Oliver Stone talks new film "Nuclear Now"
Summary
TLDRIn an interview with Anya Parampil on 'The Gray Zone', filmmaker Oliver Stone discusses his documentary 'Nuclear Now', which explores nuclear energy as a misunderstood yet viable solution to global energy needs. Stone addresses the myths surrounding nuclear power, emphasizing its safety and efficiency compared to fossil fuels. He criticizes the influence of the film and music industry on shaping negative perceptions of nuclear energy and calls for a global, positive approach to adopting nuclear power for a sustainable future.
Takeaways
- 🎬 Oliver Stone's documentary 'Nuclear Now' aims to challenge the misconceptions surrounding nuclear energy and presents it as a viable solution to the energy crisis.
- 🌟 Stone believes nuclear energy has been misunderstood for decades and his documentary seeks to provide a balanced view, focusing on the technology's potential rather than just the risks.
- 📽️ The film addresses the public's fear of nuclear energy, often influenced by media portrayals and compares it to the actual scientific facts, emphasizing the safety and controlled nature of nuclear power.
- ⚛️ Stone discusses the environmental benefits of nuclear energy, highlighting how it produces minimal waste and has a significantly lower carbon footprint compared to fossil fuels.
- 🌍 The documentary points out the global implications of energy choices, noting that countries like China and Russia are leading in nuclear energy development, while the U.S. seems hesitant.
- 💡 Stone argues that nuclear energy is not just about electricity but is crucial for heating, transportation, and industrial processes, underlining its multifaceted role in modern society.
- 🚀 The film touches on the advancements in nuclear technology, such as Small Modular Reactors (SMRs), which are more efficient and have a smaller environmental footprint.
- 🌿 Stone emphasizes the need for a global shift towards nuclear energy to combat climate change, suggesting that the current reliance on renewables alone is insufficient.
- 📉 The documentary criticizes the influence of the fossil fuel industry on environmental groups, suggesting that there are vested interests that have hindered the adoption of nuclear energy.
- 🌐 Stone calls for a change in leadership and mindset, advocating for a future-oriented approach that embraces nuclear energy as a key component of a sustainable energy mix.
Q & A
What is the main theme of Oliver Stone's documentary 'Nuclear Now'?
-The documentary 'Nuclear Now' focuses on nuclear energy as a misunderstood and often maligned solution to global energy needs and environmental challenges.
Why did Oliver Stone choose to make a documentary about nuclear energy?
-Oliver Stone chose to make a documentary because he felt that nuclear energy is a complex subject that is difficult to address in feature films due to the need for factual accuracy and the abstract nature of the topic.
How does Oliver Stone address the common misconceptions about nuclear energy in his documentary?
-Stone addresses misconceptions by differentiating between nuclear energy and nuclear weapons, emphasizing the safety records of nuclear power plants, and discussing the manageable nature of nuclear waste.
What role does Oliver Stone believe the United States should play in the global energy conversation?
-Oliver Stone believes the United States should take a leading role in promoting nuclear energy as a global solution, thinking critically about energy sources, and fostering positive international relationships.
How does Stone's documentary 'Nuclear Now' contrast with popular media portrayals of nuclear energy?
-The documentary counters popular media portrayals by presenting nuclear energy in a positive light, focusing on its safety, efficiency, and potential as a clean energy source, rather than emphasizing the risks and disasters often highlighted in films and TV shows.
What was Oliver Stone's experience like while trying to get 'Nuclear Now' distributed in the United States?
-Stone found it difficult to get the documentary distributed, as it was considered too controversial for platforms like Netflix, and he had to ensure the documentary was factually accurate and accessible to a wide audience.
What are some of the key points Oliver Stone makes about the environmental impact of nuclear energy compared to other energy sources?
-Stone points out that nuclear energy produces significantly less carbon dioxide and has a smaller waste footprint compared to fossil fuels, and that the nuclear industry is closely monitored and well-regulated.
