Newsgroup sci.geo.earthquakes 6115

Directory

Chris McKeown wrote:
> Radioactive waste disposal at Sellafield UK:
> site-selection, geological and engineering problems
[...]
> For the first time, the nuclear waste disposal industry in Britain has
> been challenged on its scientific concepts, and detailed results.  A
[...]
> underground laboratory.  These Experts were acting on behalf of the
> Objectors:-  Cumbria County Council, Greenpeace Ltd, and Friends of the
> Earth Ltd.
I'm interested, but turned off by the overtly
political tone.  Who are the experts involved?
Why is so much emphasis placed on the involvement
of barristers?  Can we get a more detailed and
technical abstract?
Surely a book of this magnitude must have an
executive summary.  It would be beneficial to
have that summary posted on the web, along with
some compelling calculations and supporting
references.  A web site with illustrations would
help.

We have completely redesigned and updated our web pages to provide you
with a comprehensive and up-to-date list of links to some of the best
Earth-Science resources on the Internet. Each link is commented and
rated on content and presentation.
If you know of any good sites that are not present in our list, please
tell us about them. You will find a form to submit new URL's at our
site or you can send your suggestions by E-mail.
You will find our web page at the following address:
    http://www.unige.ch/sciences/terre/esr/
We welcome your feedback!
Eric G.V. Fookes =====================================================
Institute of Earth Sciences
University of Geneva                    E-mail: 
Switzerland
================ http://www.unige.ch/sciences/terre/ =================

Please does anybody have data for earthquakes in Aegean area for the
years 1550-1580 A.C ?
Contact with : pica@compulink.gr

It's not quite that simple.  From what I saw in the LA Times, he loses
only if the insured damage exceeds something like $7.5 BILLION; even
then he only has to cover the claims in excess of that amount.  Viewed
just from the point of view of expected return, you could hardly find a
better investment; you just have to have a big enough bankroll to cover
the unlikely case that damage of that amount will occur during that time
frame.  If it doesn't, he pockets the $590 million; if it does, he gets
nothing and has to cover up to $1.5 billion (I believe) of excess
claims.
	/Al Cooperband
	 ... unattributed opinions are my own
On Tue, 19 Nov 1996, Harold Asmis wrote:
> Another story off the wire service, but I'll paraphrase (for legal
> purposes).
>
> Warren Buffet sinks $1.5 billion into a bet that the 'big one' is at
> least four years away.  He's putting it in the new earthquake bonds
> issued by the California Earthquake Authority.
>
> He will reap a $590 million dollar profit if there are no earthquakes,
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> but will lose a bundle if there are.
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>
>