http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/2011/03/a_is_for_atom.html
I am sorry I haven't put anything up recently. I have been busy finishing a new series of films for BBC-2
A IS FOR ATOM
- reactors in submarines could be contained, but not when scaled up to the size of commercial power plants
- under actual tests, the water failed to fill the core
I am sorry I haven't put anything up recently. I have been busy finishing a new series of films for BBC-2
As a background to the ongoing crisis at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant
I am putting up a film I made a while ago called A is for Atom.
It was part of a series about politics and science called Pandora's Box.
The film shows that from very early on - as early as 1964 - US government officials knew that there were serious potential dangers with the design of the type of reactor that was used to build the Fukushima Daiichi plant. But that their warnings were repeatedly ignored.
... more at original post
here are comments
2.At 21:54 16th Mar 2011, mcjhn1 wrote:
The film shows that from very early on - as early as 1964 - US government officials knew that there were serious potential dangers with the design of the type of reactor that was used to build the Fukushima Daiichi plant. But that their warnings were repeatedly ignored.
... more at original post
here are comments
2.At 21:54 16th Mar 2011, mcjhn1 wrote:
Comment number 3.
At 22:07 16th Mar 2011, egbert_the_atheist wrote:
Yes I remembered that episode while watching the horror unfolding with the
Fukushima nuclear plant. Clearly, governments and businesses can't be trusted
with such a dangerous resource. Nuclear reactors in a earthquake prone zone?
You'd think safety would come first, but not so. Even today, the information
coming out is sketchy and confusing. Many people still believe they can trust
authorities that they have everything under control. Watching helicopters
lifting sea water in a desperate effort to cool down these reactors is an
example about how unprepared they were for such a possibility that their backup
systems would fail.
It is not science that is at fault, it is the politicians, businesses and engineers prone to all sorts of corruption and lacking any sense of responsibility. Society is addicted to consumptions of huge amounts of unsustainable energy, for what? To power their consumer goods of course, and their cars. And this is the price we pay for this delusion.
It is not science that is at fault, it is the politicians, businesses and engineers prone to all sorts of corruption and lacking any sense of responsibility. Society is addicted to consumptions of huge amounts of unsustainable energy, for what? To power their consumer goods of course, and their cars. And this is the price we pay for this delusion.
Comment number 4.
At 12:44 17th Mar 2011, Richard E wrote:
I've been pointing people at this programme ever since the crisis in Japan
started. A useful and salutary tale.
I am quite prepared to believe that it's possible to design a safe and effective nuclear power plant (though I must admit I do find the use of radioactivity to heat water to create steam to drive turbines a bit primitive - whatever happened to MHD oscillating plasma direct conversion systems?). I just don't trust a private company to build and operate them.
I think that in absolute terms the danger to humanity of nuclear reactors is far less than that of climate change – many more will die of the latter. However to realise safe nuclear power in practice requires extremely high levels of regulation, transparency and oversight. And in the UK it will mean siting them away from locations that will be submerged by sea-level rise (virtually all our plants currently are on the coast).
I can't imagine there will be much investment available for this from the private sector for a while, so any such plants should be publicly owned, and run as a non-profit service for the population. Just don't forget that rigorous regulation, transparency and oversight.
I am quite prepared to believe that it's possible to design a safe and effective nuclear power plant (though I must admit I do find the use of radioactivity to heat water to create steam to drive turbines a bit primitive - whatever happened to MHD oscillating plasma direct conversion systems?). I just don't trust a private company to build and operate them.
I think that in absolute terms the danger to humanity of nuclear reactors is far less than that of climate change – many more will die of the latter. However to realise safe nuclear power in practice requires extremely high levels of regulation, transparency and oversight. And in the UK it will mean siting them away from locations that will be submerged by sea-level rise (virtually all our plants currently are on the coast).
I can't imagine there will be much investment available for this from the private sector for a while, so any such plants should be publicly owned, and run as a non-profit service for the population. Just don't forget that rigorous regulation, transparency and oversight.
Comment number 5.
At 21:49 17th Mar 2011, KevinSharpe wrote:
I wish everyone would watch the film "Into Eternity" which examines the
issues surrounding Nuclear Waste that is dangerous for 100,000
years...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qoyKe-HxmFk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qoyKe-HxmFk
Comment number 6.
At 12:07 18th Mar 2011, mhohl wrote:
It also shows a missing long term perspective and missing liability. At the
core of the problem is the lack of personal liability (as shown in the film 'The
Corporation'). Individuals pursue entirely profit oriented task, behind the
legal construct of a corporation, without any ethical or moral obligations
(except the 'law' of course, which they help writing in their favour). And then
these accidents happen. They are all good people that do those abominable
things. Those corrupt General Electric people and politicians involved of course
have long since retired and died.
