bob haller wrote:
that reactor was small, can you imagine what a current US nuke plant
or even storage pool could do if it melted down in a populated area?

What do you think?

Bob's thoughts are paranoid delusions.

Jeff
--

Risks

If there is a prolonged interruption of cooling due to emergency
situations, the water in the spent fuel pools may boil off, resulting
in large amounts of radioactive elements being released into the
atmosphere.[5]

In the magnitude 9 earthquake which struck the Fukushima nuclear
plants in March 2011, one of the spent fuel pools lost its roof and
was reported to be emitting steam. According to The Nation, "Spent
fuel pools at Fukushima are not equipped with backup water-circulation
systems or backup generators for the water-circulation system they do
have."[6] Later, there was some disagreement among sources as to
whether the pool had boiled dry.[7][8][9]

TEPCO, the plant owner, announced that if the rods were exposed, there
was a small chance they would reach criticality, setting off a nuclear
chain reaction (not an explosion).[10] According to nuclear plant
safety specialists, the chances of criticality in a spent fuel pool
are very small, usually avoided by the dispersal of the fuel
assemblies, inclusion of a neutron absorber in the storage racks and
overall by the fact that the spent fuel has a too low enrichment level
to self-sustain a fission reaction. They also state that if the water
covering the spent fuel evaporates, there is no element to moderate
the chain reaction.[11][12][13] On April 1, 2011, United States Energy
Secretary Steven Chu said that after efforts by workers to pour water
on the Fukushima pools, these were "now under control."[14]

Spent fuel pools lack the "4-ft.-thick (1.2 m) concrete cocoons" of
operating reactors but are "housed in more conventional buildings that
are conceivably more susceptible to aircraft strikes or explosives".
[15]

According to Dr. Kevin Crowley of the Nuclear and Radiation Studies
Board, "successful terrorist attacks on spent fuel pools, though
difficult, are possible. If an attack leads to a propagating zirconium
cladding fire, it could result in the release of large amounts of
radioactive material."[16] The Nuclear Regulatory Commission after the
September 11, 2001 attacks required American nuclear plants "to
protect with high assurance" against specific threats involving
certain numbers and capabilities of assailants. Plants were also
required to "enhance the number of security officers" and to improve
"access controls to the facilities".[17]

In 1997, the Brookhaven National Laboratory estimated that a "massive
calamity at one spent-fuel pool could ultimately lead to 138,000
deaths and contaminate 2,000 sq. mi. (5,200 sq km) of land".[18]