Not so fast there...
I mean come the eff on. Fukashima with stood an Earthquake 800 time more powerful than it was designed to withstand... and then it really was the design of the backup power that failed to cool the reactors.
Not so.
http://en.wikipedia....quake_and_tsunami
The epicenter was 45 miles east of Sendai and Fukushima is farther down the coast.
http://en.wikipedia....e_accident_begins
The 9.0 MW Tōhoku earthquake occurred at 14:46 JST on Friday, 11 March 2011 with epicentre near the island of Honshu.[43] It resulted in maximum ground accelerations of 0.56, 0.52, 0.56 g (5.50, 5.07 and 5.48 m/s2) at units 2, 3 and 5 respectively, above their designed tolerances of 0.45, 0.45 and 0.46 g (4.38, 4.41 and 4.52 m/s2), but values within the design tolerances at units 1, 4 and 6.[30] The Fukushima I facility had not initially been designed for a tsunami of the size that struck the plant,[44][45] nor had the reactors been modified when later concerns were raised in Japan and by the IAEA.[46]
I can't find the numbers, but IIRC, the actual equivalent quake at the reactors was ~ 7.0 or below.
The quake didn't do the plant in - it was the tsunami and the design/layout of the backup systems. The main point is that the plant should never have suffered loss of coolant - there should have been sufficient backups. Once coolant is lost, lots of very bad thing happen that can spiral out of control...
At least that's my understanding at the moment.
Cheers,
Scott.