So you tell me you don't understand that by design, if the water inside the reactor boils the reaction stops, is foolproof? This means you don't believe in the absoluteness of the laws of physics. Big claim on your part.

When I say that current gen are foolproof, I mean they are humanproof. You would have to literally distort the functional possibilities of physics to have a meaningful accident, or cause a literal cataclysm on the site of the powerplant that would make the underlying nuclear accident a joke in comparison.

The reactors do no rely on valves or other complicated industrial design gor security. They rely on basic geometry and physics. If you don't want to hear that from a lowly internet lurker, i can understand, but refuting an expert on the subject would be much harder; so i invite you to read :

Atomic Accidents: A History of Nuclear Meltdowns and Disasters: From the Ozark Mountains to Fukushima by James Mahaffey, an actual seasoned nuclear energy scientist and PhD.

Modern reactors are foolproof, and nowhere near resembling the design of the Chernobyl ones. Meaning that even if nothing is done ( as in, "there is no human intervention possible, and/or no control available" ) the reaction will shutdown itself by lack of moderator. And even if a nefarious agent was to still force corium creation, the underbellies of reactor vessels now make the corium deposit thinner, stopping the reaction altogether.

And even if all these passive protections were folded by heavily modifying the powerplant at the cost of billions, you would still endanger "only" a 200km² area (size of the Chernobyl no go zone, and this is a worst case scenario as the Fukushima accident proved by only having a risk zone just around the power plant, and the city having residual radioactivity bellow safety standards.) If you weigh this against risking the destruction of all our support ecosystems; there's no need to be awfully bright to understand the non issue the is nuclear energy.