The bill however is being picked up by innocent people that have nothing to do with those consciously wrong decisions made a generation ago. This system is so wrong, its unbelievable that it is allowed to exist.
The bill however is being picked up by innocent people that have nothing to do with those consciously wrong decisions made a generation ago. This system is so wrong, its unbelievable that it is allowed to exist.
Comment number 7.
At 04:03 19th Mar 2011, MiiJaySung wrote:
I was thinking of this vid last week. It's interesting watch the media here
(including the BBC) load focus and fear monger about the nuclear reactor while
at the same time giving very little analysis into the situation or the real
effects (because lets face it, anyone with a brain cell or two isn't going to
trust the government).
The Tsunami had far bigger impact socially, and likewise the side effects of last years oil spill highlights that when you look at the bigger picture, nuclear power is still far safer (even with the points you very rightly raise here), and less damaging than oil. Yet we have governments in Europe going hyper about the idea of suspending various nuclear power plans. We never had governments do the same last year after the BP crisis.
It seems that as normal the media fail to put things into perspective/context yet again.
The Tsunami had far bigger impact socially, and likewise the side effects of last years oil spill highlights that when you look at the bigger picture, nuclear power is still far safer (even with the points you very rightly raise here), and less damaging than oil. Yet we have governments in Europe going hyper about the idea of suspending various nuclear power plans. We never had governments do the same last year after the BP crisis.
It seems that as normal the media fail to put things into perspective/context yet again.
Comment number 8.
At 04:33 19th Mar 2011, Paul wrote:
Thanks for posting this full version of A is for Atom.
I had seen a version available from archive.org that appears to have been recorded off the UK History Channel. That version is missing 10 1/2 minutes. They seem to be the most controversial 10 1/2 minutes: Teller, using atomic bombs to make harbours, man radioactive for 4 days, worship of technology, etc.
Seeing lots of blog comments on the web saying nuclear is better than coal, as coal -> CO2 emissions -> global warming -> environmental destruction & loss of live
They don't seem to see that nuclear reactors -> plutonium production -> nuclear weapons proliferation -> nuclear war -> environmental destruction & loss of life
Nuclear winter is more severe than global warming.
I had seen a version available from archive.org that appears to have been recorded off the UK History Channel. That version is missing 10 1/2 minutes. They seem to be the most controversial 10 1/2 minutes: Teller, using atomic bombs to make harbours, man radioactive for 4 days, worship of technology, etc.
Seeing lots of blog comments on the web saying nuclear is better than coal, as coal -> CO2 emissions -> global warming -> environmental destruction & loss of live
They don't seem to see that nuclear reactors -> plutonium production -> nuclear weapons proliferation -> nuclear war -> environmental destruction & loss of life
Nuclear winter is more severe than global warming.
Comment number 9.
At 09:13 19th Mar 2011, Animadverto wrote:
Following on Paul's comment from above. I was also surprised to see 11.5
minutes missing from the YouTube and GoogleVideos versions of the documentary.
It may be the History Channel needing to cut it back to 45 minutes so that
commercial time needs are also met. But still, the parts that are missing are
indeed interesting.
Here is a list of the parts that have been cut out of the video:
5:18 - 8:20 --> references to Technocracy Inc
12:47 – 15:17 --> Chauncy Starr's comments and further on Edward Teller's reference to Project Plowshare
17:51 – 18:03 --> Stan Witson talking about the 1958 nuclear accident in the UK
30:44 – 31:35 --> comments by Andranik Petrosyants
34:25 – 35:23 --> Peter Kapitza's reference to Ernest Rutherford
39:39 – 42:15 --> Greg Minor talking about safety issues in the plant
Interesting deletions, eh?
Thanks for a great documentary! Very informative and educational.
Here is a list of the parts that have been cut out of the video:
5:18 - 8:20 --> references to Technocracy Inc
12:47 – 15:17 --> Chauncy Starr's comments and further on Edward Teller's reference to Project Plowshare
17:51 – 18:03 --> Stan Witson talking about the 1958 nuclear accident in the UK
30:44 – 31:35 --> comments by Andranik Petrosyants
34:25 – 35:23 --> Peter Kapitza's reference to Ernest Rutherford
39:39 – 42:15 --> Greg Minor talking about safety issues in the plant
Interesting deletions, eh?
Thanks for a great documentary! Very informative and educational.
Comment number 10.
At 12:51 19th Mar 2011, Paul wrote:
This comment was
removed because the moderators found it broke the Explain.
Comment number 11.
