As a student studying renewable energy, I found the topic of "Pandora's Promise" to be the most interesting out of all the films. I have more to say about this film and the following discussion than I'll include in this blog post, but I'll give a quick summary of my feelings. First off I strongly disliked how the filmmaker minimized the efficacy of alternative energy sources such as solar, wind, geothermal (not even a single mention of tidal!)...I think with proper siting, it seems like a no-brainer to implement some of these energy production methods. As I have come to learn however, there are areas of the world where the sun doesn't shine reliably and the wind is inconsistent and small...therefore I think that it may be wise to look at options like low radioactive-waste-producing nuclear power methods (such as thorium). I was very disappointed with the discussion that followed the film. In all prior post-film Q&A's the film directors were applauded for their efforts in contributing to the film world and welcomed to the CIFF stage...in this case it seemed like it was all of us as an audience Vs. Pandora's Promise. The purpose a documentary is to educate and promote thinking...I learned a decent amount from this film so in that sense it succeeded, regardless of some of the aspects that were just ridiculous...like the re-occurring yellow radiation meter that declared each spot as "Safe!" while completely neglecting to acknowledge to "Un-safe" possibilities that could result from an earthquake completely obliterating a waste storage tank and the resulting ecological and health devastation. The take home message for me, although it was not the intended message from the director was, there's no one-size-fits-all solution to global energy production, we need to be smart about this and work together rather than being quick to criticize.
