Skyler LaFemina
10/13/15
Word Count: 2260
Environment and Politics, Fall
Film Annotation #7
1.Title, author/director and release year?
“Nuclear Aftershocks” was written by Miles O’Brien and Jon Palfreman and co-produced by
Kate Mcmahon and Raoul Rosenberg. The documentary was first broadcasted on January 17,
2012 on the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) through the Frontline television program1.
2. What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
Nuclear power is a highly controversial source of energy. Although nuclear power has a
high energy density and its production emits no greenhouse gases or air pollution as claimed by
the film, the public has divided views on its safety and the danger it poses as a result of media
coverage of major disasters. The most recent crisis, a complete failure at the Fukushima Daiichi
Nuclear Power Plant caused by a large tsunami in 2011, has cast a dim light on nuclear energy
for the public. Many of Japan’s citizens have been displaced as a result of the incident, while
many who live in declared safe zones continue to fear the possible health effects of nuclear
radiation. Political leaders must now consider further investment into nuclear energy, which has
long been a relatively safe and productive energy source, or abandoning the source completely as
the public’s doubts increases. Countries like the United States must address this problem in the
near future as it has several outdated power plants that will close within twenty years. However,
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission must increase nuclear power plant safety standards and
threatening geological features such as fault lines must be considered when building new plants
if major nuclear disasters are to be avoided in the future.
3. How is the argument or narrative made and sustained? How much scientific information is
provided, for example? Does the film have emotional appeal?
To highlight how powerful and integral nuclear energy is to our society, the film states
that the Indian Point station alone generates nearly a quarter of New York City’s electricity and
that before the disaster at Fukushima, Japan’s 54 plants supplied half of the nation’s electricity.
The juxtaposition of former mayor Rudy Giuliani’s approval of the technology and governor
Cuomo’s denunciation of the technology is a reminder of the disparity in opinions regarding the
danger of nuclear power production. Furthermore, before the Fukushima disaster, two thirds of
all Japan’s public supported nuclear energy. Following the disaster, this rate dropped to 25%
support. In response to the crisis, Germany has aimed to eliminate all nuclear power plants by
2022, which would result in shutting down seventeen of its reactors. This has alarmed many
climate scientists, as the only energy source capable of quickly replacing the energy production
from nuclear energy in Germany is coal, which has the highest carbon content of any fossil fuel.
While 160,000 Japanese citizens were forced to evacuate the surrounding area of Fukushima as a
result of nuclear fallout, the radiation level of 20 millisieverts per year established for evacuation
zones was quite conservative. This level equates to approximately three abdominal CAT scans a
year. Unfortunately, families living near the plant have been directly impacted by the crisis. An
interview with the mother of a boy on the Fukushima Little League team offers insight into the
1
"Nuclear Aftershocks." PBS.
emotional consequences, as her son’s team is now forced to play sixty miles from its home field
due to contamination. Also, a grandfather explains how his grandchildren are scared to visit him
due to the fear of radiation.
4. What stakeholders are described or portrayed in the film, what were their experiences, what
expertise did they have, and what were their stakes?
Many stakeholders are involved with the Fukushima disaster as well as nuclear energy
around the globe in general. Many of the individuals interviewed in the documentary explain
how the disaster at Fukushima could have been avoided.
Hidekatsu Yoshii is a former nuclear engineer and a member of Japan’s parliament. He
explains how the government and the power industry including TEPCO, the electric company
that ran the nuclear plant, overestimated the safety of the plant, which included its sea wall to
prevent ocean swells or tsunamis. Hidekatsu Yoshii goes on to point out the fact that Japan’s
geographical features have resulted in many earthquakes and tsunamis in the past. He finds it
illogical that TEPCO did not prepare for these clear dangers adequately.
