in the, the time action or times the, and welcome back to going underground real cause to go around the world for me to buy in the you a this week. so a more alarming news from the a europe lodges nuclear power plant is every year we actually have geneva river. it came up to tuesdays attack along one divided by must go to the u. n itself while the hydro electric damn that supplied water to crimea. but it is nuclear power, that danger is always full time, also winning film director. and right to all of a stone contents have. we will be in hoodwink these new documentary shots, a historic conspiracy involving oil companies. the press on hollywood, preventing us from understanding that nuclear is the only way to avoid imminent

climate change. catastrophe the most of our power still comes from burning gas and cold. the mail is going up, not if we do not cut carbon emissions by nearly 100 percent, the world will suffer serious damage. this is an even bigger problems than we thought the answer to solving climate change is very straightforward. what's the best solution in your mind, largely nuclear, nuclear, nuclear, nuclear. we've been trained from the very beginning to fear nuclear power. the very thing that we fear is what may save us what scary is not the same as what's dangerous cold is dangerous. more people die from cold in a couple of weeks than i've ever died from nuclear, which is all from the one accident in turnover. first question is, what about the waste nuclear waste is nothing compared to climate. you can watch

new k a now and video on demand, but now they also go in and create your films like salvatore, to tune j. f. k. nixon, snowden, and wall street. all of a sudden joins me from los angeles. all of a welcome back to the show. you know, i wanted to speak you about, you want to go dar his death. i wanted to speak to you about ukraine under fire, and then you come up with a film that, arguably amongst all your great films, maybe the most important film you've ever made. i mean global media focusing on nuclear power, perhaps perhaps in a way that actually the feel your film uh shows is a part of the conspiracy against nuclear power. so tell me, tell me a, tell me what the films about as well and you know, you with your c store and allow me about the stairs. it's not based on conspiracy because we don't know that we know that it could include off. if not, it could just be business as usual, you know, which is competitive. but anyway, uh, starting at the beginning. uh, let's say that i haven't seen you in,

in about 2 or 3 years and you see over that period of time 2019 on this i was really annoying, more disturbed by climate change and warming warnings of all the confusion in the media coming at me at us from different sources saying this and then and this, and this is a solution that's a, that's not the solution, etc. i wanted to find out as i, for my own sale. so i wanted to go to the bottom of this. so i went to little book that i came out in 2019 called bright future, a bright future by josh goldstein who was a up international public relations professor and his partner stefan cist. screw this toes a swedish nuclear engineer. it's called a bright future and it lays out very practical economic terms. the point about nuclear energy works. it's always worked. france has made it work sweet and has made it work. it's worth to

a degree in the united states and in russia and in china and re a and so forth and so on. and it still works. it's been working for 50 or 60 years . in some cases, reactors have been built and because of a few one major accident and a few mishaps and we have to really talk about each of those actions understand. because of that, the psychology has turned against the nuclear power because of fear. and that is a huge factor of caution pin, stopping it, legislating against it, supporting environmental groups or legislating for an enormous amount of regulations that building the price up at least in the united states. here's the thing is all about you have to, you've told us this truth since elizabeth for about vietnam, about central america, the u. s. role in central america, about what happened in ukraine, the key, the key of coo and 2014. you've told us stories about the plight of the vulnerable and the dispossessed, over so many decades. but you know, jane fonda did tell us

a lot of truths about vietnam and ralph native, perhaps a more people than anyone in history individually for his fight with the comic is on the one seat belt. i mean, you're going up against, with jane fonda and ralph nader say as well. absolutely. uh, but you know, i, in my, or the both of them know i much for what they get to mr. nate are brought to our attention to automobile safety and seat belts. and so forth. and jane is an advocate, passion and advocate against vietnam. and i am myra courage and i supported her all the way through. but she's dead wrong on nuclear energy. and so it was ralph nader and there's no reason to, to, to harbor these mess we have to move on because the last, the life of the plan is at stake. so this is far more important than the protests against it. and that goes back to the 19 seventy's and eighty's. of course, things have changed so much. and so we didn't even know about climate change when