At 13:06 19th Mar 2011, singulahr wrote:
Interview with Valerii Legasov was astonishing,standing on shoulders of
Dostojevski and Tolstoj,and the paradoxal quote that we have to protect
technology from people,great words.
How can we protect anything when we cant protect ourselfs. Its sad.
Thanks.
How can we protect anything when we cant protect ourselfs. Its sad.
Thanks.
Comment number 12.
At 05:50 20th Mar 2011, Paul wrote:
Each episode of Pandora's Box that was shown recently on TV goes for about 45
minutes. I'd be interested in seeing the entire episodes so that I could see the
missing 10 minutes or so from each one. Maybe they will all be posted on this
blog eventually.
P.S. A version of this comment was originally removed for advertising a product, which I didn't realise I was doing. I've avoided mentioning the specific website and cable TV channel in the hope that this comment will not be deleted (although I did mention them in an earlier comment, and that has not been removed).
P.S. A version of this comment was originally removed for advertising a product, which I didn't realise I was doing. I've avoided mentioning the specific website and cable TV channel in the hope that this comment will not be deleted (although I did mention them in an earlier comment, and that has not been removed).
Comment number 13.
At 11:26 20th Mar 2011, GamosVoo wrote:
"At the centre of the reactor was the uranium core. Its heat powered the
generators. The cores were now so large that if for any reason the flow of water
to keep them cool were lost they would melt.
"The scientists feared that such a core could then burn its way through the floor of the containment shell. In theory there would be nothing to stop it emerging on the other side of the world. They called it the China Syndrome"
The above is from the documentary, it's a shame this statement wasn't clarified:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Syndrome
"The scientists feared that such a core could then burn its way through the floor of the containment shell. In theory there would be nothing to stop it emerging on the other side of the world. They called it the China Syndrome"
The above is from the documentary, it's a shame this statement wasn't clarified:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Syndrome
Comment number 14.
At 17:22 20th Mar 2011, mididoctors wrote:
@GamosVoo yes the explanation of china syndrome was somewhat incorrect. Not
least because anything melting it's way through the earth will come at rest in
the center not pop out the other side(liquids molten or otherwise do not flow
uphill). there were a few other quibbles I have with AC's scientific
explanations but this was the only one I thought significant enough to comment
on. Overall thou a fine piece of work and relevant today.
Comment number 15.
At 13:14 21st Mar 2011, egbert_the_atheist wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12801085
This item shows the tragedy of a failed floodgate and its consequences. You can't help but think: if only, if only...
This item shows the tragedy of a failed floodgate and its consequences. You can't help but think: if only, if only...
Comment number 16.
At 01:44 23rd Mar 2011, G wrote:
I know someone who helped engineer British nuclear power-plants during the
Thatcher era; he spoke of continual (bumbling) government interference and
costcutting pressures that were definitely hampering safety in his view.
Comment number 17.
At 06:01 25th Mar 2011, Jeff Pasley wrote:
Adam, thank you for posting this. They should be showing it every day on CNN
as long as the Japanese crisis goes on. I have seen quite a few nuclear
documentaries over the years and that was by far the most analytically incisive.
The message that technology (and capitalism) present us with moral and political
choices that we as peoples can make is so important and so hard to get across to
people. Is there is a transcript somewhere? What was the country song playing
toward the end? Something besides the usual Louvin Brothers number. Looking
forward to your new series, if we get to see it in the U.S. Bring it to the
True/False Film Festival next year!
Comment number 18.
At 14:57 25th Mar 2011, singulahr wrote:
I was also wondering about that country song,i found it but its a clip from
another nuclear documentary "Atomic Cafe". Its pretty ugly.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sP01ylAkfo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sP01ylAkfo
Comment number 19.
At 21:57 25th Mar 2011, KeenOn350 wrote:
Thanks for posting the full video. I do hope it will remain for future
reference.
Excellent history of the GE type reactors from the 1960-80 period, and their inherent problems. (Basically, most of the BWR - Light Water reactors)
See this video on the Integral Fast Reactor to discover what our new reactors should be like. Documentary describing the history of the Integral Fast Reactor project and how it solves the problems associated with traditional nuclear reactors.
Excellent history of the GE type reactors from the 1960-80 period, and their inherent problems. (Basically, most of the BWR - Light Water reactors)
See this video on the Integral Fast Reactor to discover what our new reactors should be like. Documentary describing the history of the Integral Fast Reactor project and how it solves the problems associated with traditional nuclear reactors.
Comment number 20.
At 03:17 26th Mar 2011, KeenOn350 wrote:
Excellent information on the current state and possibilities of nuclear
energy can be found at BraveNewClimate.com.
