Journalists should be taught a few things about the current design of nuclear reactors. In the case of a complete melt-down, the radioactive material still can'

Journalists should be taught a few things about the current design of nuclear reactors. In the case of a complete melt-down, the radioactive material still can't melt through the steel containment vessel. It's designed explicitly to prevent such a catastrophe. Even 3-Mile Island, which had half it's reactive material melt, only made it through less than an inch of the containment steel. So no, the article is very wrong in this point. In the event of a full melt-down, they'll have another completely useless reactor (pumping sea-water to cool it will require a new containment vessel due to corrosion anyway). It's hard enough keeping people informed of how safe nuclear power actually is without journalists constantly spreading FUD.