Ender Wiggin
Junior Member
No it wouldn't, because Japan's on tunnel projects as mentioned originally weren't effected overly much by its own earthquakes.
How to Grab Taiwan in 7 hours
- Thread starter Fairthought
- Start date
MIGleader
Banned Idiot
the soil in the english channel is far from stable. it tends to slide the instant u try to move it. not to mention the weather over the english channel can get much nastier than taiwan strait. taiwan is relatively stable compared with japan, and a small quake in the stright does not mean the entire area will be affected.
heres the jist: taiwan lies on the meeting point of the coastal plate and phillipine sea plate.most of the movement is actually on land, and the taiwanese island would most likely be affected the most by a minor quake. the strait would remain relatively calm
zergling, where u live doesnt affect how techtonically active taiwan is. ive lived in areas much opposite to taiwan, and there were never any disturbances. the primary plate movement is under taiwan itself, not the seas around it.
heres the jist: taiwan lies on the meeting point of the coastal plate and phillipine sea plate.most of the movement is actually on land, and the taiwanese island would most likely be affected the most by a minor quake. the strait would remain relatively calm
zergling, where u live doesnt affect how techtonically active taiwan is. ive lived in areas much opposite to taiwan, and there were never any disturbances. the primary plate movement is under taiwan itself, not the seas around it.
Last edited:
The_Zergling
Junior Member
It appears I may have misread the meaning of the original post, and if so, I apologize for any hard feelings anyone felt from my post.
I interpreted the number 1 point as saying, "Taiwan doesn't have common earthquake activity" when that is not true.
I simply pointed out the 921 earthquake to correct the "facts" about Taiwan's most recent earthquake, which was a 7.3.
If the point was mostly regarding the area in the Taiwan strait and not Taiwan itself, then Migleader is correct (I think) that it wouldn't affect the feasability of the tunnel. However, I don't understand when you noted that you lived in "areas much opposite to taiwan" and you didn't feel any disturbances. Of course you wouldn't feel any major disturbance from an earthquake in Taiwan, because the plate movement is under Taiwan itself as you correctly noted... so how does this come off as me saying Taiwan's earthquake movement is related to my location?
I interpreted the number 1 point as saying, "Taiwan doesn't have common earthquake activity" when that is not true.
I simply pointed out the 921 earthquake to correct the "facts" about Taiwan's most recent earthquake, which was a 7.3.
If the point was mostly regarding the area in the Taiwan strait and not Taiwan itself, then Migleader is correct (I think) that it wouldn't affect the feasability of the tunnel. However, I don't understand when you noted that you lived in "areas much opposite to taiwan" and you didn't feel any disturbances. Of course you wouldn't feel any major disturbance from an earthquake in Taiwan, because the plate movement is under Taiwan itself as you correctly noted... so how does this come off as me saying Taiwan's earthquake movement is related to my location?
Last edited:
Sorry Zergling and Mig Leader, its a good imaginative idea and I would never want to criticise anyone for exercising their reasoning and imagination, but I have to side on PiSigma on this one.
I was involved in the Drilling Industry during the Eighties and so kept a close watch on the Chunnel (Channel Tunnel) project. The biggest difficulty after those quoted by PiSigma, is that; even allowing for Technological development of TBM (probably not all that great - I cannot think of too many mega projects capable of funding this development in last 15 years), Rock Strata remains Strata, just as it has always done.
YOu cannot confuse a tunnel entrance with a mine - they are very and obviously different. A large Tunnel on the Fujianese coast would be very visable and very obvious. Determining its function would take seconds!!!!
The alternative would be to place it deep inland (perhapse disguised as a Water diversion scheme) but then you have to bore all that extra distance before you leave your own territory - a massive time and monetary cost!!!!
Finally, nobody has considered ventilation, A massive tunnel needs substantial ventilation. With Chunnel, these are large structures that break the water surface and are marked navigational hazards in the English Channel. You would need similar structures (many of them) along the Tiawanese Straits and I suspect, that they might be a bit of a dead giveaway (OK OK you could try and disguise them of Oil & Gas Test drilling Rigs, but a) Rights will probably be contested and draw unwanted attention by itself, b) If their is no known Oil & Gas reserves in the Straits - espically if the Rock Strata configurations are wrong, then this will raise eyebrows, c) That they are all in a Straight Line heading from Fujian to Formosa will definatly riase both eyebrows simultaneously.
A good effort non-the-less, keep the brain moving and the ideas coming, sooner or later you might just hit on the very thing........