Start with this post, and explore from there:
Two TV documentaries and a new film on the Integral Fast Reactor
Start with this post, and explore from there:
Two TV documentaries and a new film on the Integral Fast Reactor
Comment number 21.
At 11:00 26th Mar 2011, counterfactual wrote:
Thanks for posting the film for I have never seen it before. I very much
agree on the underlying method of examining past historical events in the light
of developments and changes to add facts to a discussion. I encourage to produce
a follow-up after the Japan events come to some conclusion. Being a physicist
myself I always find some facts missing from all the expert's statements. Here's
some sample questions I would ask if I were a journalist:
1) is it true that nuclear reactions such as radiactivity unlike chemical reactions are not influenced by outside conditions in any way ?
2) how can one speak of controlling a nuclear plant when there is but one option to influence it in the event of a disaster. Namely shutting the fission process down ?
3) how is it possible to repair broken technology inside a reactor when it is a lethal environment to work in as a human ?
4) how come there was no "nuclear fire brigade" in any country coming to the rescue of the Japanes reactor ?
1) is it true that nuclear reactions such as radiactivity unlike chemical reactions are not influenced by outside conditions in any way ?
2) how can one speak of controlling a nuclear plant when there is but one option to influence it in the event of a disaster. Namely shutting the fission process down ?
3) how is it possible to repair broken technology inside a reactor when it is a lethal environment to work in as a human ?
4) how come there was no "nuclear fire brigade" in any country coming to the rescue of the Japanes reactor ?
Comment number 22.
At 14:11 26th Mar 2011, the art teacher wrote:
Terrific. Really excited about the new films Adam, can you give us any more
info?
I love the music done by the guys out of Gang of Four at the end of this film. I was looking into them and it seems one of them works for a PR company now. Looking at the clients I'm not sure how I feel about that, kind of ironic.
I love the music done by the guys out of Gang of Four at the end of this film. I was looking into them and it seems one of them works for a PR company now. Looking at the clients I'm not sure how I feel about that, kind of ironic.
Comment number 23.
At 07:58 7th Apr 2011, Roger wrote:
Adam, please start your own blog. The BBC house rules and the glaring
invitation to 'complain about this comment' make me feel all funny
inside.
Comment number 24.
At 10:02 9th Apr 2011, Chris Harrington wrote:
Hi,
Is there a version of this documentary with Japanese subtitles available? If not, I would very much like to arrange for subtitles to be made for it to be viewable online to the Japanese public.
This documentary includes important revelations pertinent to the coming anti nuclear movement which can be expected to take shape here in Japan, presented in a manner which is understandable to the general public.
Chris Harrington
Kamogawa, Chiba, Japan
Is there a version of this documentary with Japanese subtitles available? If not, I would very much like to arrange for subtitles to be made for it to be viewable online to the Japanese public.
This documentary includes important revelations pertinent to the coming anti nuclear movement which can be expected to take shape here in Japan, presented in a manner which is understandable to the general public.
Chris Harrington
Kamogawa, Chiba, Japan
Comment number 25.
At 08:07 27th Apr 2011, hunterich wrote:
Mr. Curtis,
Thank you so much for all of your enlightening documentaries, and thank you for posting the above episode. I had no idea that I had only seen three quarters of the documentary! I think I can speak for all of your fans in saying that we would love to see the other episodes of "Pandora's Box" in their entirety. Is it possible to post the rest? I would especially like to see "The Engineers' Plot" in its entirety: the only version I can find cuts off the last few seconds of the final interview. I'm dying to know what Vitalii Lelchuk says after "Not science itself but the men who mistook what science was"! I tried to find ways of purchasing a copy and supporting your work but they don't seem to be any legitimate options.
Thank you again for your hard work and wonderful films. I look forward to your next project.
Thank you so much for all of your enlightening documentaries, and thank you for posting the above episode. I had no idea that I had only seen three quarters of the documentary! I think I can speak for all of your fans in saying that we would love to see the other episodes of "Pandora's Box" in their entirety. Is it possible to post the rest? I would especially like to see "The Engineers' Plot" in its entirety: the only version I can find cuts off the last few seconds of the final interview. I'm dying to know what Vitalii Lelchuk says after "Not science itself but the men who mistook what science was"! I tried to find ways of purchasing a copy and supporting your work but they don't seem to be any legitimate options.
Thank you again for your hard work and wonderful films. I look forward to your next project.
There have been complaints about the confusing reports coming from the Fukushima managers and Japanese gov but rather than a cover up, I reckon as with Three mile island, its more that they don't have much of a clue whats going on! Fingers crossed they manage get it under control.
The dictaphone recordings are amazing.