0 >> you actually feel like this is the beginning of a movement. good evening, everyone. welcome to our special report "nuclear power the fallout from fear" you've just seen the film "pandora's promise". i want to deepen the discussion with nuclear power and the central question about it. namely is it evolving into a plus for the environment or do the risks still outway the benefits. will me is director rob stone director of "pandora's promise" and former nuclear power plant operator joins us as well. you say this film is completely one-sided. explain. >> i was really disappointed to see almost no coverage of any interviews with experts about energy efficiency or renewable energy like solar and wind when these are the cleanest, fastest and the cheapest solutions to climate change. and in this country the utilities have tripled investment in energy efficiency just in the last few years. that's making all of our homes and shops and businesses get more energy services out of the power that we generate. that's just scratching the surface. >> but the film clearly says that alternative solutions like solar, wind, is not a real energy solution. it's never going to be enough. and that's why oil companies invest in it and support it because they know it will never be a real solution. >> that's what the film says. but that's not what people who are expert in the areas of renewable energy say. our own department of energy says renewables, wind and solar with energy efficiency and other resources, but renewables alone could be 80% of our energy needs by 2050. >> you know, that's pretty silly. do the math. the reality is that the renewable energies nonhydro renewables are less than 2% of global energy. and the growth in global energy use is 2 to 3% a year. so 20 to 30 years of subsidies to renewable energies are supplying only one year's growth. so we have to move. we need abundant, affordable, clean energy. and we shouldn't be cutting off any of those sources. >> including nuclear. >> including nuclear. nuclear should be one of the options. the people who favor nuclear don't say no solar energy. my barn roof is covered with solar panels. we generate twice as much energy as we use. but the problem is the renewable advocates will first of all try to cut down nuclear so that you have no choice. >> there's no environmental group in the united states which supports nuclear energy. >> well, the leadership of the environmental movement does not support nuclear energy. >> you used to be opposed. >> my first documentary was an anti-nuclear documentary. my last documentary was a loving history of the environmental movement. but i've take then film all over this country to colleges and universities. i'm taking it around the world now. and honestly, anderson, i've had nothing but support -- not nothing but support but overwhelming support for the proposition i put forth in the film from environmentalists. >> michael you've run nuclear power plants. do you think this is the answer to the world's energy crisis? >> it's certainly a very important component of a global energy portfolio. there's no way of getting around that. but my undying support for nuclear power comes with a very, very cautious measure, and that is that's truly only in the hands of a responsible nuclear operator. >> are there enough safety protocols in place? >> that's one of many questions. i just want to be clear, we're not saying take nuclear off the table because there's some religious opposition to it based on 70s hysteria that's not based on science. we're saying, internalize the pollution costs of all resources. so we absolutely have to have carbon pollution limits to solve global warming. i think we all agree about that. then allow the resources to compete against each other. let nuclear compete against renewables and efficiency on a level playing field. i hope that we could also agree on that. and then we'll see if nuclear actually has a role to play. >> what would put it on a level playing field? is it level right now? no new nuclear power plant has been built in the united states in a long time. is that playing level? >> that's not because environmentalists are opposing the construction of new nuclear powers it's because investors won't invest in it because it's too risky. >> you were making the film when fukushima happened. i think a lot of people expected you to maybe abandon your argument. >> that's true. >> was fukushima not as bad as people made it out to be? >> the think fukushima is a terrible accident. there's no question about it. although fortunately nobody has died, nobody has gotten sick, and according to the best science in the world health organization nobody ever will. but that said, a lot of people have lost their homes and everything. it's a terrible thing. but i think one has to look at it from the broader context. we've had nuclear power for 50 years. there are 440 reactors operating all over the world. during that 50-year time period we've had three major accidents, chernobyl, fukushima and three mile island. only one of those accidents, chernobyl, according to the best science from the world health organization, the united nations, has caused any fatalities. >> the pilots who flew in to try to drop cement on the reactor died. >> exactly. they're saying less than 