Regular price: $6.95
Buy Now with 1 Credit
Buy Now for $6.95
This book wasn’t for you, but who do you think might enjoy it more?
Someone who just wants to read anti-nuclear propaganda and doesn't care about a complete lack of context, or basic errors about reactor construction.
The book is 90% transcripts of eyewitness interviews and meetings of officials in the immediate aftermath of the accidents. It does a good job of conveying the fear and confusion of the times, but does nothing to contextualize the threats or create a coherent timeline.
- "Did you read the Wikipedia?"-level errors about the construction of power plants.
- Lack of context for the personal interviews. When were they conducted? Who conducted them?
- Claims made in the interviews (Stuff like an impenetrable blue fog miles from Three Mile Island and mass dieoff of animals) are either uncorroborated or impossible.
- Lack of a coherent timeline.
Would you ever listen to anything by Charles River Editors again?
This might have provided some decent background for a more complete study of the events, but for that, you'd want a text copy.
How could the performance have been better?
The narrator made a small change of voice when moving into interview transcripts, but seemed to forget about it halfway through, meaning that it was impossible to tell when they switched back.
Plus, mispronunciation of some very common words.
What character would you cut from Chernobyl and Three Mile Island: The History and Legacy of the World's Most Notorious Nuclear Accidents?
All of them.
Any additional comments?
Complete waste of a credit. Nothing but blatant propaganda.
Not an unbiased examination as I'd hoped. Includes accounts by people who got "sunburned" from Three Mile Island or their cat started acting strange.