If you're talking about nuclear power plants, it's pretty hard to get them to go boom. And even when they do, it's a thermal explosion rather than a nuclear one.
Aye, which is what is generally agreed upon to be what the explosion(s) at Chernobyl were at their core (pun intended).
Helped along by pre-existing design flaws, known reactor behavior at low power levels and a cascading series of operator errors and external events in the 24 hours or so leading up to 1:23 AM (all a result to varying degrees of the general culture of keeping any flaws/problems with the design under wraps, even from the people responsible for running the damn things, that came to define the USSR as a whole), all the water in the core flashed to steam instantaneously, the resulting pressure blasting the reactor lid (in RBMKs, this is known as the UPS or Upper Biological Shield) off like a wine cork and through the roof of the reactor hall, throwing most of the reactor's contents out into the immediate surroundings, destroying the reactor hall & exposing what was left of the core to the atmosphere, sparking several fires. It couldn't be more different to, say, a nuclear bomb like Trinity going off in terms of the mechanics and physics involved.
However, as is well-known, the RBMK is a design unique to the former Soviet Union - our own Magnox and AGR designs also use/used graphite as a moderator, but both were cooled by gas, not water, therefore eliminating a key factor in the Chernobyl disaster; Hunterston was never gonna go up in the same way even in the worst case scenario despite all the media hysteria at the time - and the series of modifications made to the remaining RBMKs after reactor #4's destruction make a repeat highly unlikely. Additionally, the remaining reactors in Russia have gradually been shut down as they reach the end of their operational lifespan; 4 have been shut down since 2018 (two each at Kursk & Leningrad).
