Why build nuclear power stations on fault lines?

Question

Deepest sympathy to all those unfortunate people who lost their lives in Japan last Friday. Yet, the question is valid although a little premature perhaps under the circumstancess. Nuclear power may/may not be the way forward, but is it not tempting fate to build these installations on known geological fault lines where earthquakes are a common and a regular occurence. Is the profit motive more important than the humanitarian aspects in this situation ?

Answer 1

price.. nuclear power is less than 1 cent per kw hour.. it is FAR cheaper than any alternative



ALL of japan is on a fault line.. there is NO where they can build it without having a danger of earthquake tsunami or volcano... so if japan is to utilize nuclear power and benefit from cheap energy they pretty much had no choice.



although for me.. before i judge if it was a bad idea or a good idea.. i need to find out a year from now just how much radioactive material/exposure was there?! right now we know there is a POSSIBILITY of danger... we don't know what the ACTUAL exposure levels are...



this is right now a do the recovery then when all is said and done.. look at how it was built.. what could and should have been done differently and should we continue or not.

Answer 2

This question was asked a thousand or more times during the hearings on building the Diablo Canyon NPP in San Luis Obispo County, CA. And no one, not any state officials, not anyone from PG&E ever gave an answer that directly addressed the question. The answers were always about the latest technology, minimal risk, "built to withstand" ... and blah, blah, blah - same old propaganda. On the other hand, the fact that the proposed Bodega Bay NPP at Bodega Head, Point Reyes would be sitting on the San Andreas fault did make a difference - although I always wondered why it was proposed in the first place. Did someone think that no one would notice the San Andreas fault?



Storage sites for both low and high level radioactive waste have also been proposed in areas with faulting and other geologic problems. Maybe the land is cheaper in fault zones....

Answer 3

skipped geology class in school didn't you? It really doesn't matter where they build the nuclear plant in Japan (well actually it does a little bit as southern Japan is more likely to have earthquake than the north- where most plants are located) the whole country is in constant threat of earthquake dues to its geological location. Search google for "pacific ring of fire" and read the wikipedia, you will find answer to your own question and more.

Answer 4

Humans think they know everything, constructions etc, until mother nature kicks in and in a matter of hours, what took forever to build is gone. Humans fault, not fault lines.

Answer 5

This may not be an answer but...don't they dispose of some types of nuclear waste in geological formations weather it be natural or man-made.

Answer 6

I don't know the answer to this question. It seems like a very stupid decision to build those nuclear facilities there. God bless those people in Japan!

Answer 7

Simple stupidity is all but that whole area around there is a fault zone so it wouldn't really matter where they built it.

Answer 8

The same reason why people build major population centers on them and that is... well IDK.