Many Nuclear Power Plants in the U.S. are Located Along the Ocean and Near Dangerous Earthquake Zones

No nuclear power plant currently in operation anywhere on the planet is fail-safe. The design philosophy for the existing generation of nuclear power plants is defense in depth. That is, they are designed to have multiple and diverse systems to prevent a system or component failure from becoming catastrophic. The most troubling aspect of what happened at Fukushima is that no one—not the Tokyo Electric Power Company, not the Japanese government nor the International Atomic Energy Agency—anticipated a tsunami near the magnitude of the one that occurred on March 11 or considered what it might do to the defensive systems... Many nuclear power plants are built near the ocean, since many people live in coastal areas and nuclear power plants require large quantities of water to produce electricity. - Ed Smeloff, Radioactive cocktail: As Fukushima Daiichi reminds us, Rancho Seco’s spent fuel rods remain ‘hot’ for generations to come, NewsReview.com, March 31, 2011

Japan's Nuclear Crisis Turns Spotlight on U.S. Plants

March 14, 2011

CNNMoney - The safety of America's nuclear reactors is being questioned as Japanese engineers scramble to avert a total meltdown at two of that country's quake-stricken power plants.

Like in Japan, some of the 104 nuclear reactors in the United States are situated along the ocean -- some in earthquake-prone areas.

The reactors are designed to withstand earthquakes, sabotage and other disasters. But the difficulty the Japanese are facing in controlling their plants is raising red flags about the safety of U.S. facilities.

"The tragic events now unfolding in Japan could very easily occur in the United States," Rep. Ed Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat who sits on the House committee overseeing nuclear power, said in a statement.

Disaster hits nation's economy

Markey has recommended several measures that he believes should be taken by the Obama administration and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

These steps include stronger safety systems in plants located near fault lines, emergency response drills that model instances when more than one disaster unfolds simultaneously, and the distribution of radiation-blocking potassium iodide pills to everyone living within 20 miles of a reactor. (Such pills are now disbursed to people within 10 miles of a reactor.)

The United States has 104 non-military nuclear reactors operating at 65 plants across the country. In addition, there are dozens of reactors, weapons labs and other nuclear facilities associated with national defense.

Most of the civilian plants are located near major population centers. They currently supply about 20% of the nation's power.

There hasn't been a new nuclear plant commissioned since the Three Mile Island meltdown in Pennsylvania in 1979, although dozens that were under construction at the time have come on line.

More recently, increased electricity use, a desire to generate homegrown energy and concern over global warming have made carbon-free nuclear power more attractive.

CNN coverage of the quake and its aftermath

The government has set aside $18 billion for new nuclear plants, and President Obama wants to spend an additional $36 billion.

Federal regulators are reviewing 20 applications to build new nuclear plants, and several existing facilities have applied to extend their operating licenses. Some were calling it a nuclear industry renaissance.

The events in Japan have obviously made the political climate for building more nuclear plants in the U.S. more difficult.

"The debate has been altered -- at least in the near term," Christine Tezak, an energy and environmental policy analyst at asset management firm Robert W. Baird & Co., wrote in a research note Monday.

Concerns over safety -- as well as cost -- continue to dog the nuclear industry.

0:00 /6:46Lawmaker calls for nuclear 'timeout'

In the United States, perhaps the most vulnerable plants are the two in California built on the Pacific coast near the San Andreas fault.

Those plants were built to withstand a magnitude 7.5 earthquake, said Robert Alvarez, a nuclear expert at the Institute for Policy studies and a former senior official at the U.S. Department of Energy.

The San Francisco quake of 1906 measured 8.3, said Alvarez, while Friday's Japanese quake was a massive 8.9. An 8.9 quake is 125 times as powerful as 7.5 quake, according to the United States Geological Survey.

"I don't think we should renew those operating licenses," he said.

Alvarez also said the problems at the Japanese facilities highlight the catastrophic outcome of the failure of power, pumps and other infrastructure. Such system malfunctions could happen because of an earthquake or a massive terrorist attack, such as one involving airliners.

