Lake Anna Reactor Ranked 7th most At-...

Lake Anna Reactor Ranked 7th most At-Risk for Earthquake Damage

There are 30 comments on the NBC29 Charlottesville story from Mar 16, 2011, titled Lake Anna Reactor Ranked 7th most At-Risk for Earthquake Damage. In it, NBC29 Charlottesville reports that:

The United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission has ranked the earthquake damage risk at all 104 nuclear power plants in this country.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at NBC29 Charlottesville.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
PUT A STOP TO THIS

Charlottesville, VA

#1 Mar 16, 2011
I am shocked that Lake Anna is #7 on the list, and our Governor wants to expand nuclear power!!?? I AM IN DISBELIEF!! Read this article from our Governor Bob McDonnell.
http://www.nbc29.com/story/14264648/battle-br...
I urge all fellow American citizens to e-mail, call, or write him to put a stop on this process in Virginia. Seeing what the people in Japan are going through can happen. There is other renewable energy source we can use, and SHOULD use. Solar power, wind energy, and using creek water to produce energy.
Nothing will change if the American people do not stand up and fight against this nuclear expansion! Together we can make a statement! I've already contacted Gov. McDonnell & expressed my concern. Please act on this and do not allow this expansion to occur!
Jamie

Wytheville, VA

#4 Mar 17, 2011
Plant sure helps the fishin' though. Them glowfish are easy to see at night and don't have many bones. I have to admit that third eye does look a little peculiar.
Fran

Buckingham, VA

#5 Mar 17, 2011
I can't believe that we are concerned about the aesthetics of our water views (wind mills) instead of our health and lives. Not only is Lake Anna not built to withstand a large magnitude earthquake, but no one has stated anything about the type of Reactor is at Lake Anna. Is it outdated? Supposely Japans' was. Why are we not actively seeking sun, water, and wind power resources? What Political motivation is there to futher Nuclear Power Plants?
Bud

Waynesboro, VA

#6 Mar 17, 2011
Come on, people. First, this is just sensationalism. Second, do some research and figure out how many acres of land you would need to generate with wind and solar power the amount of power generated by a nuclear plant.

And creek water? For power? What are you going to do in the summer when there's a drought and the creeks are low?

This is just a guess, but I think American nuke plants have killed less people than all the self-absorbed Prius drivers out there.
CvilleGordo

Royal Oak, MD

#7 Mar 17, 2011
PUT A STOP TO THIS wrote:
I am shocked that Lake Anna is #7 on the list, and our Governor wants to expand nuclear power!!?? I AM IN DISBELIEF!! Read this article from our Governor Bob McDonnell.
http://www.nbc29.com/story/14264648/battle-br...
I urge all fellow American citizens to e-mail, call, or write him to put a stop on this process in Virginia. Seeing what the people in Japan are going through can happen. There is other renewable energy source we can use, and SHOULD use. Solar power, wind energy, and using creek water to produce energy.
Nothing will change if the American people do not stand up and fight against this nuclear expansion! Together we can make a statement! I've already contacted Gov. McDonnell & expressed my concern. Please act on this and do not allow this expansion to occur!
I suppose you are also hoping for an even more catastrophic outcome to the situation in Japan, obviously that would fit your professional protestor agenda nicely. Who cares who you already contacted? You are clearly just another professional spittle-flecked protestor.
CvilleGordo

Royal Oak, MD

#8 Mar 17, 2011
However, now that I think about it, maybe I SHOULD harness the water in my creek. If I could find the water in the summer. Well, so much for that idea. How about a windmill? Oh darn, not windy today. Well, time to fire up the solar panels. What? No sun?

“Keeping life realistic”

Since: Apr 10

Location hidden

#9 Mar 17, 2011
CvilleGordo wrote:
However, now that I think about it, maybe I SHOULD harness the water in my creek. If I could find the water in the summer. Well, so much for that idea. How about a windmill? Oh darn, not windy today. Well, time to fire up the solar panels. What? No sun?
Stop applying logic to this topic! It has no place here..
OOP, gotta go, my new "green" bus that gets 40mpg is here to shuttle me around town, good thing THAT won't require any power from a nuke site.
CvilleGordo

Temple Hills, MD

#10 Mar 17, 2011
Laughing at the fools wrote:
<quoted text>
Stop applying logic to this topic! It has no place here..
OOP, gotta go, my new "green" bus that gets 40mpg is here to shuttle me around town, good thing THAT won't require any power from a nuke site.
Let's all go protest at the Capitol for a few weeks, and we don't have to clean up our mess, that's what taxpayers are for.
What a Joke

Charlottesville, VA

#11 Mar 17, 2011
Hippies are funny... Environuts...

Since: May 10

United States

#12 Mar 17, 2011
Maybe North Anna is more prone to earthquake damage than other plants because VIRGINIA ISN'T NEAR THE PACIFIC RIM! Think about it. When is the last time we had a 5.0 quake or a 4.0 quake for that matter in Virginia? The strongest earthquakes in this state occur in the panhandle region, and even those prove only somewhat destructive to much older construction.