How does Oliver Stone view the future of energy and the role of nuclear power in it?
-Stone is optimistic about the future and sees nuclear power as a crucial component in meeting the growing global energy demand while reducing carbon emissions and mitigating climate change.
What is Oliver Stone's opinion on the influence of the film industry on public perception of nuclear energy?
-Stone believes that the film industry has often negatively influenced public perception of nuclear energy through movies that sensationalize disasters and risks, rather than presenting a balanced view of the technology.
What steps did Oliver Stone take to ensure the accuracy of the information presented in 'Nuclear Now'?
-Stone worked closely with experts, traveled to various countries to interview leading scientists and engineers, and cross-checked all facts to ensure the documentary was intellectually honest and factually accurate.
How does Oliver Stone's approach to 'Nuclear Now' reflect his broader views on society and the media?
-Stone's approach reflects his commitment to critical thinking and challenging prevailing narratives. He aims to provide a balanced perspective on nuclear energy, encouraging viewers to question mainstream media portrayals and consider the scientific facts.
Outlines
🎥 Oliver Stone's Nuclear Now Documentary
Filmmaker Oliver Stone discusses his latest documentary 'Nuclear Now' with Anya Parampil, highlighting the misunderstood potential of nuclear energy as a solution to global energy problems. Stone explains his decision to take on the subject, emphasizing the documentary format's ability to present facts directly, contrasting with the complexities of feature films. He addresses the deliberate obfuscation and myths surrounding nuclear energy, advocating for a more open and informed discussion on its role in addressing environmental challenges.
🌏 Debunking Nuclear Energy Myths
Oliver Stone challenges common misconceptions about nuclear energy, emphasizing the scientific differences between nuclear power and nuclear weapons. He discusses the exaggerated fears propagated by media and popular culture, using examples like the films 'The China Syndrome' and the HBO series 'Chernobyl'. Stone argues for a more rational and scientific approach to understanding nuclear energy, including its safety record and the actual risks compared to other energy sources.
🔋 The Future of Energy and Nuclear Power
The conversation explores the future of energy, with a focus on electricity's growing demand and the need for diverse energy sources. Stone discusses the global implications of energy policy, citing France's successful nuclear program and the potential of nuclear energy to meet increasing energy demands without exacerbating climate change. He also touches on the environmental costs associated with renewable energy sources, such as the mining for materials needed for solar panels and wind turbines.
🌿 Environmental Impact and Nuclear Waste
Stone addresses concerns about nuclear waste, arguing that it is a manageable and closely monitored issue compared to the waste and pollution produced by fossil fuels. He points out that nuclear waste is minimal and that the industry has effective methods for handling it. The discussion also includes the economic and environmental consequences of Germany's decision to abandon nuclear power in favor of coal and other less sustainable alternatives.
🌍 Global Energy Politics and the Future
The discussion expands to include global energy politics, with Stone criticizing the United States' approach to international relations, particularly regarding China and Russia. He advocates for a more cooperative and less adversarial stance, necessary for addressing global energy challenges. Stone also reflects on the importance of a positive and optimistic view of the future, emphasizing the potential for human innovation and cooperation to overcome current obstacles.
🚀 Nuclear Now's Release and Impact
Oliver Stone shares his experiences in distributing 'Nuclear Now' and the challenges faced in getting the documentary noticed, including its release on various digital platforms. He expresses his hope for the film to reach a wide audience and to stimulate critical thinking about energy solutions. Stone concludes by emphasizing the importance of the next generation's role in shaping a more positive and sustainable future.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Nuclear Energy
💡Nuclear Now
💡Renewables
💡Nuclear Waste
💡Radiation
💡Chernobyl
💡Fukushima
💡Three Mile Island
💡Nuclear Reactor
💡Global Energy Demand
💡Environmental Consciousness
Highlights
Filmmaker Oliver Stone discusses his latest documentary 'Nuclear Now', focusing on nuclear energy as a misunderstood solution.
