Although the town of Onagawa, were the power plant is co-located, was largely destroyed by the tsunami and the Onagawa Nuclear Power Plant having a closer proximity to the epicenter of the 2011 T?hoku earthquake and tsunami, than the Fukushima I power plant, the more modern Onagawa nuclear power plant stood the test of both the magnitude 9 earthquake and ~14 meter high tsunami without incident, despite it being the closest nuclear power plant to the epicenter of the earthquake and tsunami that devastated much of the east coast of Japan in 2011 and triggered accidents at the older, and further afield, Fukushima I plant. According to Reuters after the Onagawa Nuclear Power Plant successfully withstood the 2011 T?hoku earthquake and tsunami, the power plant may now serve as a "trump card" for the nuclear lobbyas evidence that it is possible for a correctly designed nuclear facility to withstand one of most powerful of megathrust earthquakes and tsunamis ever recorded and still shut down safely without incident. According to anti-nuclear advocate Benjamin Sovacool, an interdisciplinary team from MIT in 2003 estimated that given the expected growth of nuclear power from 2005 - 2055, at least four serious nuclear accidents would be expected in that period. However the MIT study Benjamin Sovacool references did not exactly state this, instead the study acknowledges that this estimated accident number does not take into account the existing, as of 2003, and future improvements in safety, it assumes that high accident, rate cited by Sovacool, only if none of the improvements in safety technology from 1970 to 2003 were implemented. Therefore the figure the MIT team suggest, by their own account, would only be possible if the world nuclear fleet were to continue to operate and build old Generation II reactors, and not use any of the presently under construction, Generation III or in design phase Generation IV nuclear power plants between 2005 and 2055