Rumblings

It is really easy to be a monday morning quarterback with 20/20 vision. I admit it. I had a conversion a few years ago and thought that weighing the alternatives, nuclear power was the most rational and acceptable methodology for solving our acute need for energy. Even though the storage problem had not been solved, although the french have been out on the forefront. Even though the EPA has shown conclusively that every safety liner will leak at some point in time. Hey, we live in an imperfect world.

Maybe I was wrong.

I am bothered by the idea that it can't happen here. And that political arm twisting has allowed some of our facilities to dance around certain seismic issues. I was listening to a scientist on NPR yesterday discuss a new fault that she had mapped out approximately 700 yards from the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Facility in San Luis Obispo County. It is called the Shoreline Fault. It has long been known that there is another fault approximately 35 miles from the twin reactors, called the Hosgri Fault. While the facility was supposedly designed to withstand a 7.5 magnitude quake from the Hosgri, scientists are concerned that a temblor affecting both faults simultaneously could have dire effects on the site. The hypothesis is that a quake affecting both faults will cause them to create a much larger sympathetic quake than either individual quake is capable of producing on its own. From NPR:

"We don't yet have a firm idea of the hazard posed by the Shoreline Fault," says Thomas Brocher, director of the Earthquake Science Center at the U.S. Geological Survey in Menlo Park, Calif., who led the team that discovered the fault.

State Sen. Sam Blakeslee, a Republican who holds a doctorate in earthquake studies, wants PG&E to pull back an application to extend the plant's operating license for 20 years until more is known.

"Aging nuclear power plants and large, active fault systems should not be in close proximity. This isn't exactly rocket science," Blakeslee says. Because the Shoreline Fault is so close to the Diablo Canyon plant it "can produce shaking far in excess of what's expected."

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and PG&E say the plant is safe and built to withstand a magnitude 7.5 earthquake, the maximum considered possible for the site. Damage from a Japan-like tsunami is unlikely, because the reactors sit on an 85-foot cliff above the ocean and fault structure in the area differs from the Pacific Rim.

As soon as the earthquake and tsunami hit, the full speed ahead nuclear energy industry and their abettors and future employees at the NRC started backpedalling and telling us that it couldn't happen here.

Diablo Canyon, whose reactors began operating in the mid-1980s, has a long history of seismic issues. The discovery of the offshore Hosgri Fault in 1971, after the plant's construction permits were issued, forced a major, costly redesign.

Brocher, the USGS scientist, said scientists do not know how fast the adjacent sides of the Shoreline Fault are sliding, a key measurement to determine potential danger. A higher rate of slippage leads to increased pressure — and a greater chance for an earthquake.

With the two faults in proximity "the uncertainty is ... to what extent they might interact," says Barbara Byron, a senior nuclear policy adviser for the California Energy Commission. Since 2008, the commission has urged the plant to conduct three-dimensional mapping of the Shoreline Fault, using technology employed in oil exploration.

Funding has been approved for the study. In testimony to the NRC last year, she called the plant's seismic data "incomplete ... outdated" and urged a review of its evacuation plans.

Uselding, the NRC spokeswoman, said preliminary reviews found that it's unlikely an earthquake would take place directly under Diablo Canyon, but that potential shaking could cause minor damage to buried piping and conduits.

Diablo Canyon has an extensive seismic monitoring system, ready to detect any shifts in the area. "Potential impacts of the Shoreline Fault fall within all safety margins," company spokesman Kory Raftery said.

Seismic experts have estimated there is a 2 percent to 3 percent chance of a major earthquake in California each year, and a 46 percent chance of a quake with a magnitude of 7.5 or greater within the next 30 years.

State Senators on Monday asked utilities to delay efforts to relicense nuclear power plants until the companies complete detailed seismic maps to get a true picture of the risks posed by earthquakes and tsunamis.

The Obama Administration has been actively pursuing a nuclear power strategy and push and has promised the utilities billions in loan guarantees and federal tax credits.

Of course closer to home for me, San Onofre is also sporting three nuclear reactors. When it came on line in the 1980's, scientists believed that it only had to withstand a maximum 6.5 magnitude quake. It was supposedly built to withstand a 7.0 earthquake. Some scientists believe that the potential seismic event at the site is far higher on the Richter Scale.

Daniel Hirsch, a lecturer in nuclear policy at University of California, Santa Cruz, noted California's reactors are in one of the most seismically active areas of the world after Japan. "What's going on in Japan could happen here," he said.

We should have learned a couple of things by now. First off is our human inability to conceive of the magnitude of forces that our planet is capable of. They surely exceed our ability to visualize, measure or plan for. Secondly, we need to understand that with human beings involved, what can go wrong, eventually will go wrong. We tend to overestimate our competency. And plutonium is forever.

