Does the prospect of nuclear disaster still frighten anyone these days?

[JuliaL]

The sort of nuclear disaster you describe would only occur if the working reactor core melts down. It is a foregone conclusion that the Containment around the reactor core would not be breached by either a massive flood, or an undermining of the foundation of the containment building. So the reactor melt down would not be the direct result of flooding. The only possible way a flooding could lead to core melt down is if it indirectly disrupts the power supply to coolant water pumps.

Are you sure?
My recollection of the sequence of events surrounding the Fukushima Daichi releases isn't comprehensive.
But I remember there being a serious threat of losing cooling water to the spent rod storage pools. These were specially noted in the case of reactor 4 where the rods had been most recently removed from the reactor and were most at risk of catching fire if the pool drained. I could see a flood undermining the building ->cracks in the storage pool -> coolant loss -> rod cladding fire -> airborne & waterborne contamination.
The reactor vessel could probably stay intact, remain cooled yet isotopes released.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_D...4,_5_and_6

Fukushima showed that the best planned and engineered systems have weaknesses. Some aren't even physical, but cultural or commercial, e.g. why did Fukushima Daichi not have a sufficient sea wall to protect its diesel fuel tanks from the tsunami? We learn, the question is how fast. I am still pro-nuclear as the best option to support civilization without unacceptable reduction in standards of living while reducing carbon emission to less than catastrophic levels. Fukushima Daichi was a 50 year old installation.