60 people have died after 25 years that they can trace back of their mortality can be directly traced to the radiation releases at chernobyl. so you compare that to fossil fuels which kill 3 million people every year from particular at pollution and there's no comparison. we would never build a nuclear plant now with the technologies which had these accidents. now the technologies can be fail safe in the sense that if there's an anomaly like an earthquake it will shut down automatically. >> can all these countries that would like to build nuclear power plants afford that technology? >> that's a technology that exists in a powerpoint. that technology has been canceled. >> that technology was ready to move toward commercialization in 1993. >> michael, i want to get to you. >> anderson if i could make a comment. you know what, i hear these conversations all the time about the next generation nuclear power plants and they're inherently safe. the reality is this is not a technological concept. the issue is that the people who operate them, those are the people that you're putting the safety in the hands of. and it is not a technological issue. >> you're saying the danger is the operators. >> exactly. certainly and no question about it, power plants today are safer than the very first power plants that were built. and the ones that are being built in the world today are clearly safer than the ones that were built 10, 20 years ago. >> yes. >> but i don't care how safe a technology you design in hands of somebody who is incompetent you can generate just as much havoc as you can with an older generation power plant. so it is not a technological issue. >> we've got to take a quick break. james we'll have your comments when we come back. also more on the fukushima questions for all the potential long-term benefits nuclear power can it be made safe day in and day out we'll be right back. my customers can shop around-- see who does good work and compare costs. it doesn't usually work that way with health care. but with unitedhealthcare, i get information on quality rated doctors, treatment options and estimates for how much i'll pay. that helps me, and my guys, make better decisions. i don't like guesses with my business, and definitely not with our health. innovations that work for you. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare. but with less energy, moodiness, and a low sex drive,y first. i saw my doctor. a blood test showed it was low testosterone, not age. we talked about axiron. the only underarm low t treatment that can restore t levels to normal in about 2 weeks in most men. axiron is not for use in women or anyone younger than 18 or men with prostate or breast cancer. women especially those who are or who may become pregnant and children should avoid contact where axiron is applied as unexpected signs of puberty in children or changes in body hair or increased acne in women may occur. report these symptoms to your doctor. tell your doctor about all medical conditions and medications. serious side effects could include increased risk of prostate cancer; worsening prostate symptoms; decreased sperm count; ankle, feet or body swelling; enlarged or painful breasts; problems breathing while sleeping; and blood clots in the legs. common side effects include skin redness or irritation where applied, increased red blood cell count, headache, diarrhea, vomiting and increase in psa. ask your doctor about axiron. and our giant idaho potato truck is still missing. so my dog and i we're going to go find it. it's out there somewhere spreading the good word about idaho potatoes and raising money for meals on wheels. but we'd really like our truck back, so if you see it, let us know, would you? thanks. what? i started part-time, now i'm a manager.n. my employer matches my charitable giving. really. i get bonuses even working part-time. where i work, over 400 people are promoted every day. healthcare starting under $40 a month. i got education benefits. i work at walmart. i'm a pharmacist. sales associate. i manage produce. i work in logistics. there's more to walmart than you think. vo: opportunity. that's the real walmart. welcome back. we're talking about the promise and peril of nuclear energy in the wake of fukushima but also in the shadow of global warming. neither risk is hypothetical as disasters at japan, chernobyl and three mile island show. the question is not can they be made safe from these accidents but are they safe in daily operation. we learn about the radiation we're all exposed to just by living on the surface of the earth. >> i didn't know such a thing as natural radiation -- i assumed that radiation was something which humans had artificially introduced into the environment which was doing us harm. as background radioactivity affecting all of us all the time, which is many, many times more powerful than artificial radioactivity in terms of how we're affected. >> back with the panel. filmmaker robert stone, dale brick of the natural resources defense council, jim hanson of columbia university's earth institute and nuclear eng near michael friedlander. right before the break michael said nuclear power plants are only as safe as the people operating them. >> that's right. so what we should do first is look at the record. solar