Nuclear fearmongering has really set us back sadly. While the Chernobyl doc is a great tale of government corruption, I feel it may continue to setback nuclear adoption.
Last edited:
Why HBO's "Chernobyl" Gets Nuclear So Wrong (Forbes Contributor)
- Thread starter entremet
- Start date
The problem with the "nuclear power is perfect and it's only political systems that cause disasters" is that every nuclear power plant on earth now and in the future would be built and operated within one of those imperfect political system. Human fallibility will simply never rise to the level of selfless competence required to guarantee that a nuclear disaster would never occur. This is the fact that I think laymen viewers intuitively understand that nuclear energy proponents don't seem to want to acknowledge.
Nuclear power might be perfectly safe and reliable, but human beings never will be.
Nuclear power might be perfectly safe and reliable, but human beings never will be.
I mean, if there's a radiation exposure, yes, the effects could be devastating. To act like Chernobyl and Fukushima weren't devastating would be disingenuous. But the show goes to great lengths to emphasize that it was due to incompetence, hubris and deception. There is no real reason to fear nuclear power, stupid people gonna be stupid and you can't help that. But we should also recognize that nuclear power comes with a certain amount of responsibility and we need to make sure that we aren't cutting corners. You can build the best and safest reactor but politicians can fuck it up with bad regulation.
Both Chernobyl and Fukushima could have been averted or made less extreme if not for human error. That's the key factor here, and the point of the show. Not "nuclear bad"
Both Chernobyl and Fukushima could have been averted or made less extreme if not for human error. That's the key factor here, and the point of the show. Not "nuclear bad"
Nuclear adoption in America is basically dead. We can't decide on a place to store our nuclear waste, they forced Indian Point to shut down early, natural gas has risen dramatically..... Add in recent disaster in Japan and there you go. With a lot of instinctual fear reactions, by the time you take your second breathe to explain how much better modern reactors are and how old and flawed the bad ones the other person stopped listening.
If Chernobyl didn’t have graphite tipped rods the disaster wouldn’t have happened. The show made that pretty clear.
Not sure the show should be faulted for people not paying attention.
Not sure the show should be faulted for people not paying attention.
Yup. And fission has always been a dead end anyway. This conversation would sound quite a bit different if we ever cracked fusion.
I would even add to this that we've so fostered greed regardless of the political and economic system in place, and the idea that greed is some inherent human feeling, that deep down we know that the risk with nuclear power, when it can go so wrong, is great.
Someone is profiting/someone will cut corners.
OP
OP
This article is very perplexing to me. It seems that it wants to take the reaction to the show and say it that was the purpose of the show than what the show is trying to say.
If anything I think HBO's Chernobyl went out of its way to avoid any criticism of nuclear power. It was exclusively focused on Soviet beaurcracy and deceit as the villain.
HBO's Chernobyl was not very critical of nuclear power... but if calling our attention to the actual Chernobyl brings up criticism of nuclear power, well, that's unavoidable. It should. It's the great nuclear disaster... what do you really expect?
HBO's Chernobyl was not very critical of nuclear power... but if calling our attention to the actual Chernobyl brings up criticism of nuclear power, well, that's unavoidable. It should. It's the great nuclear disaster... what do you really expect?
lol, it's just an irrational fear from seeing Hiroshima and Chernobyl footage. Bombs are different from reactors but it still freaks me out. To think something has so much power to burn your skin just through the air or causing babies to grow second heads is unbelievably scary to me. It is very impressive that there hasn't been another massive meltdown due to human error.
I mean, I thought the show hammered home very heavily that it was cheap, corrupted assholes that caused the disaster, not nuclear power. Anyone who derived a nuclear power fear monger out of it is foolish imo.
Same author: renewable energy is a sham, nuclear energy is the future
I know where he is coming from . His takeaway is that the show will instill fear in people about nuclear power when in fact the intention of the show is instilling fear about government corruption and communism .
Look at his writings, he is pro nuclear environmentalist
The producer also mentioned a lot of nuclear effects were time compressed to show Long term impact of what does happpen, so the author is just whack
I know where he is coming from . His takeaway is that the show will instill fear in people about nuclear power when in fact the intention of the show is instilling fear about government corruption and communism .