I was involved in the Drilling Industry during the Eighties and so kept a close watch on the Chunnel (Channel Tunnel) project. The biggest difficulty after those quoted by PiSigma, is that; even allowing for Technological development of TBM (probably not all that great - I cannot think of too many mega projects capable of funding this development in last 15 years), Rock Strata remains Strata, just as it has always done.
YOu cannot confuse a tunnel entrance with a mine - they are very and obviously different. A large Tunnel on the Fujianese coast would be very visable and very obvious. Determining its function would take seconds!!!!
The alternative would be to place it deep inland (perhapse disguised as a Water diversion scheme) but then you have to bore all that extra distance before you leave your own territory - a massive time and monetary cost!!!!
Finally, nobody has considered ventilation, A massive tunnel needs substantial ventilation. With Chunnel, these are large structures that break the water surface and are marked navigational hazards in the English Channel. You would need similar structures (many of them) along the Tiawanese Straits and I suspect, that they might be a bit of a dead giveaway (OK OK you could try and disguise them of Oil & Gas Test drilling Rigs, but a) Rights will probably be contested and draw unwanted attention by itself, b) If their is no known Oil & Gas reserves in the Straits - espically if the Rock Strata configurations are wrong, then this will raise eyebrows, c) That they are all in a Straight Line heading from Fujian to Formosa will definatly riase both eyebrows simultaneously.
A good effort non-the-less, keep the brain moving and the ideas coming, sooner or later you might just hit on the very thing........
The_Zergling
Junior Member
Um... I am actually on the side that argues that such a tunnel would be nearly the definition of impossible... I like cool ideas, but this is just kinda... far out.
What I was should have said more clearly was in that particular aspect I didn't have a problem with the tunnel plan, though it would meet countless others that would be extremely hard to ratify given our current technology, especially without Taiwan finding out.
That said, your post was very informative, and I think you kind of KO'ed it with the ventilation observation...
What I was should have said more clearly was in that particular aspect I didn't have a problem with the tunnel plan, though it would meet countless others that would be extremely hard to ratify given our current technology, especially without Taiwan finding out.
That said, your post was very informative, and I think you kind of KO'ed it with the ventilation observation...
Fairthought
Junior Member
Thank you Guys for some very good counterpoints.
SanPanViking,
Can you provide some details on these ventilation structures?
How many of them are there?
How far apart are they spaced?
What is their size?
I wonder how much money it would take to build these ventilation structures underground (adjoining the tunnel) and just have air pumped into them through mile long airducts. Of, course this would now add the expense of building more infrastructure to the project. But additional gas pipelines along the length of the tunnel are actually quite useful for a supplying a forward deployed military base fuel. Specifically if such an underground base is going to have APC's, Trucks, and maybe even Tanks. Since it may be necessary to build pipelines anyway, why not an airduct?
In fact, it doesn't need to be an airduct (which would need high pressure and a very large cross-sectional area to adequately ventilate such a long tunnel). Better would be liquified Nitrogen and Oxygen pipes that would feed specialized evaporator pumps which releases air all along the tunnel. Liquid oxygen may be expensive, but liquid Nitrogen is actually quite cheap and easy to manufacture and air is mostly Nitrogen anyway.
Ventilation is a big problem for road tunnels, as cars are big polluters. But the tunnel I'm suggesting for military use would be a rail tunnel, not a road tunnel, and preferably an electrified line, so noxious gas emmissions in the tunnel would be much reduced. If fact, if the trains are airtight, you wouldn't need any ventilation at all! Only the underground bases in Taiwan would need ventilation, and this would come from overhead warehouses feeding them air pipes.
Besides, a ware house would be a great cover for this projet, just claim to be dealing primarily with ballast distribution, and you can disguise alot of tunnel debris.
I understand that any such 'Chunnel project' to Taiwan is prohibitively expensive, but I am not so sure it is beyond what China can afford. After all, China already spends billions of dollars worth just on missile production for use on Taiwan.
Also, thank you Zergling for correcting me about Taiwan's largest recent earthquake.
But how long ago was this 921 earthquake? Do you know if seismologists consider it a 'once in a hundred year event'?
If it occurs less frequently than that then it has a very small chance of ever even affecting such a project, as it doesn't take that long to build and utilize such a tunnel for a war.
All the same, Japan has a number of underground tunnels for car and train transport -including numerous undewater tunnels, and regularly experiences earthquakes over 7.0 every few years (including a 7.9 monster in 1968).
Japan has underwater tunnels connecting the main island of Honshu to the Kyushu island to the south (in a highly earthquake prone region). This includes the Hokuriku rail tunnel (8.6 miles long) which has been around since the Korean War (rebuilt in 1962). There are also other tunnels linking the islands, notably The New Kanmon tunnel (18.7 km), Here are links:
It should be noted the New Kanmon tunnel was the world's first underocean tunnel, built in the year 1936-1944!!