people were easily protesting nuclear power among them didn't protest, but i was, i went along with i said okay, they may have appointments, we don't need nuclear power, but that was back in 80 seventies. we now know that we need clean energy because the atmosphere is poisoning itself and we don't know how badly this is going to happen. but the i, p. c. c, the international government, intergovernmental panel on climate control, new in a large body of scientists and large body. it has warned us repeatedly since 1980 that we're reaching a point of 0 tolerance early where the part of the plan it's going to be poisoned really forever. and it's not going to stop the warming is going to keep going. and it seems to be evidently true from all the graphs from 1980 to 2000 and from the 2000 to 2020 period. which is alarming because nothing is improved. the carbon dioxide and i should include methane gas, which c h 4. that's poisoning the whole. the whole show is we're not getting better

any better. we're putting a 1000000 streams of dollars into renewables. we talked about it endlessly blah, blah, blah. nothing is happening. it's not getting better. and by 2015 we're, we're going to be really screwed. so we set the guidelines and on sale, and that 30 years from 20202015. we're talking about those 30 years practically. what can we do as a race, as a human race, the whole global, not just the united states, and we come, we come to the very strong conclusion. we're going to need nuclear power, and we and we support renewables, that's fine. we can keep doing it. but we're going to need nuclear power to close the gap that's coming. and we're gonna need a lot of it, which means building building nuclear plants everywhere in all countries, like airline production. yeah, and i should say the film goes clearly through solar and wind and the logo or just like some size or this film is fact oriented. it's not me writing what i believe i

have. i am not assigned this. i don't claim any expert knowledge. i'm going off experts, i'm going to them and asking them, and i'm interpreting. i think i'm making it more simple because they're scientists and they can go to abstract and it's sometimes difficult to read and understand. but i think what i've been able to do is interpret what they're saying for a large audience, like, my goal was to teach myself, which is to say, to make it available to a 9th grader or an 8th grader, which is what i feel sometimes when do you think there's a lot, i mean there's this fil, a closure program as i understand it of nuclear power stations. although in your film you show that the one in california where there's never been an accident of any guide is i think got a reprieve. do you think buying gas about it? do you think biding kids about the environment then ultimately, i mean, you mentioned l n g and they're increasing practice in june. and of course, as we know, the north stream pipeline blowing up was the largest single event of it. me saying

the mission ever in history? absolutely, absolutely. the l n g is the liquid, natural gas and gas is not the solution. gas has methane in it, and it come in like a leaks all along the line. we know that we're moving and it's poisoning the i'm as you're in, in the short term is that we say it's far worse, even then and then carbon dioxide is far worse, but it's the long term. it does drop off. so what we have is the situation with the downside and on top of it, they put renewables in, but renewables they'll work all the time. so it is not always there. it's winter, it's night. it's cold. the solar sun doesn't always come out. the maximum capacity in germany, for example, is about 2012 percent. so the sun came out in that is on the high side window is a little bit more like 22 percent. but we need to get up to 90 percent, to have nuclear works around the clock and it works efficiently and not. it's not

costly once it's built. so nuclear is a 90 percent plus solution it and it's clean and that you don't need to backup like renewables need to backup, which is gas and we always, so that's why these gas but when they say their partner is perfect partners, renewables don't believe it. that's energize and they're very good at it. they make it sound like it's easy. oh yeah, we'll just put some gas in and it also. so this ties into it, i think by and cares about the environment. and i think he's obviously had political challenges getting it through congress because will be showing people still believe that there's no climate warming, but that doesn't matter. listen to the account. he really doesn't care about it. if we set off the north street pipeline, which is a toy, you know, whenever you think, you know, you, we don't. uh, i agree with you. i agree with you. he's done completely industry. do you believe that story? you know, i believe the united states has something very mr. bind promised that it would not exist before it happened. you know, if you saw it has the pronouncement, he had

a smirk on his face. so he was pretty sure that he was going to end the thread of the pipeline. but what he's done is far worse than that. what he's done is the stabilize the whole world without. he blames the russians and it's easy to do so because that's the boogeyman right now. but the truth is, who set off the war, you know, who you have to go back to 2014, but we're talking about in here. yeah, i want to keep the film i want to give you the film and we don't want to get completely mad because i know you are ukraine on fire film, which i think is believe the lab back is be the film is accurate. it was owned by ukrainian man who li live through this thing. and that war started just to repeat in 2014, it did not start in 2020. my. why did the pen to kind of contract a google banner from youtube and why is netflix banning this? well, because it's a strange world we're living and they really are scared. netflix isn't bad. and you know, kind of like the new one and netflix yelling and screaming, he just rejected or they rejected it. i don't know what my system is in your do with ukraine. it's really about it's about the shortage of clean energy in the