From the USGS:
"The largest earthquake to originate in Virginia is historic times occurred on May 31, 1897. The epicenter was in Giles County, where on May 3, an earlier tremor at Pulaski, Radford, and Roanoke had caused damage (MM VI)...It was especially strong at Pearisburg, where the walls of old brick houses were cracked and bricks were thrown from chimney tops."
Jim

Powhatan, VA

#13 Mar 17, 2011
When do we break ground on #3?
County Resident

Raleigh, NC

#14 Mar 17, 2011
Fran wrote:
I can't believe that we are concerned about the aesthetics of our water views (wind mills) instead of our health and lives. Not only is Lake Anna not built to withstand a large magnitude earthquake, but no one has stated anything about the type of Reactor is at Lake Anna. Is it outdated? Supposely Japans' was. Why are we not actively seeking sun, water, and wind power resources? What Political motivation is there to futher Nuclear Power Plants?
What political motivation? Follow the money.
Judgement

Keswick, VA

#15 Mar 17, 2011
I toured the North Anna Power Plant right after it opened in 1978 and one of the major concerns at that time was that it is built right on a fault line. I have not heard a thing about that mentioned, even as it looks like they are proceeding with reactor #3!
Gru

Charlottesville, VA

#16 Mar 17, 2011
Virginia's not in an earthquake-prone area!!!!(how clueless are these people?) Jamie -- GREAT sense of humor & thanks for the laugh. I keep picturing that 3-eyed fish in The Simpsons!

Sure -- I'll write the governor -- DRILL, BABY, DRILL!!!

Kids -- if we ever have a tsunami that actually reaches us up here -- we'd have WAY more things to worry about than a nuke plant!! GET REAL!
What a Joke

Charlottesville, VA

#17 Mar 17, 2011
Gru wrote:
Virginia's not in an earthquake-prone area!!!!(how clueless are these people?) Jamie -- GREAT sense of humor & thanks for the laugh. I keep picturing that 3-eyed fish in The Simpsons!
Sure -- I'll write the governor -- DRILL, BABY, DRILL!!!
Kids -- if we ever have a tsunami that actually reaches us up here -- we'd have WAY more things to worry about than a nuke plant!! GET REAL!
Well said. People are just clueless and watch to much liberal news
Sarg

Charlottesville, VA

#18 Mar 17, 2011
If I remember correctly, the North Anna plant is built on (or near} a seismic fault line that has been inactive for something like 35 million years. Still, one never knows...
Bad

Goode, VA

#19 Mar 17, 2011
We are not on a fault line so relax already! The liberal news media is where the brakes nned to be applied. When they do not want something like nuclear power, notice how they band together to obsess over it and find all the negatives they can find about it. The environmentalists do not want to ruin the environment so they do not want hydro electric dams as it would ruin the water life. They do not want to use oil or coal as it fouls up the air. They do not want to use solar or wind turbines as it will mess up the view. The latter would only produce 20% of the electricity we consume. Just like oil, we are addicted to electricity. It powers everything we use. Glowing in the dark is a myth about nuclear power. It goes a long way in producing power for us. We have 7.5 billion people on earth and by 2020- 10 billion.They are going to be consumers of electricity! Environmentalists would push us back into the dark ages if they get their way.
Healthy green glow

Charlottesville, VA

#20 Mar 17, 2011
Please, people should stop being so alarmist! Seventh is plenty safe; no need to panic until after the first six experience a melt-down. Only then should we panic. Besides, if you keep iodine pills, hard-tack and a .44 in your concrete fallout shelter, you should come through any service interruptions just fine. So sit back and enjoy the glow!
Healthy green glow

Charlottesville, VA

#21 Mar 17, 2011
Sarg wrote:
If I remember correctly, the North Anna plant is built on (or near} a seismic fault line that has been inactive for something like 35 million years. Still, one never knows...
True, but it stopped being active three years ago. No worries!
Jamie

Wytheville, VA

#22 Mar 17, 2011
I heard about these guys down at Lake Norman outside of Charlotte that are running geo-thermal loops out into the lake instead of drillin' wells and all. That reactor down there keeps the lake temperature pretty even so their geo-thermal heat pumps work real efficient. His young wife makes him wear lead underpants when he goes out fishin' though... family "jewels" and all. There's a bit of a drawback.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Nuclear Energy Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News The Latest: Land officials OK closing nuclear s... Wed conCERN 1
News Sheen in Lake Ontario identified as oil from nu... Jun 27 sounds safe eh 2
News Russia's nuclear nightmare flows down radioacti... Jun 27 RUSSIA in DECLINE 4
News Nuclear waste burial report (May '15) Jun 27 warrengraham 3
News Nuclear waste, anyone? Feds look to willing states Jun 26 warrengraham 1
News Here's where the US nuclear boom turned into a ... Jun 23 BDV 2
News End of California nuclear era: Last plant to cl... Jun 21 Solarman 1
More from around the web