Also, Japan does have the world's biggest underwater tunnel, the Sei Kan Tunnel. As I mentioned, it connects the island of Honshu to Hokaido to the north. Here is a linK:
As you can read, it cost Japan $7 billion dollars. It was started in 1964, and not completed until 1988. It had a major flooding accident that caused a significant delay. Another reason for the long time of construction was the loose volcanic soil which made standard TBM's unviable. Altogether, it consists of two parallel rail tunnels, carrying three lines each.
Here is another article about Sei Kan tunnel:
Of course, Japan does have many subway tunnels, and these are hardened to resist earthquakes. Other earthquake cities, such as Los Angeles and San Francisco have recently given the go-ahead for subway construction:
Here is a source regarding Los Angeles:
what is interesting about Los Angeles, is the debate of building an 11-mile subway that passes to within just ONE MILE of a fault line.
And here is a source regarding San Francisco:
What is interesting about the San Francisco subway system is the planned construction of the TransBay Tube (construction begins 2007). This subway will be underwater in one of the most tectonically active faults in the world. And engineers say they can strengthen it to withstand a major earthquake to gaurantee passenger safety.
Aside from the major concern of earthquakes for tunnels, there is the secondary effect of liquefaction. This is where loose, water saturated soil liquifies when experiencing vibrations caused by a nearby earthquake. This is common for volcanic and alluvial soils. Here is a an example of liquefaction in a japanese laboratory:
Here is article from a town in British columbia, Canada, that has to rebuild a strengthened tunnel to withstand possible soil liquefaction in the event of an earthquake:
This tunnel will not be a rail tunnel, nor a road tunnel, but a water supply tunnel (it just a small town, with a small budget after all). But it does show there exists technology for tunnels to be strengthened to withstand liquefaction.
Please continue responding to this thread, I don't quite believe it is dead yet, and I find the ideas being passed around to be truly fascinating (both criticisms and solutions).
SanPanViking,
Can you provide some details on these ventilation structures?
How many of them are there?
How far apart are they spaced?
What is their size?
I wonder how much money it would take to build these ventilation structures underground (adjoining the tunnel) and just have air pumped into them through mile long airducts. Of, course this would now add the expense of building more infrastructure to the project. But additional gas pipelines along the length of the tunnel are actually quite useful for a supplying a forward deployed military base fuel. Specifically if such an underground base is going to have APC's, Trucks, and maybe even Tanks. Since it may be necessary to build pipelines anyway, why not an airduct?
In fact, it doesn't need to be an airduct (which would need high pressure and a very large cross-sectional area to adequately ventilate such a long tunnel). Better would be liquified Nitrogen and Oxygen pipes that would feed specialized evaporator pumps which releases air all along the tunnel. Liquid oxygen may be expensive, but liquid Nitrogen is actually quite cheap and easy to manufacture and air is mostly Nitrogen anyway.
Ventilation is a big problem for road tunnels, as cars are big polluters. But the tunnel I'm suggesting for military use would be a rail tunnel, not a road tunnel, and preferably an electrified line, so noxious gas emmissions in the tunnel would be much reduced. If fact, if the trains are airtight, you wouldn't need any ventilation at all! Only the underground bases in Taiwan would need ventilation, and this would come from overhead warehouses feeding them air pipes.
Besides, a ware house would be a great cover for this projet, just claim to be dealing primarily with ballast distribution, and you can disguise alot of tunnel debris.
I understand that any such 'Chunnel project' to Taiwan is prohibitively expensive, but I am not so sure it is beyond what China can afford. After all, China already spends billions of dollars worth just on missile production for use on Taiwan.
Also, thank you Zergling for correcting me about Taiwan's largest recent earthquake.
But how long ago was this 921 earthquake? Do you know if seismologists consider it a 'once in a hundred year event'?
If it occurs less frequently than that then it has a very small chance of ever even affecting such a project, as it doesn't take that long to build and utilize such a tunnel for a war.
All the same, Japan has a number of underground tunnels for car and train transport -including numerous undewater tunnels, and regularly experiences earthquakes over 7.0 every few years (including a 7.9 monster in 1968).
Japan has underwater tunnels connecting the main island of Honshu to the Kyushu island to the south (in a highly earthquake prone region). This includes the Hokuriku rail tunnel (8.6 miles long) which has been around since the Korean War (rebuilt in 1962). There are also other tunnels linking the islands, notably The New Kanmon tunnel (18.7 km), Here are links:
It should be noted the New Kanmon tunnel was the world's first underocean tunnel, built in the year 1936-1944!!