energy, for example, the record is two deaths per terawatt hour of electricity generated. nuclear power 0.5 deaths of nuclear power. people fall off roofs while they're installing solar panels. but i'm not against solar panels. i'm just pointing out that the nuclear is actually much safer. it has a very good safety record. and that's with old technology. >> dale, do you buy that? >> yeah. i just don't think it's credible to say that the radiation risk from fukushima and chernobyl and for anybody who reads the newspaper and pays attention to these issues is dim inizing cancer rates. even if you can't point to an individual person and say that person has cancer because of chernobyl, we know that there are more cancers out there. >> you believe that nuclear power is less safe than -- that more people have died from that? >> from energy efficiency from renewables? absolutely. i don't think it's even credible to say such a thing. and we can have difference of opinion. >> can you point to how many people have died from -- i mean, three mile island nobody died. emergency procedures there worked, correct? >> yes. >> i remember being a kid during that time and it was very scary but you're saying it worked. >> at chernobyl, yeah, nobody died -- there's a minor release at three mile island. 20% of american electricity comes from nuclear power. not a single death has occurred from commercial nuclear power in the entire 50-year history. >> aren't these plants very expensive to build? >> they are expensive to build but they operate for a long time. right now electricity generated by nuclear plants is about the cheapest electricity in the country. and certainly only recently has natural gas tipped that scale. because they last so long. the costs are all paid off. the operating costs are very small, fuel costs are very small. >> just this year, utilities have closed five nuclear power plants. >> because of natural gas. >> they can't compete in the marketplace. >> those plants that have been closed are very old power plants. >> all the nuclear power plants are very old power plants. >> in the film you're basically arguing that oil companies run commercials about alternative energies because they know these will never really take the place of oil. >> yeah. it's not an existential threat to their business model. absolutely. >> but nuclear is? >> nuclear would be. look at france. france went from zero nuclear to 80% nuclear in 20 years. that's the kind of time frame that according to scientists like dr. hansen say that we're got to transition away from fossil fuels. there's no case of renewable energy or efficiency displacing fossil fuels anything like that. as i said, 1/10th of energy efficiency from solar. >> that's not true. alternative -- >> the world's energy is growing right now. the world demand for energy right now is growing equivalent of adding another brazil to the planet every year. the rise of the developing world has thrown the fundamental assumption that environmentalists came up with about energy efficiency to the wind. >> if we're going to bring the world out of poverty, the part in poverty now, we need clean affordable energy. energy efficiency is not enough. >> we've got to take another quick break. next nuclear and beyond. other alternatives to a power-hungry world. la's known definitely for its traffic, congestion, for the smog. but there are a lot of people that do ride the bus. and now that the buses are running on natural gas, they don't throw out as much pollution into the air. so i feel good. i feel like i'm doing my part to help out the environment. shhhh! i have a cold with this annoying runny nose. [ sniffles ] i better take something. [ male announcer ] dayquil cold and flu doesn't treat that. it doesn't? [ male announcer ] alka-seltzer plus fights your worst cold symptoms plus has a fast-acting antihistamine. oh what a relief it is! see who does good work and compare costs. it doesn't usually work that way with health care. but with unitedhealthcare, i get information on quality rated doctors, treatment options and estimates for how much i'll pay. that helps me, and my guys, make better decisions. i don't like guesses with my business, and definitely not with our health. innovations that work for you. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare. [kevin] paul and i have been [paul] well...forever. [kevin] he's the one person who loves pizza more than i do. [paul] we're obsessed. [kevin] we decided to make our obsession our livelihood. [kevin] business was really good. [kevin] then our sauce supplier told me: "you got to get quickbooks." [kevin]quickbooks manages money, tracks sales and expenses. [paul] we even use it to accept credit cards. [paul] somebody buys a pie with a credit card, boom, all the accounts update. [paul] when we started hiring,we turned on payroll. [kevin] it's like our pizza.you add the toppings you want, leave off the ones you don't. [kevin] now business is in really great s [announcer] start using intuit quickbooks for free at quickbooks-dot-com.
Related Keywords
United States , Japan , France , Idaho , Brazil , American , Jim Hanson , Quickbooks Kevin , Newt Gingrich , Michael Shellenberger , Ralph Nader , Michael Friedlander , Kevin Paul ,
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.