Look at his writings, he is pro nuclear environmentalist
The producer also mentioned a lot of nuclear effects were time compressed to show Long term impact of what does happpen, so the author is just whack
If you made a series about Chernobyl and ignored what happened to the first responders, it would be a lying shit heap. I don't think the series did anything wrong with its portrayal of the incident, including the way they chose to show the dangers of radiation exposure.
Was my only fear when the show started to generate steam. The only solace is that new plants were already effectively ended.
They’re the best answer to making up for renewable energy’s (namely solar) big flaw, which is evening out an uneven flow of energy and providing it when people most need it. Until and unless battery tech. makes generational leaps...
They’re the best answer to making up for renewable energy’s (namely solar) big flaw, which is evening out an uneven flow of energy and providing it when people most need it. Until and unless battery tech. makes generational leaps...
In art, the vast majority of cases, people will walk away with the simplified version of what the story told. This isn't necessarily stupidity, it's just that the human brain is obviously going to fear more what it can directly see than the abstract causes of it.
Chernobyl happened because of greed, lies, recklessness, and stupidity. But those aren't things you can see, touch, or feel, they are abstractions. The resulting radiated bodies, on the other hand, are tangible and thus what stick out in our memories.
I'm not saying it's not a problem per se, but I don't see how it can be solved or how the show can be faulted for it. It went out of it's way to emphasize the human factors that went into causing the explosion as much as it could, but you literally can't see a lie because it's not a material thing. Radiation is, so that's what the audience will walk away with fearing.
Chernobyl happened because of greed, lies, recklessness, and stupidity. But those aren't things you can see, touch, or feel, they are abstractions. The resulting radiated bodies, on the other hand, are tangible and thus what stick out in our memories.
I'm not saying it's not a problem per se, but I don't see how it can be solved or how the show can be faulted for it. It went out of it's way to emphasize the human factors that went into causing the explosion as much as it could, but you literally can't see a lie because it's not a material thing. Radiation is, so that's what the audience will walk away with fearing.
That people interpret those things is not the fault of the show, the show makes it super clear it's all about meeting the responsibility that the use of nuclear power entails.
The show is certainly not an indictment of the technology but the system that made it so damaging. All the pain and suffering that is seen in the show is supposed to make us pause and realize that we should respect the atom. It was human folly that led to the disaster: If the soviet system had not nourished this negligence of truth we would have had people stand for safety instead of personal gain, would have had scientific analysis of the reactor safety be taken seriously instead of suppressed, and we would have had the reactors fixed without necessitating the suicide of Lagasov. People need to stop being passive in watching a show like this, to grasp all that is being conveyed we as an audience need to be introspective. The show runners are providing an indictment of the worst of humanity that is a part of all of us, if the watcher merely chooses to focus on the morbid events and blames it all on the technology then their indictment sure is on the money.
That the only actually fatal accident only ever happened in the old URSS and that even a grade 9 earthquake disaster on a 50 years old plant had 0 victims should make people realize how absurdly safe the technology is. Air pollution has a victim counts in the millions every year, even hydro has more than ten times the casualties of nuclear Power. But we doomed ourselves with nuclear fear and now we have an impossible problem to solve, global warming.
I mean the final episode made clear there were about a dozen or so points where they could’ve safely prevented the explosion, all the way to the emergency rod injection. That they had to push the reactor way past the the normal bounds to elicit the response it gave.
Radiation poisoning from an accident is terrible, sure but it is a power to respect and understand. The disaster didn’t behave outside of science and wasn’t unpredictable. Moreso newer reactors and even the still used RBMK reactors are much safer that the flaw in Chernobyl was found.
The move away from nuclear will cause more damage in climate change and pollution than nuclear plants ever will.
Radiation poisoning from an accident is terrible, sure but it is a power to respect and understand. The disaster didn’t behave outside of science and wasn’t unpredictable. Moreso newer reactors and even the still used RBMK reactors are much safer that the flaw in Chernobyl was found.
The move away from nuclear will cause more damage in climate change and pollution than nuclear plants ever will.
It's unfortunate for sure, Chernobyl is a great show but deviates from scientific and historic reality in odd and unnecessary ways, which is ironic given the nominal theme of "what is the cost of lies?" Radiation is super dangerous and Chernobyl killed a lot of people, but many things were turned up to 11 in the show, and presented so well you wouldn't realized it without some external reference.