The Japanese have been lauded as the most earthquake prepared people in the world but in a perfect storm, we saw their defenses crumble. The particles that have been unleashed are terrifying but the effects will be slow and difficult to ascertain. Typically clusters of cancers will start to occur within the affected population. But since it can not be seen, we can pretend that radiation exposure is not happening. It will be interesting if the affected areas of Japan will ever be able to grow edible crops again?

Speaking of Japan, the behavior of TEPCO has been shocking. Not providing independent radiation analysis, sending their employees into the radioactive water unprotected and unsupervised and then blaming those same employees for not heeding the sirens. Shameful.

From USGS

California Earthquake History 1769-Present

Includes California, Baja California, and Nevada events

The magnitude listed here is the "summary magnitude". For most events prior to 1898 this is the adjusted intensity magnitude, and for events after 1898 it is the surface wave magnitude. The list includes known earthquakes with a magnitude of at least 6 and selected smaller events. The smaller events since 1898 all have at least one reported magnitude of at least 5.8, even if the summary magnitude is smaller. Some of these magnitudes may be different than what is reported in the Southern California or Northern California Earthquake Catalog. In the future, we will adjust some of these magnitudes to reflect the best measure of the earthquake and label the type of magnitude being reported.
The date and time for each earthquake are given as "24 hour" time referenced to Greenwich Mean Time (now UTC). To convert a time to Pacific Standard Time (PST), subtract 8 hours. To convert a time to Pacific Daylight Time (PDT), where appropriate, subtract 7 hours. Example: The 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake occurred at 00:04 UTC on October 18, 1989 or 5:04pm PDT on October 17, 1989.
Source:
Ellsworth, William L., "Earthquake History, 1769-1989" in USGS Professional Paper 1515, Robert E. Wallace, ed.,1990; William Ellsworth, personal communication; and USGS earthquake catalogs.

---

DATE        TIME(GMT) LATITUDE LONGITUDE   MAG  LOCATION
year mth dy hr min      (N)       (W)  
======================================================================

1951 10  8  410       40 15.00 124 30.00   6.0  W. Of Cape Mendocino
1951 12 26  046       32 48.00 118 18.00   5.9  San Clemente Island
1952  7 21 1152       35  0.   119  1.00   7.7  Kern County earthquake
1952  7 21 12 5       35  0.   119  0.     6.4  Kern County
1952  7 23  038       35 22.00 118 35.00   6.1  Kern County

1952  7 29  7 3       35 23.00 118 51.00   6.1  Bakersfield
1952 11 22  746       35 44.00 121 12.00   6.0  Bryson
1954  1 12 2333       35  0.   119  1.00   5.9  W. of Wheeler Ridge
1954  3 19  954       33 17.00 116 11.00   6.2  Arroyo Salada
1954  7  6 1113       39 25.00 118 32.00   6.6  Rainbow Mountain, Nevada
1954  7  6 22 7       39 18.00 118 30.00   6.4  Rainbow Mountain, Nevada
1954  8 24  551       39 35.00 118 27.00   6.8  Stillwater, Nevada
1954  8 31 2220       39 30.00 118 30.00   6.3  Stillwater, Nevada
1954 10 24  944       31 30.00 116  0.     6.0  W. of Santo Tomas, B.C.
1954 11 12 1226       31 30.00 116  0.     6.3  W. of Santo Tomas, B.C.

1954 11 25 1116       40 16.00 125 38.00   6.5  W. of Cape Mendocino
1954 12 16 11 7       39 19.00 118 12.00   7.1  Fairview Peak, Nevada
1954 12 16 1111       39 30.00 118  0.     6.8  Dixie Valley, Nevada
1954 12 21 1956       40 56.00 123 47.00   6.6  E. of Arcata
1956  2  9 1432       31 45.00 115 55.00   6.8  San Miguel, B.C.
1956  2  9 1524       31 45.00 115 55.00   6.1  San Miguel, B.C.
1956  2 14 1833       31 30.00 115 30.00   6.3  San Miguel, B.C.
1956  2 15  120       31 30.00 115 30.00   6.4  San Miguel, B.C.
1956 10 11 1648       40 40.00 125 46.00   6.0  W. of Cape Mendocino
1956 12 13 1315       31  0.   115  0.     6.0  W. shore, Gulf of California

