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

Wednesday Update

By
From NEI’s Japan micro-site: NRC, Industry Concur on Many Post-Fukushima Actions Industry/Regulatory/Political Issues • There is a “great deal of alignment” between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the industry on initial steps to take at America’s nuclear energy facilities in response to the nuclear accident in Japan, Charles Pardee, the chief operating officer of Exelon Generation Co., said at an agency briefing today. The briefing gave stakeholders an opportunity to discuss staff recommendations for near-term actions the agency may take at U.S. facilities. PowerPoint slides from the meeting are on the NRC website. • The International Atomic Energy Agency board has approved a plan that calls for inspectors to evaluate reactor safety at nuclear energy facilities every three years. Governments may opt out of having their country’s facilities inspected. Also approved were plans to maintain a rapid response team of experts ready to assist facility operators recoverin...
Post a Comment
Read more

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

Nuclear Utility Moves Up in Credit Ratings, Bank is "Comfortable with Nuclear Strategy"

By
Some positive signs that nuclear utilities can continue to receive positive ratings even while they finance new nuclear plants for the first time in decades: Wells Fargo upgrades SCANA to Outperform from Market Perform Wells analyst says, "YTD, SCG shares have underperformed the Regulated Electrics (total return +2% vs. +9%). Shares trade at 11.3X our 10E EPS, a modest discount to the peer group median of 11.8X. We view the valuation as attractive given a comparatively constructive regulatory environment and potential for above-average long-term EPS growth prospects ... Comfortable with Nuclear Strategy. SCG plans to participate in the development of two regulated nuclear units at a cost of $6.3B, raising legitimate concerns regarding financing and construction. We have carefully considered the risks and are comfortable with SCG’s strategy based on a highly constructive political & regulatory environment, manageable financing needs stretched out over 10 years, strong partners...
Post a Comment
Read more