is collecting in the sediment. (cnn.com)

What (if anything) has been done to further an international response team/plan for nuclear emergencies?

While my research turned up little results for international response development, countries have been developing their own response teams. China will have a national nuclear response team by the end of 2018 which will be made up of over 300 individuals and will meet the requirements for an international response team. This makes sense since China has more nuclear power plants than any other country in the world and expects to double its nuclear output over the next few decades. (firedirect.net) 

pece_annotation_1479098674

seanw146
Annotation of
In response to

Dr. Byron Good is a professor of Medical Anthropology at Harvard University. “Dr. Good’s present work focuses on research and mental health services development in Asian societies, particularly Indonesia. He has been a frequent visiting professor in the Faculty of Medicine, Gadjah Mada University, in Jogyakarta, Indonesia. He has conducted research with colleagues there on the early phases of psychotic illness for more than 10 years, and is co-director of the International Pilot Study of the Onset of Psychosis (IPSOS)” (Harvard bio).