Spokesmen for the utilities that own the California plants, Pacific Gas & Electric (PCG, Fortune 500) and Southern California Edison, said Sunday the plants are designed to meet the maximum quake projected for their immediate vicinity, which is not thought to exceed a magnitude of 6.5.

In addition, tests have shown that the country's nuclear plants could withstand an impact from an airliner, said Steve Kerekes, a spokesman for industry group the Nuclear Energy Institute.

Responding to Congressman Markey's recommendations, Kerekes said that safety systems at U.S. plants are already robust. He said that disaster planning could always be improved upon, but that studies show there's no need to distribute iodide pills beyond the current 10 mile radius.

A spokesman for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission said U.S. plants are safe.

"NRC's rigorous safety regulations ensure that U.S. nuclear facilities are designed to withstand tsunamis, earthquakes and other hazards," he said.

Map of U.S. Nuke Reactors Reveals What Happened in Japan Could Happen in America

Many of the nuclear power plants in the United States are located near dangerous earthquake zones.

March 14, 2011

Examiner.com - As Americans watch Japan struggle to gain control of their nuclear power plants the public is beginning to question whether the same sort of nuclear crisis is possible in the United States. The crisis in Japan is already said to be worse than the Three Mile Island incident, and if conditions deteriorate even more there is concern of a meltdown with international implications. The nuclear crisis began with Japan 8.9 magnitude earthquake. The tsunami which later impacted the island-nation made matters worse. Unfortunately, the location of America's nuclear power plants seem to indicate that the same scenario might come about here.

Maps of the United States nuclear power plants show many lie along dangerous earthquake zones. There are four nuclear power plants in Southern California, at least one (the Diablo Canyon power plant) rests right next to the ocean like the Fukushima plant in Japan. The San Andreas fault line which has often produced earthquakes of 7.0+ magnitude. Geologists believe California is actually "overdue" for the "Big One," a 8.0+ magnitude quake. In 1700 a large earthquake that struck what is now California caused a massive tsunami wave to impact Japan. As recently as 1886 South Carolina suffered from a magnitude 7.3 earthquake which was felt over 2.5 million square miles.

If an earthquake were to hit a United States nuclear power plant it could shut off power to the plant in the same manner as Japan's quake. At that point the plants would need to rely on backup power sources to keep coolant flowing through the reactors. Damaged infrastructure may limit the ability to bring in new coolant as well. In Japan officials have had to resort to pumping in sea water in order to cool down the reactors at the Fukushima plant. That option may or may not be available at the U.S. nuclear plants.

Especially disconcerting is the fact that Japan is a well-developed nation with some of the best nuclear experts and equipment to deal with the crisis. If what was happening in Japan was occurring in a less-developed nation the crisis could be more easily dismissed, but Japan has almost all the same resources as the United States. Many experts say that if this sort of nuclear crisis can happen in Japan it can happen anywhere.

There is also little comfort in the idea of redundancy. Japan's nuclear reactors were never supposed to regress to this point. Japan actually anticipated a possible earthquake and tsunami hitting their nuclear plants, yet clearly their planning was not enough. If the main power supply was cut off by an earthquake, as it was, then backup power generators on site were supposed to allow for coolant to circulated. In reality, the earthquake did shut off power to Fukushima. Later a tsunami approximately 10 meters high hit the power plant. Officials only prepared Fukushima for a tsunami of about five meters in height. As a result, the tsunami knocked out Fukushima's backup power supply which is causing many of the current problems.

List of Nuclear Power Plants in America
U.S. Nuclear Power Facts

• The USA is the world's largest producer of nuclear power, accounting for more than 30% of worldwide nuclear generation of electricity.
• The country's 104 nuclear reactors produced 799 billion kWh in 2009, over 20% of total electrical output.
• Following a 30-year period in which few new reactors were built, it is expected that 4-6 new units may come on line by 2018, the first of those resulting from 16 licence applications to build 24 new nuclear reactors made since mid-2007.
• Government policy changes since the late 1990s have helped pave the way for significant growth in nuclear capacity. Government and industry are working closely on expedited approval for construction and new plant designs.