the pacific wave dilemma

the pacific wave dilemma
The tsunami alert was rescinded this morning for New Zealand and Taiwan. BBC News 24 a moment ago had a headline saying that it is going to the entire Pacific region.How are two diverging statements like this reconciled?The tsunami is a wave off the Coast of Japan. Like a mirror this can reflect in a given direction as well as the original east heading wave across the Pacific. As such the wave is picked up on weather and GPS sattellites and can be monitored by weather bouys on uninhabited rock islands on route, learned from the Tsunami of 2004.

This has refined predictions that have been developed from Ice core predictions taken from the Arctic, Russia, Canada and teh Antarctic. the decision to invest in such research has historically been taken by nation states upon the advice of their intelligence agencies and co-ordinating and cooperating bodies. Now input comes from observer status for the International Atomic Agency and the relevant professional bodies that have observer status at the UN.Other research methods that have been used to attempt to predict earthquakes are bouys sent into volcanic magna in the past three decades and thermal imaging satellites.

The UK has not had earthquakes of this magnitude and its nuclear plants are not at risk of explosion.
The question to ask is can nuclear plants be sited in earthquake zones safely and if so can an earthquake cuased radioactive fire be put out as quickly as occurred today.

Also what are the risks of aftershocks in the wider Pacific Rim following an earthquake of the magnitude of 8.9 (the earthquake Richter scale limit)