1959  3 23  710       39 36.00 118  1.00   6.3  Dixie Valley, Nevada
1959  6 23 1435       39  5.00 118 49.00   6.1  Schurz, Nevada
1960  8  9  739       40 19.00 127  4.00   6.2  W. of Cape Mendocino
1966  6 28  426       36  0.   120 30.00   6.0  Parkfield
1966  8  7 1736       31 48.00 114 30.00   6.3  Gulf of California
1966  9 12 1641       39 25.00 120  9.00   6.0  Truckee
1968  4  9  228       33 11.00 116  8.00   6.5  Borrego Mountain
1968  6 26  142       40 14.00 124 16.00   5.4  Punta Gorda
1971  2  9 14 0       34 25.00 118 24.00   6.5  San Fernando
1973  2 21 1445       34  4.00 119  2.00   5.2  Point Mugu

1976 11 26 1119       41 18.00 125 42.00   6.3  W. of Orick
1979  8  6 17 5       37  7.00 121 31.00   5.7  Coyote Lake
1979 10 15 2316       32 36.00 115 18.00   6.5  Imperial Valley
1980 01 24 1900       37 50.00 121 47.00   5.8  Livermore
1980  5 25 1633       37 36.00 118 50.00   6.1  Mammoth Lakes
1980  5 25 1649       37 39.00 118 54.00   5.9  Mammoth Lakes
1980  5 25 1944       37 33.00 118 49.00   5.8  Mammoth Lakes
1980  5 27 1450       37 29.00 118 48.00   6.0  Mammoth Lakes
1980  6  9  328       32 12.00 115  5.00   6.4  Victoria, B.C.
1980 11  8 1027       41  7.00 124 40.00   7.2  W. of Eureka

1981  4 26 1209       33  8.00 115 39.00   6.0  Westmorland
1981  9  4 1550       33 40.00 119  7.00   5.9  N. of Santa Barbara Island
1981  9 30 1153       37 35.00 118 52.00   5.8  Mammoth Lakes
1983  5  2 2342       36 14.00 120 19.00   6.5  Coalinga
1983  7 22  239       36 14.00 120 25.00   5.7  Coalinga
1984  4 24 2115       37 19.00 121 39.00   6.1  Morgan Hill
1984  9 10  314       40 23.00 127  9.00   6.7  Mendocino Fracture Zone
1984 11 23 18 8       37 27.00 118 36.00   5.7  Round Valley
1985  8  4 12 1       36  8.00 120 10.00   5.9  North Kettleman Hills
1986  7  8  920       34  0.   116 36.00   6.0  North Palm Springs

1986  7 20 1429       37 34.00 118 26.00   5.6  Chalfant Valley
1986  7 21 1442       37 32.00 118 26.00   6.2  Chalfant Valley
1986  7 31  722       37 28.00 118 22.00   5.2  Chalfant Valley
1987 10  1 1442       34  3.00 118  5.00   5.8  Whittier Narrows
1987 11 24  153       33  4.00 115 47.00   6.2  Elmore Ranch fault
1987 11 24 1316       33  1.00 115 51.00   6.6  Superstition Hills
1989 10 18 0004       37  2.19 121 52.98   7.1  Loma Prieta
1991  8 16 2226       41 38.00 125 52.00   6.3  W. of Crescent City
1991  8 17 1929       40 17.00 124 14.00   6.2  Punta Gorda
1991  8 17 2217       41 41.00 126  3.00   7.1  W. of Crescent City

1992  4 23  450       33 58.00 116 19.00   6.1  Joshua Tree
1992  4 25 1806       40 20.00 124 14.00   7.2  Cape Mendocino
1992  4 26  741       40 26.00 124 36.00   6.5  Cape Mendocino
1992  4 26 1118       40 23.00 124 35.00   6.6  Cape Mendocino
1992  6 28 1157       34 12.00 116 26.00   7.3  Landers
1992  6 28 1505       34 12.00 116 50.00   6.2  Big Bear
1993  5 17 2320       37  9.00 117 50.00   6.1  Big Pine
1994  1 17 1230       34 13.00 118 32.00   6.7  Northridge
1994  9 01 1515       40 27.00 125 54.00   6.9  Mendocino Fracture Zone
1994  9 12 1223       38 49.00 119 37.00   6.0  Carter's Station, Nevada

1995  2 19  403       40 37.00 125 54.00   6.6  W. of Eureka
1995  9 20 2327       35 46.00 117 38.00   5.5  Ridgecrest
1996  7 24 2016       41 47.04 125 54.66   5.7  W. of Eureka
1997  1 22  717       40 16.32 124 23.64   5.7  Punta Gorda
1999  8  1 1606       37 23.40 117  4.80   5.7  Scotty's Junction, Nevada
1999 10 16  947       34 35.64 116 16.26   7.1  Hector Mine
2000  3 16 1520       40 23.16 125 16.74   5.9  Mendocino Fracture Zone
2003 12 22 1916       35 41.98 121  5.84   6.5  San Simeon
2004  9 28 1715       35 48.90 120 22.44   6.0  Parkfield