Nuclear Power Plants in the New Madrid Fault damage Area

First of all, I apologize if this has already been posted. I searched because I honestly expected to find something on it, but I didn't. Second, I apologize again if it's in the wrong place.

Now, with the nuclear crisis going on in Japan, it really got me thinking about what those of us in the U.S. could have to deal with, if that big one ever occurs on the New Madrid. So, I did a little research and what I found is scary!

First of all, let's take a look at the damage area and area of where a magnitude 6 earthquake was felt in 1895.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/0c87a0da906b.jpg[/atsimg]

Source

That's just a magnitude 6 and look at how far away it was felt!

Now, let's take a look at a map of nuclear power plant locations in the U.S.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/dad9e03b82b6.jpg[/atsimg]

Source


Doesn't look very safe, huh?

Now, granted, just because a quake was "felt" in an area doesn't mean that it did damage, but keep in mind that this was a magnitude 6. What kind of damage would a quake of a higher magnitude do? For one thing, I don't think I'd be too far off in saying that the area of destruction would be significantly larger than in 1895.

I'm not trying to downplay what is going on in Japan right now. I feel for those people to the point that my heart breaks! But maybe those of us who live around nuclear power plants should take a look at just what could happen... not just those of us around the New Madrid, but everywhere. I chose New Madrid, because I live in the damage area, but there are nuclear power plants near fault lines in many places on the globe.

I'm not a fear monger and I try not to be too paranoid, but the threat is very real. No, we should not live our lives obsessing over what COULD happen, but we can get prepared. I'm not for packing up and moving far far away, but being prepared for something can never be bad. I just think we should all be aware of what is around us. I will admit to always having a fear of nuclear power plants, even when I was little. Clean energy is good, but clean isn't clean when it turns into a dirty bomb. I don't even pretend to know what precautions any of these power plants have taken to prevent something disastrous from happening, but let's hope the people in charge realize just how dangerous this situation could get when New Madrid goes!

Thoughts?

Eyeball the red patch in the top map. Now eyeball the blank area in the 2nd map. They are congruent. Which means that nuclear power plants were deliberately NOT placed in the red zone.
Second point -- the power plants in Japan were taken down by the tsunami, not the quake. It was the flood of water that knocked the backup generators offline and damaged them. That is not a problem for reactors that would be affected by New Madrid.

reply to post by SunSword


That is what I see as well. It looks intentional to me. Their are very few reactors near the New Madrid fault zone. Maybe our government has some forethought after all?

I find it more interesting to notice the actual lack of nuclear plants in the immediate area of the New Madrid Seismic Zone. Zoom in on the US Central region and you will see what I mean.

There would still be a certain risk to the surrounding plants if a large shallow quake were to occur in the area.


eta:
looks we all caught it at the same time

Great post!
I believe that at the point that New Madrid starts the big one, we have to shut-down the plants, suck it up and look past the fact that you dont have power for a few months because otherwise, you would be choking to death from radiation! Thats the problem with people right now, theyre so weak without their tech. OMG no cell phone OMFG! but they dont think of the fact that you not having your cell phone or TV just saved the entire East Coast! So everyone be grateful for the life you have.

WAKE UP WAKE UP WAKE UP WAKE UP WAKE UP WAKE UP.....

None of this was towards the one who posted this, they have their head on straight

Eyeball the red patch in the top map. Now eyeball the blank area in the 2nd map. They are congruent. Which means that nuclear power plants were deliberately NOT placed in the red zone. Second point -- the power plants in Japan were taken down by the tsunami, not the quake. It was the flood of water that knocked the backup generators offline and damaged them. That is not a problem for reactors that would be affected by New Madrid.

reply to post by SunSword


Agreed. I did notice that. Maybe I am more paranoid than I like to think I am, but what worries me the most is that this was just a magnitude 6. I wonder how much the area of damage would grow in a significantly larger quake? I have looked up maps of the predicted area of damage, but some of them vary widely.

We can only hope that this was well thought out! And yes, you are right about the tsunami causing the majority of the damage. A shaking nuclear power plant just doesn't make me feel safe though. Again, maybe I'm more paranoid than I like to believe.

Originally posted by SunSword
Eyeball the red patch in the top map. Now eyeball the blank area in the 2nd map. They are congruent. Which means that nuclear power plants were deliberately NOT placed in the red zone.
Second point -- the power plants in Japan were taken down by the tsunami, not the quake. It was the flood of water that knocked the backup generators offline and damaged them. That is not a problem for reactors that would be affected by New Madrid.

Yes, it looks pretty good, and may have been a plan that took this into consideration when these were built.

BUT............I think I read just recently that scientists are now thinking the NMF could go all the way from the gulf to the great lakes.

And, thanks OP. Now I don't feel so good about living in OHIO.