Paleontologist Koji Minoura credits Hidekatsu’s comments by providing geologic
evidence discovered through his research of the soil and sediment. Historic records detail a large
tsunami that hit Tagajo on July 13th in the year 869. Koji found marine sentiment dating to the
year 869 in rice patties nearly three miles inland, suggesting that the earthquake associated with
the tsunami in 869 was a magnitude 8.3 earthquake.2 In addition to a layer of sediment
correlating with this event, other deeper layers of marine sentiment were found suggesting that
major tsunamis cyclically occur in Japan roughly every 1,000 years.
Jacopo Buongiorno, a professor for Nuclear Science and Engineering at the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology offers engineering advice that may have prevented the
disaster. He states that, “…if the emergency diesel generators had been located at a higher
elevation […] or the batteries had been placed in water proof rooms, a lot of this would probably
not happen.” Later in the film he explains that nuclear power is a necessary energy source, as it is
the only scale-able source that does not heavily rely on foreign imports or emit much pollution.
Ron Ballinger, another professor for Nuclear Science and Engineering at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology agrees with Jacopo’s view by adding that society’s energy consumption
is far too great not to incorporate nuclear energy.
Klaus Topfer was appointed co-chairman of the Ethics Commission for a Safe Energy
Supply, a group created to study how to handle German nuclear energy going forward following
the disaster. The unanimous decision by the German parliament to phase-out nuclear energy was
handed down to Klaus’ commission, who have aimed to shut down all remaining reactors by
2022.
Gregory Jaczko is the chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), a group
in charge of regulating nuclear power practices. One notable example of when the NRC’s actions
prevented a possible disaster was the case of Fort Calhoun. Inspectors from NRC deemed that
nuclear plant did not have adequate protection against flooding and although the company
owning the plant argued this claim, the NRC resisted the arguments and mandated changes. In
2
Minoura, K., F. Imamura, D. Sugawara, Y. Kono, and T. Iwashita. "The 869 Jogan Tsunami Deposit and Recurrence
Interval of Large-scale."
June 2011, the Missouri river flooded, inundating the reactor at Fort Calhoun, but due to NRC’s
involvement, the flooding was not threating to the reactor.
Lastly, citizens have become increasingly important stakeholders. As opposition builds
among the public, protests and rallies against current reactors (such as Indian Point) and
proposed reactors have the potential to persuade politicians to shut down or cancel their
construction respectively. Since citizens’ safety is tied with nuclear accidents and since much of
their electricity is generated by nuclear reactors, they are directly affected by the construction of
nuclear reactors in more ways than one.
5. What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
The discovery that the Indian Point nuclear plant is located above two active fault zones
(according to Columbia University professor Lynn Sykes) was most surprising. Although the
company owning the reactor claims it spent $1 billion on upgrades on offsite power locations at
various elevations, it is difficult to unconditionally accept any protection effort for a plant that is
inherently in danger. While the chance of a large scale earthquake hitting the region is small, and
an unforeseen chain of events leading to a catastrophe is even smaller, the fact that the plant is
located closer to more people than any other reactor in the United States is very troubling.
Governor Cuomo agrees that leaving anything to chance in the eyes of millions of people and the
largest city in the United States is unacceptable. After all, Indian Point has suffered radiation
leaks, transformer explosions and oil spills throughout its history.3
6. What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by? Why?
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) chairman Gregory Jaczko’s defending
statements regarding the NRC’s commitment to nuclear safety, its core responsibility, were
overall unconvincing. For example, 1990 studies showed that the two reactors at the North Anna
nuclear power plant, among twenty-seven other reactors, were deemed seismically under
designed, or not structurally safe if a sizeable earth quake were to strike. Despite the warnings,
the NRC has not required any corrective action on behalf of the power plant to prevent a possible
disaster. On August 23rd, 2011, a 5.8 magnitude earthquake centered just 11 miles from the North
Anna power plant forced the power plants reserve power generators to power on to avoid
overheating.4 However, these protective measures and equipment were not installed under the
direction of the NRC but were identified as necessary additions by the owner. If it were not for
the owner’s personal decision, it is possible that an accident could have resulted.