Stone chose documentary format for its ability to present facts directly, unlike feature films which require more exposition.
The documentary counters myths about nuclear energy, emphasizing it is not the same as nuclear weapons.
Stone criticizes media and films for promoting inaccurate perceptions of nuclear energy, including 'The China Syndrome' and 'Chernobyl' series.
The documentary points out that nuclear energy has been hyped negatively, with accidents like Chernobyl and Fukushima misrepresented.
Stone argues that nuclear waste is not as fearsome as portrayed, and is well managed by the industry.
The film suggests that nuclear energy is a necessary part of the global energy solution, especially as renewables require backup.
Stone discusses the influence of money in shaping environmentalist views, hinting at undisclosed funding that may sway opinions.
The documentary addresses the issue of nuclear waste, comparing it favorably to the waste produced by fossil fuel industries.
Stone emphasizes the importance of electricity for the future and the role nuclear energy can play in meeting growing global demand.
The film contrasts Germany's energy policy, which moved away from nuclear, with France's continued reliance on it.
Stone calls for a global perspective on energy, stressing the need for the United States to lead responsibly in this arena.
The documentary highlights the potential of nuclear energy to significantly reduce carbon emissions compared to fossil fuels.
Stone reflects on the difficulty of changing public perception and the resistance to nuclear energy due to fear and misinformation.
The film is praised for its intellectual honesty and thorough fact-checking, aiming to be accessible to a wide audience.
Stone expresses hope for a future where humanity uses its potential to solve global energy challenges.
The documentary is noted for its optimistic outlook, contrasting with the prevalent dystopian narratives in media.
Stone calls for a new generation of leaders who can think differently about energy and international relations.
The film is available on various platforms, and Stone encourages viewers to watch and re-watch for a deeper understanding.
Transcripts
foreign
[Music]
hi everyone welcome to the gray zone I'm
Anya parampil here with a very special
guest filmmaker director screen writer
Oliver Stone his latest documentary is
nuclear now it is out in the United
States this week welcome back to the
gray Zone Oliver
thank you Anna
I'm a long time fan of your films
whether I'm talking about your
screenplays that are obviously some of
the best to have come ever come out of
U.S film but also your documentaries
your South of the Border film definitely
made a huge impact on my own pursuit of
Latin America coverage and trying to
understand our our immediate
neighborhood and so I was really excited
to get the chance to review nuclear now
and what I loved about it is that a lot
of times with documentaries and of
course I fall into this myself people
are
documenting a problem or demonstrating a
problem looking at it from all sides but
what you're doing here is actually
talking about a solution to a problem
and something that has been
misunderstood for decades and that's
nuclear energy as a source of power I'm
wondering how did you decide to take on
this subject
okay that's a good question because it's
not my up my alley normally I'm into
feature films about generally subjects
that concern me but I could not make a
feature out of nuclear energy because
it's very difficult I mean probably
someone out there in your audience can
figure out a way to do it I'm not and I
I think it can be done as a feature but
inside the context of the time I was in
and that I felt like the documentary was
the best way to go because it would cut
right to the chase you can't do that in
a feature film you you otherwise you're
it's a pamphlet and you get accused of
you know Exposition and all that so you
know you could do this at one point my
my co-writer Josh Goldstein who's uh
wrote the book bright future on which is
his base uh wrote a treatment for me uh
with a female scientist like yourself
going to the end of her very close to
death and threats everywhere to to make
nuclear energy to to save nuclear energy
and like save the whales or something
and it was it was a wonderful fairy tale
ending but I didn't believe a word of it
so I don't think it's up to any one
person to solve this thing I think it's
not a movie script it's more of a it's a
nation issue and it's a worldwide
Consciousness issue and as I said at the
end of the movie I do think this moment
in time this period in time we are more
conscious than ever of the environment
than ever and I think more people
realize that we're in trouble and that
we have to do something about it so I
think people are more open to this uh
obvious solution which has always been
