Greenpeace Energy: The Deathzone

Greenpeace believe that the only way to stop governments building nuclear powerstations is to stop using nuclear power. We believe that in order for people to stop using it they need to understand the real dangers and consequences that could arise as a result.

Advertising Agency: Miami Ad School Europe
Art Director: Zoe Sys Vogelius
Copywriters: Duncan Munge, Amadeus Henhapl

Related videos by Shutterstock


ivan's picture

The campaign solution is great. Very powerful message even if it's untrue. Comparing Chernobil to Germany's nuclear technology isn't fair. There are thousands of perfectly working nuclear plants in the world and they are the only relatively clean source of energy that can power industry and cities at this point. Scaring people away from nuclear technology is detrimental to everybody. It should be embraced to make it possible to reduce the burning of fossil fuels (which btw emit a lot of radioactive carbon waste, which nuclear plants don't) and allow for a transition to fusion or other revolutionary clean energy source.

Ivan Raszl, admin of AotW

Mungee's picture
5 pencils

The problem is that Krümmel is'nt one of those 'perfectly good' power plants. In the last three years it's had 2 major fires that have required a total refit. Also a few years ago it was shown that there were massive spikes in the incidents of Leukaemia in people living near the site. (For more info just wiki Krummel)

It's over 20 years old and extending it's life for another 20 years when the majority of the population don't want you to seems to be a little irresponsible.

morse's picture
15714 pencils

The balloons are very cool! The art on the posters isn't cool. Looks like pirate treasure maps.

.. / .-.. --- ...- . / .- -.. ...- . .-. - .. ... .. -. --.

monsieurange's picture
520 pencils

Buena forma de crear conciencia. Buena idea.

Simon Dell's picture
Simon Dell
2 pencils

I've actually written a blog based on this advert: http://bit.ly/4VkW0b - its my own personal site so no dodgy links!
There's a couple of major flaws in this campaign:

1) it takes so LONG to deliver a message that's urgent
2) asking a consumer to switch their pattern of consumption based on scare tactics is never likely to work


gmint7's picture
2685 pencils

I have to side on him, iv

presentation .. its forgivable as its done by a student,(though it sucks that I have to be PATIENT to see the concept) (it's fucking slow man)

concept.. i don't think saying [it nuclear kills you] works. it's like saying [smoking kills], it never worked. hence, bad strategy.

Sorry to burst the bubbles too, (I was a student so i feel the pain too). But there is already a solution for better nuclear plants that is so much safer and more efficient (both to mankind and the world). I don't wanna spam too much, but the gist is instead of using the conventional uranium, scientist fuse another agent. It's called Thorium. google that out if u wanna learn more....


gmint7's picture
2685 pencils

keep it up


Hibon's picture
3731 pencils

Interesting but NOT so relevant and true. Also... yes we all have to find new solutions for clean energy and use them. We must also reduce some of our life "habits" and use less energy and >>>>>> open your eyes.... be aware of the new green dirty business people. (new associations, green political groups, etc... they just suck your money and are doing nothing for our world).

Simple ideas are the best !

chris myles's picture
chris myles
429 pencils

I very much Ivan, they should find a better solution !! not scare people away cz Nuclear power plant powers some major countries.

gmint7's picture
2685 pencils

they = greenpeace

in anyway, one argument is we as creative held no powers in suggesting (a better solution). our job is only to say a message they want (as interesting as possible).

so sometimes it sucks.


Mungee's picture
5 pencils

Hey, Duncan here (one of the copywriters)

Thanks guys for all the feedback.

Just one comment I would like to make about some of it.

Greenpeace Energy (our 'clients') do not believe that Nuclear energy is clean and the campaign was based around that. If you disagree with that then that's ok, but does that really have anything to do with the quality of the campaign.

Otherwise, it would be rather like saying the Heineken 'Walk in Fridge' was a bad ad because I prefer to drink Carlsberg.

Thanks for your comments all the same.


cmac's picture
82 pencils

I don't think it scares me, it makes me angry that the government is being so careless about using OLD nuclear technology. Nuclear is not the only solution. Just last year my dad put 3 solar panels on our roof and it powers our entire first floor. It took him a week to do it. There are other viable solutions to nuclear.

slip's picture
919 pencils

i'll bite my lip this time


GMAN's picture
336 pencils

Great elaboration

Post new comment

Thank you for commenting. Please do not spam, be elaborate, respectful and helpful.
Log in or register to post comments