7. What audiences does the film best address? Why?
The film addresses two main audiences, those involved with creating, planning,
constructing and maintaining nuclear power plants, and those who are affected by these decisions
(citizens). Nuclear energy companies involved with previous disasters have failed to account for
geological features and phenomena that pose real risks to reactors. Also, it is the NRC’s
reasonability to enforce corrective action onto the companies in control of reactors that are in
risk. While the general public’s concerns over the exposure to radiation and the overall danger
that nuclear power plants poses are understandable, they must also consider the benefits. The
3
Feiden, Douglas, and Brian Kates. "Cuomo: NY Nuke Plant Should Be Shut." NY Daily News.
Grass, Michael. "North Anna Nuclear Plant Earthquake Risk: 1977 Memo Details Cover-Up Of Seismic
Knowledge."
4
documentary explains how nuclear energy production does not produce nearly the amount of
greenhouse gases or pollution that coal or other fossil fuels does. Additionally, Dr. Gen Suzuki
states that the increased cancer risk from radiation from the Fukushima plant at the edge of the
evacuation zone is 0.2% over an entire lifetime, while the general risk of cancer in Japan is 30%.
The film suggests that the public’s negative view of nuclear energy, particularly in Germany and
Japan, is a result of fear more so than scientific evidence.
8. What could have been added to this film to enhance its educational value?
While the film extensively covered nuclear accidents like the one that occurred at
Fukushima, it did not provide adequate information regarding daily operations of a typical
nuclear power plant and the associated negative environmental impacts. For example, the film
neglected the inherent problems of storing nuclear waste, whereby any containers that are used
for storage cannot outlast the lengthy decay process of radioactive material with half-lives lasting
as long as several thousand years. Hundreds of millions of tons of mining wastes and radioactive
tailings, or exposed radioactive rock trails along landscapes have been generated by the Uranium
mining process necessary for nuclear energy production. Lastly, nuclear energy production
consumes more water than any other energy technology.5
9. What kinds of action and points of intervention are suggested by the film? If the film
itself does not suggest corrective action, describe actions that you can imagine being effective.
The documentary primarily addresses the actions that groups such as the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission as well as companies such as TEPCO must take. Stricter guidelines
regarding safety measures for the location, protection and maintenance of nuclear power plants
must be enforced. These precautionary steps will mitigate the chances of other nuclear disasters
in the future. Countries like the United States will need to apply these steps to outdated plants
while countries such as China will need to apply these steps to their proposed plants.
Considerations must include adequate geological protection (including earthquakes, flooding,
tsunamis), fire protection and evacuation plans. Also, to evaluate nuclear power plants in terms
of importance and dangers, or lack thereof, the public must be better informed of the nuclear
energy process, the benefits over other energy sources and the safety measures put in place.
10. What three points, details or references from the film did you follow up on to learn more?
Write short descriptions of what you learned in your search, providing citations.
Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant is located approximately forty-six miles from my
hometown. According to current New York governor Andrew Cuomo, the nuclear plant is not
safe to continue operation and he has continually called for its shutdown. According to a research
conducted by Columbia University, a magnitude 7.0 earthquake could potentially hit Indian
Point, as it lies on the intersection of two active fault lines.6 MSNBC’s research of Nuclear
Regulatory Commission data estimates that the chance of a reactor malfunction at the Indian
Point reactor caused by an earthquake is 1 in 10,000, whereas the odds for a typical American
reactor is 1 in 74,176.7 Indian Point is looking to extend its license but several local politicians
5
"Nuclear Power's Environmental Impact." Sierra Club Alantic Chapter.
Sykes, L. R., J. G. Armbruster, W.-Y. Kim, and L. Seeber. "Observations and Tectonic Setting of Historic and
Instrumentally Located Earthquakes in the Greater New York City-Philadelphia Area."
7
Dedma, Bill. "What Are the Odds? US Nuke Plants Ranked by Quake Risk."