obvious but which has been obscured by
the forces of
column time and evil time and evil and I
think there's a lot of deliberate
obfuscation and stupidity here at work
uh you know what I'm talking about the
film was okay I'm not gonna go on
because you know me I can go on for five
minutes go ahead
oh I don't mind at all the more
information the better of course but
you're talking about the deliberate
obfuscation of the truth when it comes
to nuclear and of course part of that is
also it's developed a lot rapidly we're
capable of something greater than we
were decades ago in this first became
part of the discussion on energy and one
of the things that you point out about
how people have adopted a
an inaccurate or incomplete picture of
nuclear nuclear is how the fight against
a nuclear war or nuclear catastrophe in
that sense
kind of became part of the conversation
around nuclear energy and so you're
trying to separate that what can what
can you say about that topic well it's
just so scientifically obvious that
they're so different nuclear energy is
not a nuclear bomb a nuclear bomb is
constructed it's much more complicated
it takes time and Rich plutonium Etc
this as you the iaea it monitors that
very closely you're not going to build a
bomb in your backyard that's crazy and
even a dirty bomb it's so you get into
these silly scenarios to block progress
in other words there's all these reasons
what if what if what if I'm sick of it
I've been hearing what if for almost a
year or two years of this project uh the
what ifs you know we can't live our life
what if uh in as we say in the film at
one point there should have been more
accidents there was only one significant
life-threatening accident that was
adjournable in 1986. the Fukushima was a
was a myth because no one died no one
died of radiation poisoning in all of
Japan it was the tsunami that killed
eighteen thousand twenty thousand people
and that was not known I mean people
have this misimpression of chernobyla
and Fukushima killing millions of people
it's same thing is true about
the American experience at Three Mile
Island that was so hyped by that movie
Jane did Jane Fonda it was a wonderful
movie I enjoyed it China Syndrome and
for I was a mild believer in in the in
the anti-nuclear position I went I
didn't take a stake in it but you know
it just seemed the right thing to do we
had no nukes concerts in the 80s we had
Bruce Springsteen we had uh Jackson
Browne everyone you know who was
glamorous it was a movie music or movie
business was against nuclear and the
movie business has done no favors to
nuclear believe me uh including uh China
Syndrome including silkwood which was a
wonderful film with Meryl Streep and
then years later of course on television
we had
Chernobyl the series from HBO which has
done no which was so negative and so
untruthful and we went to Russia we
talked to the scientists uh who were
deeply stricken by their accident and it
was clear that there was guilt uh on
their part but there was no collusion to
lie to the iaea or to the public about
it and he so in other words Chernobyl
was completely hyped up and made worse
than it was as if it was another Ralph
Nader nuclear disaster which it wasn't
the journal book did happen and it's
good that it happened because it wasn't
it was a lesson and you needed a
containment structure and so as you said
there have been technological
improvements but there was nothing wrong
with the original you know it it kind of
reminds me of I hate to bring it in but
the JFK debate everybody in the world I
swear you know it doesn't doesn't even
watch the movie I made or watched the
documentaries I made but they all have
an opinion everyone has their opinion
about Kennedy oh he did this he was shot
here he was done that or and it goes on
and on and on anything that doesn't come
back to the CIA or U.S government any
other explanation is fine oh sure
gangsters this uh Mob I mean every
explanation in the world but
uh it's the same problem it's just be
rational go to science and when you go
to either case you're going to find out
that it's just impossible the way they
described it as happening and uh that's
the problem we we live in with a lie we
too many mythologies set in uh
and it takes it takes a lot of Bravery
to start picking apart those myths and
those lies that we don't even recognize
as as myths or Lies We just recognize as
fact and I think nuclear is one of those
issues was there something that
surprised you the most as you ventured
to make the film nothing surprises me
anymore as to the stupidity as Einstein
said to the stupidity of the human being
is is just unbelievable but there's a
lot of myths in the world you know first
of all we go into the radioactivity
question we go into
background radiation versus dangerous
right radiation scary versus dangerous
we talk about radiation very