future. and right now, and we have to do something about it, that's what the film is about. and that's what gives it as urgency. i don't looks like it distracted, but, but absolutely be, i mean, i know the time just wondering, is it you showed and is it a possibility that you actually go around russian nuclear power stations you're talking about? china is expansion of nuclear. i mean, it's happening as the countries are listening to the arguments of this realm already clearly and they understand what you're talking about. that brings, you know, just say that one of the reasons i just that film is because so much of the material machine in the movies, television and in, in news is so depressing and disturb you. and it's always about a negative future, especially movies, movies have done no favorites to nuclear energy. they may have was made at the intimate as you know, from china syndrome silkwood and the data that horrible tv series at h. b. oh, good turbo. which was not accurate,

we go into that in the field. they made it so it works is drama because it's sensational and upstairs is out of you. but that is not true. the terrible thing was, i'm was this tragedy no question and it was badly handled. but we go into the detail design, this was actually involved is a very broken man, and he explains what really happened. and he was, he had test the professionalism of the soviet crew. there was never any intent to, to see the i a e, a. and he talks about, i'm gonna let him say it, but the truth is that because of that accident, which was the only fatal accident in the history of the nuclear. and i was 50 people who died. first responders were badly protected, they were sent in. and then on top of that, there are some, there was a large release of the low level radiation in the northern europe, which initially had come in, the guy died. and that was a shame. but the u. n. went in there exhaustively,

as did the don't real house organization and they tested tested they, they, they, they said, possibly 4000 people died of casters after that. but it's hard to trace the link between we uh it with cancer and radiation. radiation. we have a lot of it in the world. all of us don, i'll stop you. the more from the oscar winning film director up to this break. the the, [000:00:00;00]

the, the other way, not the right. it says the brother, the printer was up in there. so sounds good, just so basically of course we need your last name was name is read, it comes to movies too much. and we have some more

for someone who is this relationship to the the the welcome back to going on the ground. i'm still here with also winning film director all of a so known as new release, new k. and now i have noticed that the, some of the scientific a scholarly papers are reducing the numbers previously thought of as being affected by radiation near the power stations. but when i said conspiracy earlier, i didn't mean of course, last time you were on, i think you were talking about j. f. k. the film that created a congressional panel, they biden is refusing to release the papers. clearly, i was talking about the conspiracy in your film, which is um, which is quite something, the 7 system oil companies with hollywood. you've got an interesting story altogether, the press all coming together. so the generations on from these great oil companies,

rockefeller and his alliance, has a very significant, very significant article night. i know i learned about it of courses, ron adams, and in 1956. the new york times published a study done by the rockefeller foundation. rockefeller foundation, remember, is the john rugged on the rock of roller and biggest oil magnate of our time. they found that any level of radiation is harmful to the human body. it was a 1956 that report was released front page new york times not a big publisher of the new york times was of course on the board of the raja philip foundation. so, you know, you see the connections at a high level, and once they put that news out, you know, to advertise and it was just the front page store radiation men became even more scary to more people because we have the world war 2 experience. and he or she but where indeed it was a dangerous level of radiation because it was an enrich mom. we were dropping bombs

with rich plutonium uranium. so people were dying from radiation boys, no question. but this is a different kind of radiation as low level as back what they called background read pretty ation. and that is what people have is terrified because of all the fears stoped by the rockefeller foundation and the environmentalist. and i think you go into it's in such detail and people can watch it on, on a video on demand. the fact that the radiation risks of ionizing radiation are exaggerated. i would say that you, as a veteran affairs department, still recognizes increased cancer risk on those. so having a nuclear submarines they do the say, do the risk panel. $85000.00 nuclear submarine cruise between $69.82, there is increased cancer from an as ation radiation at low doses. but um, just what i'd like, i don't know about that report, but i'd love to know exactly. i'd like to know the more i can tell them to you as well as truly, i mean, you can get money if anyone watching who is serving who has of delegates of rain.