6
and environmentalists are opposing it, stating that 20,000,000 people live within 50 miles and
that a nuclear disaster is possible.8
TEPCO, the Tokyo electric power company, is now responsible for decommissioning the
Fukushima Daiichi reactors after the irrevocable damage sustained in March 2011. As part of the
monumental process, the company has employed various technologies such as walking robots
and unmanned miniature boats that can investigate the locations of leakage in primary
containment vessels and water leakage respectfully. Detailed monitoring of spaces, forests,
buildings and rivers as well as decontaminating efforts under the “Act on Special Measures
Concerning the Handling of Radioactive Pollution” continue to this day. Most importantly,
TEPCO must ensure the safety of workers and employees involved in the process. One the major
safety precautions includes managing the exposure dose of workers at the plant to measure
radiation levels and to work towards reducing exposure.9
Nuclear energy in Germany, an economically and industrially significant country, will be
eliminated by the year 2022. Up until March 2011, at the time of the Fukushima crisis, Germany
obtained a quarter of its electricity from nuclear energy but currently receives only 17% of its
electricity through nuclear energy. It turns out that Germany has been planning to phase out
nuclear energy as early as 1998. In 2009 however, this policy changed as a new set of politicians
took office and Germany canceled the phase-out program. Finally in 2011, Germany drastically
declared an irreversible phase out of nuclear energy in reaction to the events in Japan early that
year. According to the World Nuclear Association, “The cost of attempting to replace nuclear
power with renewables is estimated by the government to amount to some €1000 billion without
any assurance of a reliable outcome, and with increasing reliance on coal, especially lignite.”10
8
Feiden, Douglas, and Brian Kates. "Cuomo: NY Nuke Plant Should Be Shut." NY Daily News.
"Decommissioning Plan of Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power: Basic Principles."
10
"Nuclear Power in Germany." World Nuclear Association.
9
Works Cited Page
"Nuclear Aftershocks." PBS. January 17, 2012. Accessed October 9, 2015.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/nuclear-aftershocks/.
Minoura, K., F. Imamura, D. Sugawara, Y. Kono, and T. Iwashita. "The 869 Jogan Tsunami
Deposit and Recurrence Interval of Large-scale." Journal of Natural Disaster Science 23, no. 2
(2001): 87. Accessed October 10, 2015. http://www.jsnds.org/jnds/23_2_3.pdf.
Feiden, Douglas, and Brian Kates. "Cuomo: NY Nuke Plant Should Be Shut." NY Daily News.
March 17, 2011. Accessed October 11, 2015. http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/riskyindian-point-nuclear-power-plant-open-gov-cuomo-article-1.124685.
Grass, Michael. "North Anna Nuclear Plant Earthquake Risk: 1977 Memo Details Cover-Up Of
Seismic Knowledge." The Huffington Post. January 6, 2012. Accessed October 10, 2015.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/06/north-anna-nuclear-earthquake_n_1078870.html.
"Nuclear Power's Environmental Impact." Sierra Club Alantic Chapter. September 13, 2012.
Accessed October 10, 2015. https://atlantic2.sierraclub.org/content/nuclear-powersenvironmental-impact.
Sykes, L. R., J. G. Armbruster, W.-Y. Kim, and L. Seeber. "Observations and Tectonic Setting of
Historic and Instrumentally Located Earthquakes in the Greater New York City-Philadelphia
Area." Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 2008, 1717. Accessed October 10,
2015. doi:10.1785/0120070167.
Dedma, Bill. "What Are the Odds? US Nuke Plants Ranked by Quake Risk." MSNBC. March
17, 2011. Accessed October 10, 2015. http://www.nbcnews.com/id/42103936/ns/world_newsasia_pacific/t/what-are-odds-us-nuke-plants-ranked-quake-risk/#.Vhmkw3nJCM8.
"Decommissioning Plan of Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power: Basic Principles." TEPCO:
Tokyo Elecc Power Company. 2015. Accessed October 11, 2015.
http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/decommision/principles/index-e.html.
"Nuclear Power in Germany." World Nuclear Association. 2015. Accessed October 11, 2015.
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Country-Profiles/Countries-G-N/Germany/.