Oliver Stone’s Nuclear Now: How nuke energy could help cool a warming planet

Stone, the internationally renowned film director, is known for his works on the Vietnam War and American politics. He has made films such as Platoon (1986), Born on the Fourth of July (1989), JFK (1991), and many more. He has also made well-recognised documentaries like Comandante, based on the life of Fidel Castro, and Persona Non Grata, centred on Israel-Palestine relations — both released in 2003 — and others on other varied political subjects. Nuclear Now (2022) is based on A Bright Future: How Some Countries Have Solved Climate Change and the Rest Can Follow (2019) by American scientists Joshua S Goldstein and Staffan A Qvist.

Nuclear power: A viable option

The documentary’s central theme is global warming/climate change, which looms large in the current global scenario, casting a long shadow over our present and future. No longer a distant threat, it is a pressing emergency worldwide. Its roots lie largely in the era of post-industrialisation and the unchecked rise of capitalism in Western countries. This trajectory was directly related to colonialism, which enabled the West to extract resources and wealth from the Global South while externalising the environmental costs. In those nations, these developments resulted in the exploitation of the working class, who toiled in inhuman conditions of factories to sustain industrial growth.

Regardless of its origins, we must now recognise that time is running out. The Western world has an ethical duty to curb emissions within the next few decades. The world must decarbonise urgently and move away from fossil fuels. At this point, the main alternatives include renewable sources like solar, wind, and hydro power. Unfortunately, any new technology takes time to gain widespread acceptance. Hydropower, too, comes with its own issues — particularly large-scale displacement of people and ecological disruption. However, even the countries that have adopted renewables have not succeeded in significantly reducing CO₂ emissions.

Also read: The Dirty Sky: Filmmaker OP Srivastava on why space junk is earth’s next big crisis

The only viable option currently at our disposal appears to be nuclear power, which has long faced opposition from environmental groups. Interestingly, one of the founders of the Green Movement has now become a staunch supporter of nuclear energy. Stone, in his documentary, systematically debunks the arguments traditionally made against nuclear power. Anti-nuclear groups have argued that it is dangerous, uneconomical, and unnecessary, claiming that renewable sources alone can meet global energy needs.

However, evidence suggests that the oil industry has funded several of these groups to maintain opposition to nuclear energy. ARCO, an oil company now part of British Petroleum, financially supported Robert Brower, co-founder of Friends of the Earth, following his split with the Sierra Club, the American environmental body with chapters in all 50 US states, Washington D.C., and Puerto Rico, which was founded by preservationist John Muir in 1892. Ironically, Brower initially backed the Sierra Club’s ‘Atoms, Not Dams’ campaign. Today, Friends of the Earth, which popularised the motto ‘think globally, act locally’, operates in various countries, including India. Even within India, groups such as Tamil Nadu-based Poovulagin Nanbargal echo similar environmental concerns — though not all of them are categorically opposed to nuclear energy.

Not more expensive than coal

The director, while tracing the history of nuclear energy for commercial use, points out that reactor technology originated from small nuclear reactors used in submarines. These compact reactors have been in operation for a combined total of over 6,000 years without the need for refuelling. Hundreds of technical staff and soldiers have worked in close proximity to these reactors without any incident. He even jokes that the easiest job aboard a nuclear submarine is in the reactor control room because nothing ever happens there.

After the revelation that CO₂ emissions into the atmosphere are a major cause of global warming, some countries reversed their stance on nuclear energy and substantially reduced their emissions. South Korea, Sweden, and France are prime examples. Even Japan, despite experiencing the Fukushima disaster, is returning to nuclear power. In contrast, Germany, which phased out nuclear in favour of renewables like solar in a big way, is now paying the price: high costs for imported energy and continued CO₂ emissions due to its reliance on fossil-fuel-powered thermal plants.

Stone also challenges the argument that nuclear power is more expensive than coal by highlighting economic growth patterns in countries and regions dependent on each. Further, concerns about nuclear waste are clearly dealt with through detailed data showing that the volume of waste is extremely small and does not pose a major radiation risk to society, but exaggerated fear is created among people’s minds. For instance, the total fossil fuel waste generated by the average American over a lifetime amounts to around 70,000 kilograms, while nuclear energy would produce only about one kilogram of waste in comparison. Of that, only a minuscule portion is long-lived radioactive material. Most nuclear waste becomes safe within a short period, and current regulations around waste management are more than adequate.

Effects of low-level radiation

It’s true that improvements can be made with the development of new technologies. The director also addresses the risks associated with nuclear accidents. Over the years, several accidents have occurred, but the most dangerous ones are: Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima. Each had very different characteristics. At Three Mile Island, there was no radiation leak and no casualties, but the event sparked widespread fear that led to a slowdown in the growth of the nuclear industry in the US and a few other countries.

The Fukushima disaster, caused by a massive tsunami, severely damaged one of the reactors when its backup generator, crucial for coolant circulation, was flooded. There were no casualties directly linked to the reactor incident, but the subsequent large-scale evacuation went far beyond what was necessary. In fact, the tsunami itself caused far more deaths and destruction than the nuclear accident. At neighbouring reactor sites, people even took shelter inside the reactor complex to protect themselves from the tsunami. The recovery from Fukushima was fast to the extent that when Japan hosted the Olympics ten years later, Fukushima was among the locations proposed to host events.

Also read: How Artificial Intelligence is shaping the future of Indian filmmaking

The Chernobyl disaster, on the other hand, happened partly due to the man-made (unauthorised) experiment that spiralled out of control. The casualties were primarily among the firefighters who sacrificed their lives to contain the damage and protect the public. A large area around Chernobyl remains a restricted zone today. Ironically, the absence of human presence has led to a resurgence in wildlife populations, prompting scientists to reconsider the long-term effects of low-level radiation. For instance, wild wolves, previously endangered, have thrived in the area, benefiting from the lack of human interference.

India’s nuclear programme

Given the ongoing climate crisis and the need for sustainable growth — especially in developing countries like India and China — one needs to focus on modern advancements in nuclear energy. In this context, the current development of Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) is important and could very well be the future for the nuclear industry globally and for India. With modern power demands driven by data processing, machine learning, and artificial intelligence, people are looking for alternatives inspired by nuclear-powered submarines that do not require refuelling for several years. Countries like China and Russia, with their expertise in this field, are now nearing commercial-scale deployment of SMRs, which are expected to play a major role in the future.

India is also exploring SMRs at the research level, although it remains far from achieving its long-term targets. A major breakthrough is China’s recent success in operating a molten salt thorium reactor — a development that could be a game changer. Unfortunately, the lacklustre performance of our atomic energy agency needs out-of-the-box thinking to achieve world standards in these areas.