you can get a reimbursement from the u. s. federal government. well, nobody has, as we say, and there has been no major, no accident, no significance in the navy that was on the accident is the lower level of radiation. you're continually exposed to over time. well serving in a new one year young submarine as well as i mentioned that it does, i think my problem, my problem with it was the film was the risk of terror attack. nuclear waste with yours, you say is very safe, is usually ways is clearly not safe because it has the bearings. it was very say, if we say it was very well handled and it was watched in mont, and one of the terrorists blows it up, one of these concrete steel. as soon as you know, there is, if you are in a nuclear tech or the safest place you could be as inside one of those concrete tests, they're really well done. and it's, you know, you can never have perfect. you're never going to be perfectly safe, blowing up something up and you blow up it and we, we did have an irish. we had

a nuclear explosion at journal age. 50 people went in to clean it up and died as a result. and there was a way to actually, but that's compare it. how does that compare to the gas blowing up in both home which kills $18000.00 people. chemicals gas? uh oh the the hydro, even one and 18000 with birth defects. i'm talking about dad. i'm telling me that there was about a 100000 wounded as far as i know. yeah. the china, there was a hydro electric game that, that the sailed in 201975200000 dead. i mean, you understand when, when a rate, when it's what i'm just saying, the front of the door, it was in front of climate change before you crane. but now everyone is worried about nuclear war. actually. yes, yes, yes, yes, this goes on and on and looks by us. yesterday i asked an expert what's really going on. he wrote municipalities of each reactor as

a containment structure to begin with. all 6 reactors are shut down, but still putting the residual heat from radio to any, not a fishing chain reaction. the plant has its own cooling pond, which will continue to work without the reservoir. you know, you can get on twitter it, but if you have to go to a site and just to understand what's really happening, you can't do with a new statement because a lot of sensationalism sure. the threat of another journal sounds horrible, but it's even jermel was not nothing compared to who she meant on august. so i think that's the point. no, no, of course of course, but we didn't think 911 was possible. that film, i know you, you made it were in its own that i'm telling you and your smart man, and you can have an explosion and it's not going to be as bad as you think it is. why, why did the, why did the pro nato pro zalinski greens oppose me about what's happened to the green movie? maybe you want to just tell me what it would. the green movement is completely supportive of,

of the military industrial complex in your country. it seems like kemp, the excuse me, one sec james water, excuse me for that. so i just have, i don't know what's entered politics of the green party, but it's so disappointing to me like starting the 1980s that they really change the world. but they have become pro anti nuclear energy. you mentioned green piece in the film. green piece. we showed one of this, i just found it. i found it. and he says, very clearly says bring peace has done a lot of good saving the wells, bringing up toxic waste, opposing nuclear bombs. but we got one thing wrong. that was nuclear energy and he was in very forthright about it. and yet, bring peace continues to, to act out and make sensational claims that they never back up and mean they never happen. but they always say, well,

when the russians floated that barge to pay back in the article was a nuclear barge, s m ok. small modular react when they slowed his ad barge, they said it was gonna be a nuclear titanic never happened. they went through all the icebergs and its functioning beautifully in a small town, medium size town and you're in the arctic. this is what the beauty. ready of nuclear is you've been floating on on barges, you can put it up and down the coast. there's another way of approaching it on water. and i should say also that is a natural, natural partner with brand new. like if you actually talk about small businesses being able to make scalable nuclear power decisions in the united states. if uh, if uh, federal authorities continue to be, um, uh, believing that the nuclear is, is a little evil. but you know, this week it was an advisors in the ukrainian deputy pm, and this was quoted across the whole u. s. news. we consider the act of is a damn breach, an act of terrorism. the consequences on the scale of to know bill,

which you already have explicit, are not actually ideally as bad as you say in the field as coal fired gas stations in their effect on breathing. but uh, this is what the deputy m b m, the system does it landscape? what is it with the power of nature, the scale of how many people should leave their homes? it's always new. clear now, alexi rehab jim is the guy, honestly, i don't care about obviously i know is a, you know, there's a war on and you, once you get into a war situation and there's ukraine, you have so much probably getting it from especially from the western side it's so one side of the everything becomes an anti russian issue. obviously they're there this stronger country. they're winning the war. they're actually kicking the house . but we don't know that in the west, we have no realization of what's really going on because there's been no military honesty. it's a completely corrupt processing united states, and it runs that, that you have to run everything to the white house because the white house is