So, while the show didn't set out to fear-monger about nuclear power, the deviations from the reality for the sake of the narrative end up having a subtle but similar effect. It exaggerated the severity and speed of radiation poising, the risk of a "nuclear" explosion, and small-ish things like the helicopter crash being linked to radiation when it really wasn't. Characters talk about dying in 5 years when people exposed to much more radiation are still alive.
So, while the show didn't set out to fear-monger about nuclear power, the deviations from the reality for the sake of the narrative end up having a subtle but similar effect. It exaggerated the severity and speed of radiation poising, the risk of a "nuclear" explosion, and small-ish things like the helicopter crash being linked to radiation when it really wasn't. Characters talk about dying in 5 years when people exposed to much more radiation are still alive.
I don't know anyone who saw the show say it made them worried about nuclear power, more so that they didn't know how bad the Soviet Union was. And to be honest, with my albeit limited knowledge of nuclear fission, the show doesn't actually get that much wrong. It even says the reactors in the West do not have the same major flaws
And Scary Movie 3 and Scary Movie 4. Identity Thief. It's quite a dramatic turn for Mazin.
Is there a reason why the OP doesn't even link to the article?
Follow up question: Is there a reason why we should care what a "Forbes contributor" thinks? Isn't this basically the equivalent to some rando posting to Medium?
Follow up question: Is there a reason why we should care what a "Forbes contributor" thinks? Isn't this basically the equivalent to some rando posting to Medium?
But it has always been that way, especially after 1986.
People in general are trash at evaluating risks and the physiologial effects of radiation.
I'm always bothered that stories like these absolutely never acknowledge that nuclear power is dangerous technology. Dangerous in that we absolutely need to respect its power & capability, and that it requires exceptional engineering, maintenance, & oversight.
I just feel like a lot of these stories don't respect the power that nuclear energy yields. It's too often written off something that poses zero threat, when that is factually incorrect. Yes, they are safe, and yes, they are clean...however, there is also always the potential for incredible disaster. If we don't acknowledge that something terrible is in fact a possibility (it is, and always will be) then we put humanity in a position to fail.
Nuclear energy DEMANDS respect and care, and frivolously stating "it's safe" without addressing the respect and care necessary...is simply absurd.
I just feel like a lot of these stories don't respect the power that nuclear energy yields. It's too often written off something that poses zero threat, when that is factually incorrect. Yes, they are safe, and yes, they are clean...however, there is also always the potential for incredible disaster. If we don't acknowledge that something terrible is in fact a possibility (it is, and always will be) then we put humanity in a position to fail.
Nuclear energy DEMANDS respect and care, and frivolously stating "it's safe" without addressing the respect and care necessary...is simply absurd.
I bet we all live relatively close within the "danger zone" of a nuclear power plant and don't even think about it. Hell, nearest one to me is ~34 miles away.
Yeah, irrational fears of nuclear power has essentially doomed our planet in the long term due to climate change, while also generating loads of toxic and radioactive coal ash that now needs to be managed forever causing health risks in the short and medium term. But only poor people live close enough to coal plants to get the worst of the effects, so it just goes on and on.
And modern governments and corporations are just as corrupt and negligent as ever.
45 miles away from me. Located in the middle of the desert and is the only large nuclear power plant in the world that is not located near a large body of water.
Also, even though nuclear radiation is scary ass shit....
So just just normal every day fire, and third degree burns are horrific and painful, so we need to take care to make sure that our tools that have the potential to produce flames are handled with appropriate care.
We should think of it in those terms.
So just just normal every day fire, and third degree burns are horrific and painful, so we need to take care to make sure that our tools that have the potential to produce flames are handled with appropriate care.
We should think of it in those terms.
What a weird article. Is this newsflash?
Nuclear is safe when used under safe environment. Nuclear is fucked when used under fucked environment. Modern Nuclear Power Plants have ridiculous safety regulations that no corrupt govt can meddle in.
Nuclear is safe when used under safe environment. Nuclear is fucked when used under fucked environment. Modern Nuclear Power Plants have ridiculous safety regulations that no corrupt govt can meddle in.