Again, I'm hearing "nuclear reactor explosion," despite the fact that all evidence points to an RTG, not a reactor.

Is this splitting hares? Am I being pedantic? I dunno. To me, it's a pretty massive distinction. To someone who knows naught but from a fissionable material to an ass on the ground, perhaps.

Misinformation about nuclear power in news media irritates me in a very specific way.

It is very annoying that news sources covering this have seemed to have invented the "reactor" or "nuclear-powered propulsion" from thin air. Especially given Russia's well-documented love of RTGs.

That being said, it's almost certainly worse from a contamination perspective to blow up a large RTG (perhaps one big enough to provide electrical power for a weapons system) than to blow up a small, un-operated nuclear reactor.

http://bcdbimages.s3.amazonaws.com/w...e_splitter.jpg

It's the equivalent of a dirty bomb rather than a "meltdown" from what I'm hearing, right?

It doesn't help that this is Putin's high profile technological device touted as a matter of national pride. They would lie anyway but it will be worse this time. Something something country obsessed with not being humiliated.