forthrightly it's always been known
people may not know it but DNA plays a
role here because DNA does repair our
bodies all the time so we're subject to
radiation on a daily basis we need a
banana or subject to radiation we live
in an altitude we fly on a plane
radiation is with us it's part of the
human process it's it's it warms the
Earth it's a beautiful beautiful element
in the in the god-given natural planet
we have radiation isn't is part of the
deal as cosmic rays bouncing off us all
the time and okay so we go into that one
and then we go into the issue of nuclear
waste which seems to be the greatest
Bugaboo of all what if what if radio
radioactive waste is not to be feared
it's something that has monitored dealt
with
closely monitored the nuclear Industries
monitors is the closest because but it's
at the same time it's the smallest
amount of waste nothing compared
compared to oil gas coal nothing
compared to those industries that muck
up the universe toxic chemicals the
chemical industry the gas accident the
Bhopal in India far far more dangerous
than than nuclear has been nuclear is
well handled and it's been well studied
and and we're talking about Geniuses
here the nuclear industry has to be
developed and more and more we know more
and more about it we handle it better
but it was never a problem even in 1970s
when France built 15 reactors in a
record uh no 57 reactors in a record 15
years France didn't have a problem they
they it works and 70 of France is
electric we need electricity it's a
crucial element in the coming World
electricity is going to be a new vast
demand and not only electricity but we
have to heat transportation we have to
heat buildings and factories and there's
Industries like cement steel fertilizer
all this is going to require tremendous
energy and that's
it has to be a global picture it's not
about the United States it's about the
globe how are we going to deal with this
Mass demand for energy
yeah I've noticed actually just in the
last few years a lot of people who are
concerned with the question of energy
starting to ask these questions again
about nuclear and that the main issue or
question they always came up against was
that of nuclear waste the scare of Yucca
Mountain and all that and so I was
fascinated to see how you addressed that
point in your film
and also as you said
Shifting the way we think about Energy
deaths and catastrophe because if you
look at coal and oil the deaths spurred
by that those Industries alone far
outnumber that those cause those caused
by the nuclear industry so it is
important I think that we we start to
ask wait why why has the conversation
about nuclear why does it have these
strict blinders on why has it been
warped in this way it would seem that
there are powerful interests that don't
want it no well they're certainly we
proved we went to that a bit obviously
in the oil the gas in oil industry
wasn't there was a put it this way tried
this I can't we cannot prove it because
when money moves in certain directions
but we know a certain amount of money
was given to friends of the Earth for
example which was the first
Environmental Group and that was given
by uh Robert Anderson of Sinclair Oil I
believe it was and that wasn't you know
that was 200 000 but that in 1970 that
adds up to a lot of money and that start
a group with it so a lot of the
environmentalists may not know it but
they anonymously supported by these
interests and maybe coal but uh because
this is all privately done you know it's
hard to to uh pinpoint but the important
thing to remember and you mentioned gas
and coal but you have to say
uh people that this is very important to
remember is that
there's also methane gas and methane gas
is what they're using to back up the
Renewables right now up until and that
is a very poisonous short-term gas in
the atmosphere very dangerous methane we
don't talk of enough about it we talk
about gas and oil but we don't talk
about methane when the when the solar
and wind does not work which is most of
the time because it's night and it's
winter and because there's no wind or
there's no uh the temperature is wrong
that's when they go they use gas as the
backup mechanism and gas is a very easy
solution to say and the newspapers don't
take into account the methane so
everyone goes to gas because why the
companies advertise perfect partner for
Renewables
and
go ahead
we're not against Renewables I mean if
but
it's the backup mechanism for Renewables
it's dangerous nuclear is a perfect
backup too we need that electricity we
need that energy from nuclear in order
to create this kind of volume and there
would be no nuclear has no uh back uh no
uh what do you call it uh
uh I can't use the word I'm I'm not
technical about it but there's no waste
that's insignificant and there's no
there's no danger from it like there is
