“So many mothers against nuclear energy!”

“So many mothers against nuclear energy!”–And For It, Too.

A photographer named Nonoko Kameyama decided to take pictures of mothers (with their children) who are against reopening the nuclear facilities in Japan.

Kameyama is unquestionably moved to use her craft to support her views.

In 2006 I took a break and travelled to Nepal. That was a turning point for me - my passion came back right away. I was taking pictures - capturing the joy on the faces of the people in Nepal; it was extraordinary.

But at the same time I was confronted by the poverty of people and the problems that they were facing, so I started to wonder what I could do. When I came back to Japan I joined two groups, one that tries to rescue children, Stop Child Trafficking, and the other group which promotes fair trade between Japan, Nepal, and Bangladesh. They asked me to help them make a catalogue to sell Fair Trade goods. This is the first time I got connected with a social cause.

I wonder if she also took pictures of the poverty in Nepal to support her social effort – I’m going to assume she did, but it’s curious she doesn’t say so. As we’ll see, she likes to take pictures of happy people. In any event, I can’t imagine anyone questioning the value of what she did as a response to her Nepal visit.

Then the Fukushima Daiichi accident happened and she decided she did not want the nuclear facilities in Japan to reopen.

I started taking pictures of these mothers, and joining demonstrations. One after another I kept photographing these mothers - suddenly I realized that I had taken photos of 100 mothers. So many mothers against nuclear energy! To me, a hundred is like every mother. A hundred is a symbol because, no matter where they live - Fukushima or Tokyo, or Nepal, or India - mothers would protect their children.

Again, one cannot doubt her sincerity or desire to portray that some who are against nuclear energy are women and some of those women have children. Such is the case with Women in Nuclear, too, I daresay, and if the group hired a good photographer such as Kameyama to take pictures of them and their children, they would look almost precisely like the women she did photograph – that is to say, varied and interesting.

I have to admit that at the beginning I was worried that if I made a book there would be lots of stern, angry, and depressed faces. I was afraid that I might end up with a depressing book; but soon I realized that mothers with children are always joyful, and there’s a dignity and a beauty. They are soft, but strong and powerful. This tenderness, love, and compassion will open people’s hearts.

Let’s let this pass. There are a lot of reasons mother are not “always joyful” and genuinely fretful for their children. But wait – open people’s hearts to what?

What I can do is connect with other mothers and men too, through photography; and build a movement for renewable energy which is safe for our children.

That’s a pretty specific goal for a book of lovely photographs of mothers and their children. If Kameyama does a good job, one might want the book for its aesthetic qualities. A book of Women in Nuclear – maybe of Japan’s branch of the organization - would probably include text explaining why the participants value their work, what they think of nuclear energy, what their hopes are for their own and their children’s futures. Voices and thoughts. Maybe we could include some women who are not mothers, though I guess we want to stay in parallel with the rival project.

Would it be more likely to change minds than Kameyama’s project? Probably not, but it would show that women have professional and industrial aspirations, perhaps a little more unexpected than showing them exclusively in their maternal role and described as fearful. Even Kameyana’s project could show and tell more.

Here are some of Kameyama’s photographs – they are quite lovely – some include non-explicit nudity, so take that into account.

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

You may have noticed over the past few weeks that a number of nuclear plants are shut down for refueling outages or are resuming operations after just returning from one. This type of routine outage usually occurs in the spring or fall when electricity demand is low so that nuclear reactors can replace about one-third of the spent fuel rods with new fuel and conduct other routine maintenance and repairs at the plant. To get a better sense of how refueling works at a nuclear energy facility, I spoke with Marcus Nichol, NEI’s senior project manager for used fuel storage and transportation, and asked him to explain the basics. Why does a nuclear plant need to replace one-third of its fuel? Nichol: The main purpose of a refueling outage is to replace older fuel that is depleted—meaning it can no longer efficiently produce energy from nuclear fission reactions—with new fuel. This “used fuel” has typically been used in the reactor for four-and-a-half to six years before it is pe...

How Much Land Does Nuclear, Wind and Solar Really Need?

Not too long ago, we reviewed a report that looked at nuclear energy (and other energy sources) as biodiversity agents. This had to do, in part, with the amount of land a facility needs to function. Nuclear energy and fossil fuel plants use relatively little, wind farms and solar arrays quite a lot of land . Based on an objective and transparent analysis of our sustainable energy choices, we have come to the evidence-based conclusion that nuclear energy is a good option for biodiversity conservation (and society in general) and that other alternatives to fossil fuels should be subjected to the same cost–benefit analyses (in terms of biodiversity and climate outcomes, as well as sociopolitical imperatives) before accepting or dismissing them. Writer Barry Brook, who collected 75 scientists to endorse his paper, is interested in land use as it impacts flora and fauna. Biodiversity concerns do not get as much play as they might – and, when they do, it annoys many when land is withdraw...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog