{"id":8817,"date":"2026-09-17T10:34:24","date_gmt":"2026-09-17T08:34:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/industrynews.ro\/?p=8817"},"modified":"2026-09-17T10:34:26","modified_gmt":"2026-09-17T08:34:26","slug":"nuclear-disasters-are-very-popular","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/industrynews.ro\/en\/nuclear-disasters-are-very-popular\/","title":{"rendered":"Nuclear Disasters are very popular"},"content":{"rendered":"

I love movies. I have about 1,400 movies logged as watched on Letterboxd, all done in a 2-day frenzy of marking what I\u2019d seen, out of curiosity for the ballpark figure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I watched the Chernobyl<\/em> miniseries with my family over a weekend when it came out. Fascinating stuff. We paused repeatedly so my parents could tell us stories of what they remembered from back then. My mom said they were given iodine pills at school after the accident, being told it was \u201cfor health\u201d. In truth, it was to reduce the effects of the nuclear fallout. The show earned 10 Emmy Awards, 2 Golden Globes and 9 Baftas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Source:
https:\/\/www.hollywoodreporter.com\/news\/general-news\/chernobyl-wins-best-limited-series-emmy-awards-2019-1241850\/<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Had a watch party for the Fukushima miniseries too when it came out four years later, in 2023. Although not nearly as popular, with no awards earned, still a decent watch.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There are books, urban legends, and social media trends around nuclear disasters. I have an adventurous friend who even visited the reactor site and was very proud to talk about it. There were people a while back who photographed themselves at \u2018the claw\u2019, a machine used to move radioactive material immediately after the disaster, which is still extremely dangerous to come near today.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Source:
https:\/\/www.news.com.au\/technology\/environment\/the-claw-of-chernobyl-most-dangerous-thing-in-the-exclusion-zone\/news-story\/533246f01b396bd8deb106c315aecf61<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The point I\u2019m trying to make is simple. Nuclear disasters are very popular. And I believe there are some interesting reasons for that.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

My childhood friend, Wikipedia, has an article entitled \u201cList of environmental disasters\u201d which enumerates a whopping 211 entries, broken down into 12 categories. The 12 entries on nuclear disasters represent 5.69% of the total. While it is true that this list is quite extensive, \u201cif you feel the list is incomplete, feel free to expand it\u201d. There\u2019s stuff here like \u201cdirty dairying in New Zealand\u201d or \u201cNurdles\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, jokes aside, the oil industry section has 35 entries. Despite the oil section being nearly three times as long as the nuclear one, the ecological impact of oil disasters seems to occupy far less space in our public awareness. There\u2019s 2016\u2019s Deepwater Horizon<\/em>, a thriller focusing on the 12 hours leading up to the explosion and the crew\u2019s efforts to escape the burning oil rig. Still, nothing on the environmental disaster it caused. On April 20, 2010, an explosion occurred on British Petroleum\u2019s Deepwater Horizon offshore rig that killed 11 workers and sank the platform. With the safety shutdown system on the ocean floor failing, the uncapped well leaked oil into the Gulf of Mexico for 87 days, discharging an estimated 4.9 million barrels (210 million gallons) of crude and becoming the largest marine oil spill in history.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Sources:
https:\/\/news.mongabay.com\/2025\/04\/15-years-after-the-bp-oil-spill-disaster-how-is-the-gulf-of-mexico-faring\/<\/u><\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\n