Okay, so I'll start right off the bat with stating the controversial conclusion I came to:
I don't think we should use this feat for powerscaling the characters, including Enel himself.
And I'll do my best to explain why.
As near as I can understand it, the full argument for the revision to Enel is essentially this:
1) The Space Pirates use
this machine right here as part of their excavation work on the Moon.
2) If the machine was at point-blank range of the excavating explosion when it went off, that means its durability scales to the full potency of the explosion used for excavating.
3) The Space Pirates triggered
this explosion on the Moon [
calced here by KingTempest].
4) Enel destroyed the machinery during his rampage against the Space Pirates, so his Attack Potency scales above the durability of the machines, which scales to the potency of the explosion calced above.
At face value, it seems really simple and straightforward so I get where the OP is coming from with it.
But I think some things which are being taken at face value are heavily dependant on a lot of assumptions here. First of all, let me preface that the Cover Stories overall are pretty sparse on details; we get them as a single captioned panel at a time, often skipping scenes and portraying the events of their stories as a bunch of snapshots. We sometimes need to make assumptions and inferences about what is going on, but it is because of that very problem that we can't always be
completely sure about what is happening.
And it goes without saying that the more assumptions you're required to make about something, the less reliable it will be.
Firstly, I don't think we can be sure that the machine was at the centre of
this explosion when it went off.
We don't know what this machinery is exactly or what role it plays in the Space Pirates' excavation other than we see it in the crater after the explosion has taken place. Did it cause the explosion itself? Is it used to clear rubble or debris after the explosion? Does it drill further down perhaps? As I said, details are sparse on its exact nature; if it isn't directly involved in the explosion itself then thar raises the question of if it was at point-blank range of whatever explosive was set off.
And does it being located in the crater in
this panel necessarily mean that it was always right
there the whole time since before the explosion was set off? We don't have a "Before" shot prior to the explosion going off. All we see is the explosion itself, and the aftermath. In the aftermath, we see
this big eel-like alien seemingly inside the crater and touching the machinery. Maybe, after the explosion happened, this big guy lowered the machinery into the newly created crater.
As KT pointed out, the Space Pirates have
infrastructure around the excavation zone. The whole area is fenced off and there's other machinery present. It's possible that this machine was just present
next to the crater and was lowered in to continue the excavation work.
But okay - maybe the machinery
was actually there, dug into the ground and it was used to detonate some kind of explosive. Maybe it drilled down into the lunar surface and then placed the bomb there. I can't assert that the big alien definitely moved the machinery after the explosion went off, so I'm just raising the possibility.
Secondly, the bigger issue is that the proposal in the OP
isn't that we use
the explosion that we see on-screen here in which the machinery could plausibly have been in close proximity of and withstood. The proposal is that we use
this other explosion to scale the machinery's durability. I'll refer to the former as
Explosion 1 and the latter as
Explosion 2.
The benefit at the least for Explosion 1 is that the machinery is visible after the explosion took place and in the crater that was caused by the explosion. That at least makes it a plausible assumption that it was there all along and therefore scales to the explosion as we see it intact.
But we have even less context about Explosion 2 than we do with Explosion 1. We don't see what machinery was used during it, or whether that machinery truly did survive intact despite supposedly being at the center of this Multi-Continental explosion. We don't know that it is the exact same equipment used during Explosion 1. We don't know that the Space Pirates only have one of these things and they use the same one each time.
Without direct evidence of the machinery being at the dead-centre of this vast explosion, it currently comes across as an association fallacy; where we presumably see the machinery intact after one explosion, therefore in a vastly different explosion the same machinery was probably used and it was just as unaffected by larger explosion as it was by the smaller explosion.
Thirdly, I think there is also a simple common sense matter here that I think needs to be taken into account. Let's consider the narrative logic behind what is happening here; the Space Pirates are performing an excavation mission of the ruins on the Moon. They're blasting a hole into the Moon's surface in order to uncover
the entrance to the ruins visible here. It's dozens of meters, or a couple hundred meters, below the lunar surface.
Which makes the use of an explosion like
this to uncover it rather implausible.
As KingTempest calculated, this explosion here is about
363608626 meters across, or
363608.626 kilometers. It is as wide
28.5 planet Earth's lined up end-to-end. It is an explosion massively larger than
most planets.
And the Space Pirates were using this to... uncover some ruins near the Moon's surface? A couple of hundred meters down?
There's no getting away from the fact that
this explosion and
this explosion are about as far apart as you can get in their differing depictions. The one we actually see the Space Pirates use in detail in their excavation plan is a few hundred meters across, maybe a kilometer. The other one? Hundreds of thousands of times bigger, and no narrative cause behind it; we don't see a vast crater left behind by it. As mentioned above don't even see any surviving machinery used in this detonation.
Now, I know what some people maybe thinking here: "
Damage, what are you talking about? We see the explosion happen on-panel. That means it really did happen and it was that big despite all your skepticism."
The thing is, just because we see something on-screen doesn't
always mean it is meant to be taken literally. Exaggeration is a common technique and it's not limited to just statements either; art style can be deliberatelt exaggerated even without getting into the whole Toon Physics thing.
Like take
this panel of Darkshine from the manga One-Punch Man as an example. He's not literally that big; we would be silly for trying to pixelscale his height here. He's drawn in an exgerrated manner to emphasize the intimidation / power he has. Or an example closer to home,
the Seven Warlords of the Sea in One Piece are drawn in an exagerrated manner in this panel. Just like at the tiny Marine in front of them. Mihawk is only mean to be 2 meters tall but here he looks twice that size.
Things can be drawn in an exaggerated manner for many reasons; for comedic purposes, for emphasis, for dramatic effect, etc. In this case, I think it's simply that if the explosion was drawn at the proper scale for what it's intended purpose is, then it would of course be nigh-invisible against the true scale of the Moon. It was simply drawn big so that the audience can see it and so that the old man would suffer a heart attack upon noticing an explosion go off on the Moon's surface, thus giving the tiny Automata people a reason to travel up to the Moon for vengeance.
Now, too much skepticism is a bad thing I know. If there were
more consistency to this feat, then there wouldn't be as much of a problem with it. But the fact is that we don't juse have a single Moon explosion to judge off of. We have two. And with there being such an enormous difference in portrayal between the two, that calls into question the legitimacy of exclusively scaling off of the one explosion.
Now, I apologize for the lengthy post but I just want to make it clear that I don't think that the situation is as straightforward to powerscale as is presented. Does this mean that I don't think we should powerscale Enel destroying the machinery at all? No.
I think the better options would be that we calculate the actual explosion that the machinery can most plausibly be tied to, Explosion 1. We can also calculate the actual damages to machinery itself as an alternative to that by finding its volume, assuming a reasonable material for it, and then calculating how much of it Enel destroyed or damaged - but that's a more complicated option with more assumptions.
I just think that there are enough issues with trying to powerscale Enel directly to the High 6-A explosion for me to be against the proposals in the OP.
@Elizhaa @Dalesean027 @Duedate8898 @Reiner04 As you all evaluated
this earlier thread which argued in favor of having Enel scale to the large explosion on the Moon, I would appreciate it if you could read my thoughts on this topic here.
) how do you know tho btw? Actually nevermind you don’t need to answer, kinda off topic
what even is 2% computer 
didn't know that existed unless it's a laptop/MacBook which I even more funny trying to prepare CRT's with 
but anyway no more derail 
