>>And we don't even know about the radiation yet. (At least we won't be hearing for a while about how safe and economical nuclear energy is).
>
>On the contrary - if you have any interest in this issue, there's an excellent analysis at http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/14/fukushiima_analysis/ .

at least it is not driven by alarmist tendencies or to create a wider audience...

>At 8.9 on the Richter scale, it was some five times stronger than the older Fukushima plants had been designed to cope with.

factor five is about correct assuming the current estimate of 9.0 considering the dampening effect of 180 kilometers distance

>Control rods slammed into the cores, absorbing the neutrons spitting from the fuel rods and pinching off the uranium-fission chain reactions powering the plant.

Somehow I don't view this like an electronic gate... But yes, control rods probably performed to a very large degree, even if we would NOT have been told otherwise (if exact status were known)

But the part of PR blunder and controlled Hydrogen generation, this I doubt the most...