from gas there's absolutely clean
and that's what people don't but you
mean there's not something new produced
some new element that's produced I meant
to say there's no backup required for
nuclear it works it's 90 the maintenance
levels are 90 to 100 percent I mean
these things work forever they work 50
60 70 years some of these Legacy
reactors which we built by the way back
in the 1970s and they still work some of
them in other words this thing is a it's
a expensive to build in the United
States anyway and but it lasts a long
time and the maintenance is relatively
simple compared to the other Industries
if we want to continue down the path of
thinking critically about all of these
Alternatives we have people want to
characterize or a solar or wind energy
as clean but the process it takes to
produce a solar panel and then transport
a wind turbine not to mention the war on
the African continent that is required
to gain all the minerals required to
prod to to build a solar panel it should
all be factored into what we consider
clean or safe but we compare as you know
in the film We compare Germany because
they went that way they went with gas
they went with oil I'm sorry they went
with coal but they also went with wind
and they went with Renewables they got
rid of nuclear completely which was a
huge mistake and they're in the as you
know Germany's economy is now in the
because uh they just they're
stupid they were really stupid and
they're supposed to be bringing people
but they should learn from the French in
this regard which they've always had
this thing with the French
not not to mention that
Dimensions over oil pipelines
oil and gas reserves fuel War including
the one we're currently experiencing or
witnessing play out in Ukraine a lot of
it has to do with these resources that
are required for energy
how has your film been received by your
colleagues Oliver and and what was it
like trying to get it distributed in the
United States well it wasn't easy I mean
first of all it was a very difficult
film to make because it deals with
abstract issues and sometimes they're
not visible but we tried to make
everything visual in this documentary so
that a ninth grader an eighth grader
could understand it because frankly I
was not an expert I went through this
with uh Josh Goldstein and his partner
Stefan's fist a Swedish a nuclear
engineer to try to understand I traveled
to France I traveled to Russia to
rosatom I traveled to the in Idaho
National Laboratory here in the United
States to learn as much as I could from
the people who know this you need to
talk to the people who know what they're
doing and uh that's why uh I everything
in this documentary has been checked out
they'll tell you that it's all
on this and that that it's not it's an
intellectually honest film and deals
with everything that that said in the
film I had to triple check quadruple
check drove me crazy took a long time
and it's not the normal way of working
uh you know this is a documentary that
does not allow for any opinion it is a
documentary that requires fact and this
is a strictly fact oriented documentary
and I'm very proud of it I think it's
one of the most important contributions
I could make in my later years uh I
could make another feature film and I
hope to one at least one my 21st feature
but I've done what 10 documentaries but
this is the most by far the most
important one Joe Rogan who I was on the
other day who smart man he's he said
this is one of the most important films
I've ever watched
which I'm very proud to I think that's
fair the question of energy in our in
our future everything War peace depends
on how we are going to meet the demand
of a growing planet and when you have
people pretty much saying that human are
a cancer on the earth because it can't
provide for it
well
that is a pretty slippery slope and a
dangerous assertion to make so we should
instead be trying to think how can we
actually provide for everyone the Earth
may actually give us the power to do so
you know one of those key uh people that
we interview in the film is uh the head
of rosaton which is the Russian agency
that deals with nuclear energy some 250
000 people work for Rosa Tom it's they
take it very seriously now this fellow
Mr likachef who's a very bright man and
a great administrator he's done a
terrific job he said very clearly in the
film he says there are now
490 gigabytes of nuclear energy in the
world gigabytes or billions billions
that's a lot
490 which is about 400 reactors maybe a
little more
and he's saying if we replace those
those gigabytes with energy of another
kind we would have two and a half
billion tons of carbon more carbon
dioxide in the atmosphere two and a half
billion tons
can you imagine that I mean it's he
called it an extra long nuclear energy
is an extra lung for the Earth he's
concerned about the Earth and he sees
