"Robert Green" wrote in message
...

That, in my mind, means that siting is not as important as it seems.

By that logic you wouldn't step off the train tracks because you might be
hit by a bus instead. Ignoring a *known* threat would never be justified
because there might be an unknown threat too. In the case of Japan allowing
private industry to do its own geological studies and accepting the results
without question seems to have been a bad idea, likewise with allowing them
to locate and build nuclear plants with inadequate defenses against
earthquake and tsunami damage.

Hardening all reactors AT LEAST in areas known to be seismologically
active
is the better course of action

You are correct, the bar has to be raised. Cost-cutting cannot be allowed
to put the public's safety at such serious risk.