Lmao no.

Fukushima No1 was a carbon copy of a US nuclear power plant that was intended to withstand earthquakes... And tornadoes.

Tsunamis were not factored into the design.

TEPCO wanted to minimize cost. So instead of redesigning the reactor, they just used the same blueprints and built a giant sea wall to block tsunamis.

They then refused to upgrade the sea wall. This is despite multiple earthquake forecasts by public and private authorities.

They even started a sea wall upgrade project 1 year before the earthquake.

It was cancelled due to "excessive costs".

Not as unsafe as using coal instead of nuclear, and pushing the world towards a climate disaster.

Climate change has already done much more damage to Europe than Chernobyl.

Fukushima was neither best precautions nor best designs. And, as multiple posters have said, still far fewer fatalities, and less environmental damage, than any fossil fuel.