[TopQuark]

You can easily verify the information he presents.

No, sorry, I must be not as knowledgeable as you are.

I know quite a bit of physics, but to form an opinion on this matter, that is not enough: one needs to know (i) nuclear engineering, (ii) construction of the specific plants in question, and (iii) events at those plants as they actually occurred rather than reported.

I do find it grossly misleading and unbecoming for a scientist to be misrepresent his qualifications: it is not true that he is a "Ph.D. scientist:" his Ph.D. is in a completely different "science," which is not even natural one.

[AndyJackson]

As a former Navy nuclear engineer, I have to say that the article is well-written and rings true - meaning it was probably written by the father, as whoever wrote it had to have a lot of knowledge, not only of plant design, but a lot of info on plant operations.

The stated facts fit with my own knowledge and the ebb and flow of affairs over the last couple of days.

Some of the details that will be interesting to find out is how/why a tsunami took out the back-up generating capablity. I have seen no information that the plant was directly hit by the tsunami. It was interesting to learn about the problem that portable generators did not work because the plugs did not fit. Now what I would normally expect here is a bunch of guys would starting hacking off things and hacking into things to make the electrical connections anyway. It will be interesting to know.