Nuclear Plants Vulnerable to Earthquakes
The American government has officially stated that fracking can cause earthquakes. Some fracking companies now admit this fact The scientific
community agrees. See this, this, this, this and this.
Earthquakes can – of course – damage nuclear power plants. For example, even the operator of Fukushima and the Japanese government now admit that
the nuclear cores might have started melting down before the tsuanmi(sic) ever hit. More here.
Indeed, the fuel pools and rods at Fukushima appear to have “boiled”, caught fire and/or exploded soon after the earthquake knocked out power
systems. See this, this, this, this and this. And fuel pools in the United States store an average of ten times more radioactive fuel than stored at
Fukushima, have virtually no safety features, and are vulnerable to accidents and terrorist attacks. And see this.
Indeed, American reactors may be even more vulnerable to earthquakes than Fukushima.
But American nuclear “regulators” have allowed numerous nuclear power plants to be built in earthquake zones (represented by black triangles in
the following diagram):
Image sourced at Food Freedon
(This site is worth a browse in it's own right)
The article is full of links to other articles in Washingtons blog. The the basic suggestion that fracking, or fraccing or hydraulic fracturing to
give it its proper name, or other fluid injection or extraction, is instrumental in causing or triggering earthquakes is well known to seismologists
and had been proven beyond any doubt.
The injection of any fluid under pressure, be it for the extraction of gas.oil or for the disposal of 'other fluids' WILL have an effect. Only in the
past day a report has come out saying that removal of water in
Spain caused, or triggered, the Mag 5+ earthquake
that resulted in the death of 9 people and a great deal of destruction.
During this period, the water table dropped by 250 meters (274 yards) as farmers bored ever deeper wells to help produce the fruit, vegetables and
meat that are exported from Lorca to the rest of Europe. In other words, the industry that propped up the local economy in southern Spain may have
undermined the very ground on which Lorca is built.
The researchers noted that even without the strain caused by water extraction, a quake would likely have occurred at some point.
But the extra stress of pumping vast amounts of water from a nearby aquifer may have been enough to trigger a quake at that particular time and place,
said lead researcher Pablo J. Gonzalez of the University of Western Ontario, Canada.
There are many earthquakes in Iceland because of the hydrothermal power plants, the Geysers in California has hundreds of small earthquakes and
a project in Basel, Switzerland, was shut down because of it.
A seismic-hazard evaluation was then conducted, resulting in the cancellation of the project in December 2009. Basel, Switzerland sits atop a
historically active fault and most of the city was destroyed in a magnitude 6.5 earthquake in 1356. But the Basel project, although it had established
an operational approach for addressing induced earthquakes, had not performed a thorough seismic risk assessment before starting geothermal
You cannot go drilling holes in the ground and altering the equilibrium without paying the penalty.
Our ATS member Eric Blair has many good theories on fracking and earthquakes and some that are a little on the wild side.
(Here is one)
I have said on Quake Watch that if you scrape holes in the ground, in relation to the Louisiana sink-hole, that it causes unbalance and my other half
likens it to making holes in a pie crust - an analogy that was very succinctly put by Eric Blair again:
We keep sucking on that long straw in our milkshake. We've damned all the rivers, drained all the swamps and when we ran out of water sources
on top of the land, we then bored straight down and found the stuff hidden away in the aquifers. We keeping pricking the pincushion and poking holes
in the old apple pie's crust. And if you think we'd stop at sucking, you'd be wrong. Because now we're blowing. We're pushing all our dirty secrets
back down those holes. Knowing they'll never come back to haunt us.
The last sentence is of course sarcasm just in case anyone missed it.
Allowing fracking within 500ft of any building, especially a nuclear power station, is madness! It is not stupidity but is the act of the criminally
insane. Do these people not realise that a fracking well is drilled horizontally? Do they not realise this can extend up to a mile from the well head?
A mile is 5220ft, or was when I went to school, and that is 10 times the permitted distance. Do they think the gas/oil companies will not use the full
well area to their advantage?
The effects of another nuclear disaster would be very bad for the world. It is not just the immediate effect but the effects of low levels of
“In 2000 alone, civilian reactors produced enough plutonium to make more than 34,000 nuclear bombs,” writes Smith. 
This is what the nuclear energy industry is about – producing plutonium, tritium and other ingredients for nuclear bombs. 
One isotope of plutonium has a half-life of 24,000 years. That’s twice as long as the latest interglacial in which Homo sapiens developed
agriculture, and thus modern civilization. Another – P-239 – has a 250,000-year half-life. That’s longer than Homo sapiens has been around. But
then we have uranium-238 with a 4.5 billion-year half-life, the lifespan of Planet Earth. Tritium has a half life of 12 years; strontium 29 years,
cesium – 30 years, and on for the hundreds of hot particles (radioactive isotopes) created by fission.
That article goes on at greater lengths about the effects of low levels of radiation. I do not agree in total with the rejection of nuclear power as I
consider Thorium needs to be explored in greater depths, but Uranium based reactors built purely to provide bombs should be shut down.
The establishment and big corporate interests will always attempt to cover up and hide the effects of fracking.
Going back to the link in Eric Blair's post (see link above) the article states:
some may speculate that the quake could have been caused by hydraulic fracturing taking place in western North Dakota’s booming oil patch.
Geology experts quickly shot down that theory, noting that Friday’s small quake would have happened at about 2,000 feet below the surface, too
shallow to be caused by the fracking taking place much deeper in the ground. There is no proven link between fracking and earthquakes, they
There is also no 'exact' depth for an earthquake. You only have to look at the enormous range of depths you get from different sources to realise that
the determination of the earthquake hypocentre is NOT a precise science.
Fracking 500ft from a nuke is criminal, madness and may prove to be genocidal.
edit on 23/10/2012 by PuterMan because: Green decoration was required.