Perhaps, because not all faults are apparent until they move.
And to answer your question, yes, since there are many many faults located, there are also over 100 nuclear plants in the US itself and faults need to be built were cooling water is available, such as a river, and faults are originally located along some rivers. So yes, plants are built along fault lines inevitably.
Yes, the San Andreas fault, in America. This caused the San Francisco earthquake in 1906.
Near any fault lines but earthquakes tend to happen more on the west coast. For example, in California there is a big fault line called the San Andres fault and it took down San Francisco in the early 1900's.
Yes, anywhere.. such as last year there was earthquakes in w. va. felt all over the eats there are fault lines everywhere some catagorized as "dormant" but can become active at any time..
Yes, but no significant ones.
While not on or near any fault line like San Francisco or Los Angeles, Mexico City is vulnerable to earthquakes..
No there is not any fault line in Arizona.
Britain does have nuclear power plants.
In short, no.
Yes, many deserts, if not most deserts, have fault lines in the rocks that lie below them.
One is the Meers fault near Meer, Oklahoma.
No, Indiana does not currently have any nuclear power plants.
No South Dakota does not have any fault lines!!! I beg to differ. I live in SD and I know for a fact that we have fault lines that do produce small earthquakes from time to time.
No. As of 2012, there are no nuclear power plants located in the state of Montana.
No. See the NRC website 'www.nrc.gov' for a map of all US nuclear plants
As far as I know Australia does not want any nuclear plants
no
Fault Lines