Also, Japan does have the world's biggest underwater tunnel, the Sei Kan Tunnel. As I mentioned, it connects the island of Honshu to Hokaido to the north. Here is a linK:
As you can read, it cost Japan $7 billion dollars. It was started in 1964, and not completed until 1988. It had a major flooding accident that caused a significant delay. Another reason for the long time of construction was the loose volcanic soil which made standard TBM's unviable. Altogether, it consists of two parallel rail tunnels, carrying three lines each.
Here is another article about Sei Kan tunnel:
Of course, Japan does have many subway tunnels, and these are hardened to resist earthquakes. Other earthquake cities, such as Los Angeles and San Francisco have recently given the go-ahead for subway construction:
Here is a source regarding Los Angeles:
what is interesting about Los Angeles, is the debate of building an 11-mile subway that passes to within just ONE MILE of a fault line.
And here is a source regarding San Francisco:
What is interesting about the San Francisco subway system is the planned construction of the TransBay Tube (construction begins 2007). This subway will be underwater in one of the most tectonically active faults in the world. And engineers say they can strengthen it to withstand a major earthquake to gaurantee passenger safety.
Aside from the major concern of earthquakes for tunnels, there is the secondary effect of liquefaction. This is where loose, water saturated soil liquifies when experiencing vibrations caused by a nearby earthquake. This is common for volcanic and alluvial soils. Here is a an example of liquefaction in a japanese laboratory:
Here is article from a town in British columbia, Canada, that has to rebuild a strengthened tunnel to withstand possible soil liquefaction in the event of an earthquake:
This tunnel will not be a rail tunnel, nor a road tunnel, but a water supply tunnel (it just a small town, with a small budget after all). But it does show there exists technology for tunnels to be strengthened to withstand liquefaction.
Please continue responding to this thread, I don't quite believe it is dead yet, and I find the ideas being passed around to be truly fascinating (both criticisms and solutions).
MIGleader
Banned Idiot
the cost of this project would be exorbitant, but i think i might have a good way to pay for. china could remove up to 70-80% if the missles pointed at taiwan, and this alone would save several million dollars annualy. several other military cuts could be made to further fund the project, such as a reduction of more army troops.
even if the region is relatively stable, a quake stilll has a chance of dmaging the project. seeing how this may run a decade or more, that is more than likely. if that happens, the entire scheme cover is blown. millions of dollars wasted. quite a gamble.
a less risky idea would be to build a mole to taiwan, but i dont see how that could go un detected by anyone.
even if the region is relatively stable, a quake stilll has a chance of dmaging the project. seeing how this may run a decade or more, that is more than likely. if that happens, the entire scheme cover is blown. millions of dollars wasted. quite a gamble.
a less risky idea would be to build a mole to taiwan, but i dont see how that could go un detected by anyone.
The_Zergling
Junior Member
The 921 earthquake occured in 1999. Though Taiwn is very active, earthquakes of that magnitude are (thankfully) rare so I don't think earthquakes would render the project completely infeasible. (Again, speaking on this point only)
Having lived in Taiwan, I can personally testify that the place is earthquake prone. Some time ago the World Bank produced a report to show the most dangerous place to live by natural disasters, such as floods, earthquakes, and typhoons. Taiwan took #1 place with 73% of its population threatened by at least 3 natural disaster types, versus 90% of people in Bangladesh, Nepal, Haiti, and Malawi are threatened by at least 2 natural disasters.
Can a tunnel be built from Fujian to Taiwan? I think so, it won't be easy. It'd be costly and probably take 20-30 years to build if tunnels were dug from BOTH SIDES to meet in the middle. Definately not a "quicky" PRC invasion scenario. LoL.
Can a tunnel be built from Fujian to Taiwan? I think so, it won't be easy. It'd be costly and probably take 20-30 years to build if tunnels were dug from BOTH SIDES to meet in the middle. Definately not a "quicky" PRC invasion scenario. LoL.
Last edited:
MIGleader
Banned Idiot
:roll: 20-30 years? :roll:
to slow. things have come along way since the chunnel, and i have listed in one of my posts several resons why the building should take half the time.
as a matter of fact. digging could be done from both sides. china can open a warehouse?excavation company in taiwan, and fly hundreds of workers to there. that way, work can be done from both sides,doubling speed.
to slow. things have come along way since the chunnel, and i have listed in one of my posts several resons why the building should take half the time.
as a matter of fact. digging could be done from both sides. china can open a warehouse?excavation company in taiwan, and fly hundreds of workers to there. that way, work can be done from both sides,doubling speed.