I thought I'd be pretty safe unless the great lakes were affected if the NMF goes, and unless it affected the Ohio River, but then I live pretty far from the river. Although I live real close to I75, which COULD conceivably funnel the river right up to where I live.

But NOW....I see I have to worry about possible nuclear fallout, since the winds and our weather usually comes from the southwest.

As you can see, I have been considering which type of disaster might affect me.

Now I have something else to think about.

I live in an area where there are a good amount of nuclear power plants. I also live a few hours from a very large city that could easily be a target of a terrorist attack (in fact it was more than once fairly recently). I was reading about the possibility of a dirty bomb being deployed. It is not unwise to try to be prepared for some sort of nuclear energy incident. I have potassium iodide pills for my family and I already, and I'm glad I did it.

Looking at that map of power plants (nuclear), I find it interesting to see great discrepancies between it and the map offered here:

www.radiationnetwork.com...

(That was offered on this thread: www.abovetopsecret.com... )

I noticed the difference in the Pacific Northwest... There are other differences as well.

reply to post by Amaterasu


Yeah, big difference. Date is on the map, but who knows where the info came from originally.

Both maps show a plant in Ohio on the border of Indiana, that I'm pretty sure has been closed down and cleaned up already.

reply to post by SunSword


Actually the Missouri plant is in the affected zone you referenced. I live 9 miles as the crow flies from it, luckily we are not in the prevailing wind direction, but anyone east of us is. It may not sit on what the geological services say is teh exact fault line, butits close enough for danger.

reply to post by SunSword


I'm in agreement with this.
There APPEARS that are no plants within the old earthquake effected area. A few are on the outskirts, though.

Two things that are important to note though are, one. the New Madrid fault line is extensive and a quake could center anywhere along its hundreds of miles, so the effected area of the previous quake is of less value than it may seem in evaluating future quake probable effect areas.

A second point, already alluded to is the earlier quake was a 6.0.
That is an extremely mild quake. I was only a mile from a 6.2 several years back near Riverside and it didn't even wake me up (and I was sleeping on the floor).

For those not familiarized with the antilogarithm used in the Richter scale, just a small difference in the Richter value correlates to a huge difference in the actual megatons of power. For example, when the Japan quake was upgraded from an 8.9 to a 9.1, that resulted in the megaton power estimate going from 360 megatons (8.9) to 750 megatons (9.1). More than doubling the probable effects of the earthquake.
The earthquake in Haiti and Christchurch, New Zealand were roughly one half of a megaton or 1/1500th of the power of the Japan quake.
The earlier 6.0 quake in New Madrid was a tenth of a megaton, or 1/7500th of the power of the Japan quake.

So say we have a new quake at New Madrid that is a 7.0, that would be about 50 times the strength of the earlier 6.0, thus comparing the old New Madrid quake to a new one is of limited value.

But it is of great value in pointing out just how huge the probable effect area would grow with a larger quake.

In regards to the tsunami, SunSword is right on.
Just like Katrina, the disaster there had little to do with the Hurricane, it was the result of the surge (and poor engineering).

Hawk

Hi,

This is my new video highlighting some of the preparations for the NLE Exercises 2011, including the state asking for such equipment as: dosimeters, x-ray scanners, and general items related to radiation in the wake of a catastrophic new madrid earthquake.

It also highlights some of the occult numerological fingerprints on this disaster preparation, specifically the recurrence of 11's, the appearance of the numer "911" in drill names, and the appearance of "April 19th" as a date for one drill (the anniversary of the Oklahoma City Bombing)

Are they going to go ahead and go live with this thing and bring disaster on the heartland this May?

Earthquake does not equal damage. Feeling shaking does not equal damage. The beautiful thing about EQs is that we can prepare, build, etc. to avoid major damage.

The stats I heard coming out of Japan are 10% of the damage was from the earthquake, 90% from tsunami. It was the water that caused the most damage and trouble. It was the water that knocked out the nuclear plants (as someone else replied/explained). Very sorry I can't find the source link to that stat - still looking. From CNN maybe?

I was in the 1989 Loma Prieta quake - 6.9 in California. We were absolutely fine - our house was bolted to the foundation, we lived in an "earthquake proofed" home (no heavy stuff hanging over the bed, latches on the cupboards, water and food stashed and updated annually, etc.)

The damage seen on tv was from buildings and bridges that did not take precautions for EQ country. Brick buildings on a mud foundation in the Marina district - yes, there will be damage.

Anyway, my point is, preparations can be made for earthquakes. Building can take shaking into account.

The knowledge and technology is out there. There is no excuse for US power plants to be damaged.

The nuke plant map must be real old, Big Rock Point in northern Michigan was hauled away several years ago and there's nothing there except a tombstone.

This earthquake should be happening soon