Skip to main content

Let the Debunking Begin

By Lisa Stiles
Like 24 before it (click here to see our take on the series of episodes), NBC's The West Wing is apparently delving into nuclear un-reality to drive up ratings. And I'm calling on all of our operations experts out there to add their comments.

A script for the January 26th episode "Duck and Cover" can be found here by scrolling down to Episode #712. Though friends tell me that spoilers on this site have proven reliable, it should be noted that the owner of this blog states clearly at the top:
Spoilers are often taken from first drafts of scripts and those are often not the shooting script and even when you see a shooting script, that can be changed by the director during shooting and then changed again by the editing of the episode. No one here makes any guarantee that the information presented will remain in the episode exactly as presented.
So, I'll say that all of my comments are related to the script described above and if NBC found a clue between that draft and the actual shooting, I will promptly take down this post.

Borrowing further from the 24 farce, the setting is Southern California and again, the writers went to zero effort to understand basic nuclear power plant design. I'm certainly no operations expert, which is why I sent out the bat signal above, but here are just a few of the gross errors.

First, the spoiler says:
the feedwater pump failed. Kate inserts that the feedwater pump carries radioactive, hot water to the steam generator....
Raise your hand if your PWR has a feedwater pump between the reactor vessel and the steam generators. No one?

But that is almost a forgivable error compared to the failure to mention that there are backup pumps, backup systems, and backup water sources to ensure that core cooling is maintained. The script says that personnel at the plant were able to install a "temporary cooling line...to the core." I defy the writers to describe exactly how things like safety injection systems and gravity-fed emergency cooling can be categorized as "temporary."

While they do mention that many, many things must go wrong for anyone to be harmed by a nuclear power plant incident, they conveniently eliminate all of the actual safety systems that make it a true statement. Like the fact that even though designs ensure that there is plenty of backup cooling, PWR containment buildings can withstand steam buildup from a loss of coolant accident. Venting in the auxiliary buildings? Only if I'm there expressing my frustration with antinuclear propaganda.

Those are egregious errors I found after a quick scan. It's time for our operations experts to join in the debunking party!

Technorati tags: , , , , , , , ,

Comments

Anonymous said…
Well at least we can brutally torture these script writers after the Olduvai cliff.
January 8, 2006 at 9:30 PM
Anonymous said…
I agree. These people must be held accountable for the social unease they create.
January 8, 2006 at 9:34 PM
Anonymous said…
The China Syndrome (with anti-everything Jane Fonda) was a success. It too was a laugh to those with technical knowledge. I doubt Hollywood will ever be on the side of logic.
RV
February 16, 2006 at 2:28 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

By
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...
23 comments
Read more

How many nuclear plants does it take to meet the world's energy needs?

By
Several weeks ago Joshua Pearce at Clarion University in Pennsylvania released a study titled “ Thermodynamic limitations to nuclear energy deployment as a greenhouse gas mitigation technology .” In the study he stated... nuclear energy production would have to increase by 10.5% per year from 2010 to 2050 to both replace fossil-fuel-energy use and meet the future energy demands. This line, of course, made the headlines and has been picked up by several outlets and blogs . When looking into his calculations for this statement, he made one assumption error that overstated the above sentence by nearly a factor of three. Page 121, Section 4.1 of the study states: Richard Smalley pointed out that in 2004, the global economy consumed the equivalent of 220 million barrels of oil per day, which converted into electricity terms is the equivalent of 14.5 TeraWatts (TW), or 14,500,000 MegaWatts (MW) (2005). … With a nuclear plant having about 1000 MW (1 GW) of capacity, we would need 14,500...
7 comments
Read more

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

By
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...
6 comments
Read more