Tim Streater gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying:

His point is that for the stations proposed here, such a tsunami and
earthquake would be of no consequence because:

1) they'd withstand the earthquake, as the japanese ones did

It might also be worth pointing out that there are no nuclear reactors in
the UK lying in the direct path of a tsunami originating from a massive
earthquake with an epicentre barely more than 40 miles away.

In fact, as far as a quick google finds, the only almost certain tsunami
to affect the UK was the result of a massive Norwegian landslip in about
6,000bc.

The 1607 Bristol Channel floods might have been an earthquake tsunami. Or
might not have been. Either way, it wasn't exactly on the same scale.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristol...l_floods,_1607