fighting the war. and they are telling you the russians are evil, bruno, all this stuff. but it's not fair because we're not getting the truth and american people are blind. they're like, lead by like sheep to a conclusion. well, how come we can't get both sides? how can we can here yours? yours show in england or in america. you can't even hear it. it's ridiculous. you don't, you're the right to speak. you're an intelligent man. our team was a good network. and it doesn't mean you have to buy everything they say, but they did a good job. they got cameraman to those places. and they continue to be good and there's other outlets that should be promoted and allowed, but you can't say anything apparently in the united states. it's really on speaking to you because you're in dubai, which is what you're trying to make is that yes, they're gonna, they're going to exaggerate everything possible against the russians, including anything that happens nuclear. anything will be built up into some sensational a bit, although there is in fact no actual threat. what's happened with the damage ration

and you know, nobody's cleaned it, but it's clearly motivated. the, the motive for doing it is new training in ukrainian motive is to wreck their losing badly. they want to wreck the land before the russians take care. so the russians are predicted to take that area because it's a russian, basically, a russian speaking area, russian ethnic. so no one's ever pointed out, it seems to me successfully to the american people and the, the engine, especially the remainder. this is a civil war. this is not like a normal one, this is between russian and ukrainian. the ukrainians have been vicious against since 2014 against the russian ethnic population vicious. joining us. i heard on various reports from 50027000 plus wounded. there's been almost 14000 people affected in that spirit while they resign the means degree, meth ukrainians, and they didn't know they didn't honor it for 6 or 8 years. they us

a mentor ukraine says it over and is everything. we're financing the government and built up the army to this level where it should attack and take back the don't us and the move this so well just for just finding very briefly, just very briefly though, all of a very briefly. and i should say, i think is available in some cable networks in the united states. it's only banned in the european union and britain and we go out there to so many different channels . i just want to say though, you went to russia in this film and people watch the film can see that you actually went today just very, very briefly, the prospect of the new foss breathing react, is that you witness the recycle of waste. just very quickly. yes, the russians have a 250000 people working on atomic energy that in the a government agency rosenthal as we need government back in to get these things

done on a big scale franchise. the electricity data falls, china, it has its agency, and that's what you have, and that's what you need to do to move things the deal. the department of energy, by the way, has been good and they're pro nuclear, but they're slow and they're not spending big money, big, big money. but they are definitely backing initial initiatives. they're back in the small modular reactors and they want to, she is 50 companies in america, 3 enterprise companies developing it has great extorted, make them smaller reactor and i think control works and it's going to be huge. but you know, it's not going to deal with the volume that we need from the world to we still need the heavy reactors. china is doing the biggest amount of progress as of the date they have committed to. they have like, uh, some say 506070 reactors. i forgot, but they are building a lot more according to what i read recently, the building, $440000000000.00 worth of new reactors, some $170.00 some. and they're going to be around their plan is to have it up by

2038 a significant yet. we know the china uses a lot of coal and still does so all of the more reactions they can build a less coal, they will use all of this done. thank you. thank you actually have that. so for the show, remember you can watch new fan now on video on demand will be back on monday on russian day with funeral. you can of chapman to the presidium of russians, counsel before and defense policy. until then you can even talk to about all social media of instruct cents, and then you will country and had to channel going on. going to be a normal dot com to watch new and old episodes of going underground c on monday, the case of china, it's the, the us elevator tie. one's international status. you see,

you have no c. lucy's visit. which already craze crisis. anthony lincoln, i'm sure china wilson thoughts a military operation there was i have to even have no, i don't want to even down to about the, a temporary shelter for people in the back. you waited from the must of loving and that her some region again comes on during infinity and shelling thing, at least for one person. a woman said, this also way it can be stated with absolute certainty that this offensive has begun. furthermore, the ukrainian troops did not achieve the objectives assigned to them in any of the combat areas. a lot of are putting saves, that much voluntary do, printing and cultural offensive is under way of his feelings. of dozens of western