Media Silent On Fate Of North Anna Nuclear Plant At Epicenter Of 5.9 Mineral Virginia Earthquake
The Intel Hub
By Alexander Higgins
August 23, 2011
A massive 5.9 earthquake, the largest ever for the area in recorded history, which has been felt across the U.S. from Colorado to Massachusetts, has an epicenter near Mineral Virginia’s North Anna Nuclear Power Plant.
The 2011 Virginia earthquake was a magnitude 5.9 (Mw) intraplate earthquake that occurred on August 23, 2011. The focus is reported by the USGS to be about 64 km (39 mi) northwest of Richmond, Virginia near the town of Mineral, Virginia. [1][2]
The earthquake was the highest-magnitude event in Virginia in recorded history.[3]
Impact
At approximately 2:12 PM EST, tremors were felt as far away as Ontario, Canada, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Massachusetts. In Washington, DC the Capitol building and the Pentagon were evacuated, as were many buildings in New York City.[4][5][1][6]
[...]
References
- ^ abc“Magnitude 5.9 – VIRGINIA”.
- ^ ab“BBC News – Earthquake strikes US east coast”. bbc.co.uk. 2011 [last update]. Retrieved 23 August 2011.
- ^“Largest earthquake in Virginia State history strikes on Tuesday afternoon measuring almost 6.0″. http://www.theweatherspace.com. 2011 [last update]. Retrieved 23 August 2011.
- ^Magnitude 5.9 Earthquake Hits Virginia, Sends Shockwaves Throughout East Coast | FoxNews.com
- ^5.9 magnitude quake rocks East Coast
- ^“5.9 earthquake hits Virginia, rattles NYC, east coast”. ABC News. 23 August 2011. Retrieved 23 August 2011.
Source: WikiPedia
While no damage, injuries, or deaths has been reported at the moment there is one thing the media is being suspiciously quiet about.
The epicenter of the quake Mineral Virginia, which is the location of the Anna Nuclear Power Plant.
According MSNBC, the plant was among the list of nuclear power plants at most risk to suffer core damage from an earthquake.
In fact the list, compiled from NRC data, showed that the Anna nuclear plant was the 7th most likely reactor to suffer core damage with a 1 in 22,727 chance of being struck by an earthquake based on 2008 geological data.
The top 10
Here are the 10 nuclear power sites with the highest risk of an earthquake causing core damage, showing their NRC risk estimates based on 2008 and 1989 geological data.
1. Indian Point 3, Buchanan, N.Y.: 1 in 10,000 chance each year. Old estimate: 1 in 17,241. Increase in risk: 72 percent.
2. Pilgrim 1, Plymouth, Mass.: 1 in 14,493. Old estimate: 1 in 125,000. Increase in risk: 763 percent.
3. Limerick 1 and 2, Limerick, Pa.: 1 in 18,868. Old estimate: 1 in 45,455. Increase in risk: 141 percent.
4. Sequoyah 1 and 2, Soddy-Daisy, Tenn.: 1 in 19,608. Old estimate: 1 in 102,041. Increase in risk: 420 percent.
5. Beaver Valley 1, Shippingport, Pa.: 1 in 20,833. Old estimate: 1 in 76,923. Increase in risk: 269 percent.
6. Saint Lucie 1 and 2, Jensen Beach, Fla.: 1 in 21,739. Old estimate: N/A.
7. North Anna 1 and 2, Louisa, Va.: 1 in 22,727. Old estimate: 1 in 31,250. Increase in risk: 38 percent.
8. Oconee 1, 2 and 3, Seneca, S.C.: 1 in 23,256. Old estimate: 1 in 100,000. Increase in risk: 330 percent.
9. Diablo Canyon 1 and 2, Avila Beach, Calif.: 1 in 23,810. Old estimate: N/A.
10. Three Mile Island, Middletown, Pa.: 1 in 25,000. Old estimate: 1 in 45,455. Increase in risk: 82 percent.
(This short list of the top 10 sites, or plants, groups together reactors at the same site if they have the same risk rating, such as Sequoyah 1 and 2. The full list of 104 separate reactors is below at the bottom of the text.)
