Under the Dome (film)

Synopsis

The documentary is narrated by Chai, who presents the results of her year-long research mostly in the form of a lecture, reminiscent of Al Gores An Inconvenient Truth. As well as data, she reveals footage from factory visits and interviews with government officials, environmental experts and business owners. She also speaks with officials from London and Los Angeles on how their respective cities have managed to deal with historic issues of pollution.

Chai begins with the story of her daughters tumour in utero and its removal shortly after her birth. Chai claims the tumour was caused by air pollution.

The film shows that China is losing its "war on pollution". The targets of her film include state-owned oil companies such as China National Petroleum Corporation, which has also been the subject of the governments anti-corruption crackdown. Chai also critices PetroChina and Sinopec. These companies set their own production standards and the Ministry of Environmental Protection is largely powerless to respond. Steel producers and coal plants also ignore regulations to maximise profits. Chai visits a steel producer in Hebei province with a government inspector to measure levels of pollutants. Months later, it has yet to pay its fines but a provincial official tells her that it is not possible to shut down such factories and sacrifice employment for the sake of the environment.

Towards the end of the film, Chai urges individuals to take responsibility. She convinces a restaurant to use environmentally more sound equipment. She says: "This is how history is made. With thousands of ordinary people one day saying, No, Im not satisfied, I dont want to wait. I want to stand up and do a little something."

Release

The film was released online 28 February 2015, on the Saturday preceding the meetings of the National Peoples Congress and Chinese Peoples Political Consultative Conference. The film was streamed on major internet platforms, such as Tencent and Youku, without interference from censors. Abundant discussion about the film also took place online. It was viewed more than 150 million times on Tencent within three days of its release. Chinas environmental protection minister, Chen Jining, praised the film as "worthy of admiration" and compared it with Rachel Carsons book of 1962, Silent Spring, which is said to have given impetus to the environmental movement in the United States. Peoples Daily, the official newspaper of the Communist Party, reposted the film and published an interview with Chai. Gabriel Wildau of the Financial Times, based in Shanghai, suggested that government support might be linked to criticism of China National Petroleum Corporation, since people associated with the company were facing corruption charges. However, censors on 2 March ordered media to stop publishing articles about the film.

In his opening address to the National Peoples Congress on 5 March 2015, Premier Li Keqiang said: "Environmental pollution is a blight on people’s quality of life and a trouble that weighs on their hearts ... We must fight it with all our might." However, a week after its release, the film was removed from Chinese websites, by which point it had been viewed more than 300 million times. Copies (some with English subtitles) are still available on YouTube. An employee of China Business News was suspended for leaking the order.

On 2 March, the first weekday after the films release, the stocks of several environmental companies traded up to ten percent higher. The stocks were in companies involved in pollutant treatment, air quality monitoring and green technology, including Sail Hero, Top Resource Conservation Engineering, LongKing Environmental and Create Technology & Science. In Hong Kong, the shares of BYD Company, a maker of electric vehicles, rose nearly seven percent.

In forums online, Chai received some criticism for being a tool of hostile foreign forces, after travelling to the US for the birth of her child. Doubts were expressed about the link between air pollution and her childs tumour, and questions asked about the independence and validity of her research.