It’s also failed. Why not just avoid it? That’s the approach taken according to your link.
The solution to the problems faced at Onagawa were to decommission the plant, and this process would take longer than the duration for which the plant actually ran.
“the 2011 events strongly influenced the decision to decommission the Onagawa Unit 1 early, brought to attention the length of the decommissioning process (which will surpass the operation stage)”
The decision to decommission the plant is political, not technical.
Onagawa was closer to the epicenter than fukushima and suffered no ill effects. It can be done, the main different between Onagawa and Fukushima is that they were owned by different companies and one company took safety seriously.
Why not? It worked at Onagawa: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S259012302...