where this is going because in the 20
years we've been in love uh with fixes
and talking about Solutions and in love
with Renewables like Germany spent I
mean we spent trillions of dollars on
Renewables in Germany at least billions
and maybe a trillion and we've got
nowhere the CO2 levels have gone up
slightly that's what's frustrating we're
not realistic about this we have to cut
CO2 now in the next going on to the 2050
period which the ipcc warned us about
would be the uh the break point of
course there's always break points but
the truth is there's only we have to
think we have to think positively about
the future and we want a future we can
look forward to we don't want a future
where we're
competing for energy with some other
country or amongst ourselves and we're
fighting
as we are now unfortunately stupidly and
I think in Eastern Europe and the United
States has to think globally as a
responsible leader about and this is I
you know I've been harping on this point
for years about having a real good
relationship with China and a good
relationship with Russia which is
possible and I am convinced it's
possible you know damn well from your
own experiences in South America that
this is possible but we keep denying it
we keep saying we have enemies I want to
believe
that were on the the verge of a paradigm
shift simply because we won't have a
choice for much longer to live in this
delusion where we can cut off ourselves
from the rest of the world and keep
pretending as though we're European
Kings pretty much you you said we have
to speak positively
and globally about the future and I I
think we all it also has to be Humane
humanely about the future humans are not
the problem humans actually have all the
unlimited potential in the world too
to solve these these issues and and
Usher in a society in a world that's
even better than what we're currently
living under and a lot of the people in
charge seem to be telling us that the
future is only going to get worse so
maybe that means we need to replace them
Hollywood does oh look at all the movies
Hollywood puts out they're all dystopian
exactly
it's disgusting why can't we have a
little I mean I know Disney and all that
but we want to be positive and we want
our children Next Generation to hear
positive messages and or at least at
least if it's not positive because I'll
say not all of your films are positive
but they they
prompt critical thinking societal
introspection about how we can make
something positive everything today is
either apocalypse or superheroes that
never arrive that's all that's all they
make I was very conscious of that when I
was making this because the subject is a
dark one and I all I've seen is dark
stuff about climate change and this and
that and this so I made a conscious
effort in this to transition this from
the dystopian side to the optimistic
side and we towards the end of the film
what do they scientists that we
well is uh Stephen Hawking who died not
too long ago and he talks about the
future where we can meet it with
optimism and I think he is a beautiful
beautiful man and he was a smart man he
believed in a nuclear energy but most
scientists who really know their stuff
but I heard Elon Musk recently saying
the same something very similar
good endorsing the the saying that he he
seemed to be aware of a lot of the
information that you put forward in your
film a few years ago by the way musk was
talking about batteries as a solution
not nuclear energy now he's obviously
clearly batteries are great we want to
have bigger better and better batteries
but there are limitations on batteries
got to get lithium from somewhere right
there's beyond that there's how are you
gonna it's like this is a
continent-sized problem this is a
continent-sized problem this is not
about fixing your home your your car uh
or your your phone this is a really this
is so because India is coming on Africa
is coming on Asia's coming on Indonesia
holy cow we have so many people are
going to want more energy they they're
not going to live on there
like some poor peasant in India they're
just going to change they're going to
see they see it on television they hear
it they know what's going on people want
more energy we have to accept that we
can't people here aren't going to go
back and live under some controlled
Society where they're regulated and
monitored in every way by the government
but that is the problem you see what we
did with unknowingly we're all guilty of
it we used carbon we we emitted we use
the carbon quota of the universe so to
speak there was a carbon quota we used
up and now we're in this Hall where
other people are suddenly Say Hey I want
to get some of that carbon but they're
they're not going to be able to unless
they pollute the universe and they will
because it's the cheapest thing in the
world is gas
I mean it is cool the cheapest thing in
