Well, as I think Miho did a nice job summarising the documentary (though I think that she uses some strong language that I don’t necessarily agree with), I think that I will just present another perspective:
The problem that Kamanaka portrays in the film is definitely something that can be related to in some way, in many parts of the world, as Norma Field noted before the screening, and I think, related to in many different ways. I think, from a global perspective, this film really made me think about the future of the earth in general, with our current energy consumption, and I start to feel more and more like the (scientist? He was shot with a print of Picasso’s Guernica in the background, which I think was quite fitting for this film) man who thought that with our current energy trends, we will always have some sort of problem. (Something like this. I wish I had made better notes. Please correct me if I’m wrong). In a sense, I think that this is true. Because in order to sustain our energy consumption, something must provide the energy, right? so it can be coal, oil, natural gas, wind, nuclear power etc. We don’t have THAT many choices, and with each choice comes a problem (either polution of some kind, or accessability/availability), but if we want to live our “lives of convenience,” then there are certain risks that we must take.
So from the perspective of someone who feels like this life of convenience is the only way to live, or the inevitable way to live (there’s no going back, they say), then of course they will not mind assuming certain risks, even if it hurts many people. Because the fact is, that everything hurts in someway (coal burning effects in China, for instance) . In addition to this, convenient sources of energy will also run out some day, which is why this recycling process seems so promising to some–as a way to forever continue this life of convenience. And perhaps, some even may think that eventually we’ll be able to find cures for these soon-to-be-common-diseases that will arrive after the establishment of more nuclear recycling plants or nuclear plants… (though this seems like it will be a sad time–humans evolved to no longer need thyroids, or to constantly have to be on medication due to the abundance of nuclear energy plants. But I’m just being a bit melodramatic, I guess.)
So for me, it seems like the “problem” lies in our energy consumption, rather than the establishment of the plants, though they are very connected. Though it does makes sense to me that perhaps, stopping the establishment of plants for now will eventually help stop people from using so much energy. Still, I don’t know.
What is the best route to take here? What is the real “problem”, and what would be the best way to go about “solving” it??