Source: MSNBC
But here is the real kicker, that data used to come up with the risk showed the area just hit by the quake wasn’t even in a high risk earthquake zone.
Nitro Pak – High Quality Affordable Freeze Dry Foods(Ad)
U.S. Geological Survey – Based on 2008 data, a map of earthquake damage risk in the United States. The highest risk areas are purple, red and orange.
Now we have the highest earthquake ever recorded in the area to hit the nuclear reactor which shows the NRC risk assessment of potential earthquake activity was flawed.
U.S. Geological Survey – Based on 1982 data, a map of earthquake damage risk in the continental United States. The highest risk areas are red, yellow and purple.
In fact, they knew it was flawed because as the MSNBC report points out, the North Anna 1 and 2, Louisa, Va. had a 1 in 22,727 chance of core damage based on 2008 data.
The risk was revised upward by 38 percent based on the risk assessment compiled from the 1982 data.
One more parting point, TEPCO’s – and in fact the nuclear industry’s – dirty little secret.
The nuclear meltdown in Japan didn’t happen because of the tsunami as they first told us.
The meltdown was caused by damage from the earthquake before the tsunami hit and while it may have been a 9.0 earthquake out in the pacific, it was only a 6.4 at the nuclear power plant itself.
Follow @IntelHubTEPCO’s Darkest Secret – A Weak Earthquake Caused The Nuclear Meltdown Not The Tsunami
The Fukushima Daiichi Reactors Were in Meltdown After the Earthquake, But Before the Tsunami Hit.
Note: While the earthquake that caused the massive tsunami is now estimated to be 9.0 in magnitude the strength of the quake when it hit the Fukushima nuclear reactor hundreds of kilometers away was a relatively weak 6.4 magnitude earthquake. This weak earthquake caused the caused the Fukushima nuclear meltdown – not the Tsunami – which raises red flags about the safety of nuclear reactors around the world.
David McNeill and Jake Adelstein
Counter Punch via Activists PostWIKI Commons Image – Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant
It is one of the mysteries of Japan’s ongoing nuclear crisis: How much damage did the March 11 earthquake do to the Fukushima Daiichi reactors before the tsunami hit? The stakes are high: If the quake structurally compromised the plant and the safety of its nuclear fuel, then every other similar reactor in Japan will have to be reviewed and possibly shut down.
With virtually all of Japan’s 54 reactors either offline (35) or scheduled for shutdown by next April, the issue of structural safety looms over the decision to restart every one in the months and years after.
The key question for operator Tokyo Electric Power Co (TEPCO) and its regulators to answer is this: How much damage was inflicted on the Daiichi plant before the first tsunami reached the plant roughly 40 minutes after the earthquake?
TEPCO and the Japanese government are hardly reliable adjudicators in this controversy. “There has been no meltdown,” top government spokesman Edano Yukio famously repeated in the days after March 11. “It was an unforeseeable disaster,” Tepco’s then President Shimizu Masataka improbably said later. As we now know, meltdown was already occurring even as Edano spoke. And far from being unforeseeable, the disaster had been repeatedly forewarned.
Comments
2 Responses to “Media Silent On Fate Of North Anna Nuclear Plant At Epicenter Of 5.9 Mineral Virginia Earthquake”Trackbacks
Check out what others are saying about this post...[...] Media Silent On Fate Of Anna Nuclear Plant At Epicenter Of 5.9 Mineral Virginia Earthquake [...]
[...] Soon after the media began reporting on the status of plant saying the plants electrical power had been cut-off and the spent fuel pools at the reactors were being cooled by power supplied by emergency backup generators at the nuclear plant. Media Silent On Fate Of Anna Nuclear Plant At Epicenter Of 5.9 Mineral Virginia Earthquake [...]