the world plus wood if they'll use wood
if necessary they'll burn down all the
trees so
we have to solve the problem scientists
have their obligation or responsibility
to be to to help solve this problem and
the United States could take the leak
but it hasn't China and Russia have
taken the lead and that's ideological
this is just the truth and
they're doing the work on a mass scale
that can solve these problems for
example China according to what I read
is building is building more and more
nuclear reactors so they also use a lot
of coal but they are putting up 440
billion dollars worth of reactors
another
170 by 2038 is the goal that is a huge
huge amount and can help
I chose exporting also Russia exports to
other countries and they should keep
exporting keep building because they
have they can meet their own needs but
their export uh exporting of uh both
smr's small modular reactors and bigger
reactors are crucial
I I was going to ask since in the film
you did go to Russia you go to China you
meet with the people on The Cutting Edge
of this technology and development what
do you think is holding the United
States back fear fear and change they're
not we're not good at change I think we
just we we have a president who's a
dinosaur I mean he's talking about
Cold War still you know like
China's our enemy
how can they be our enemy if that's the
end of the world there are Russia is our
enemy
well he needs enemies I I don't that's
done that's this is Dr Strangelove
thinking of a World War II period these
people are dinosaurs they got to be
replaced New Generation people that
think about the future in a completely
different way yeah who see it as
something to hope for and not something
to friends you get along with your
people you don't look for reasons to to
have uh you know to have this dissent to
the amongst each other and this has been
going on in the United States for a long
time too long we keep demonizing
demonizing Russia we keep demonizing
China now this is crazy time
there's no room for this dissension this
fighting Let's Get Serious let's grow up
be Reynolds responsible let's fix this
world
it's uh depressing to be no but I want
to be positive and say that it can be
turned around because we're smart and
there's a new generation coming
It's always darkest before the dawn it's
a cliche but that's I like to think that
since at this point our leaders are
either marching us into total apocalypse
that or or or that we're going to take
over and actually change the way things
are done that the the history of man
tells us we're going to uh defeat them
and actually build something positive
for all of us and so that is what is so
fascinating and important about the
nuclear now question that you bring up
because again it's not even just about
energy because energy is
related to war and everything else that
that from the moment we wake up to the
moment we go to bed as part of our daily
life so how can people see nuclear now
Oliver
oh it's available now today as of today
we've been screening it in uh scientific
uh isolation scientific Outlets like you
know MIT Harvard we screened it in
London we screened it in Madrid and
Paris and you know we're getting it out
there among the people who know these
Specialists but now today June 6 it's
available on Amazon wide and it's
available on Google Play it's available
on iTunes it's available so you can look
at it today if you want and I urge you
to do so or look at it in two parts but
look at it and maybe look at it twice
it's well worth it it's not this is not
for profit we couldn't get on Netflix
they wouldn't want us then too too
controversial I guess or maybe they just
didn't like it but it really is worth
it's important to see and I for that
matter I would go anywhere to any
country just to show it I want this to
get around the world I don't want it to
be limited to a few rich countries
because that's not going to solve the
problem
um
well thank you so much for making this
film and for
sticking with your commitment to
shattering paradigms reevaluating the
way we think about history and the
present
future as well ultimately and I look
forward to your next screenplay your
next feature film
bless you Anya you're really I wish
everybody in the future would like more
like you and thoughtful and educated
themselves and trying to find out the
answer behind the headlines thank you
we'll talk soon Oliver thanks so much
[Music]
Посмотреть больше похожих видео
Oliver Stone Pushes Back Against Fears Over Nuclear Power
Oliver Stone on RFK Jr., Nordstream, Sy Hersh, Nuclear Power and Climate Change
Atomkraft erklärt: Wie funktioniert sie? (1/3)
Nuclear Power Plants Are Floating on Water…Wait What?
Wie gut ist Atomkraft wirklich? Pro- und Contra-Argumente wissenschaftlich geprüft
Is Nuclear Energy Green?
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)