nuclear-news

£127M wasted on failed UK nuclear cleanup plan

Don’t worry, only 100 more years of Sellafield nuclear site cleansing to go

Lindsay Clark, Sat 7 Jun 2025,
https://www.theregister.com/2025/06/07/mps_find_127_million_wasted_sellafield/

The center for the UK’s nuclear industry wasted £127 million ($172 million) during delays and replanning as it scrambled to find alternatives for facilities which treat and repackage plutonium, a Parliamentary report found.

In the face of a 2028 deadline to replace its 70-year-old analytical lab, Sellafield Limited, part of a group of companies and government bodies on the northwest England Sellafield site, has abandoned plans for its Replacement Analytical Project (RAP). Ditching RAP was chalked up to multiple expected delays from 2028 until at least 2034 and a half-a-billion-pounds cost increase to £1.5 billion ($1.93 billion).

A new report from the Parliament’s public spending watchdog says RAP “has been managed very poorly indeed.”

Sellafield, formerly known as Windscale, has been the center of the UK’s nuclear industry since the 1950s. While the site is home to a number of companies, and the government’s Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, Sellafield Limited, is a British nuclear decommissioning Site Licence Company controlled by the NDA.

In October last year, the UK’s public spending watchdog said Sellafield depends on an on-site laboratory that is “over 70 years old, does not meet modern construction standards and is in extremely poor (and deteriorating) condition.”

The National Audit Office said [PDF] the laboratory is “not technically capable of carrying out the analysis required to commission the Sellafield Product and Residue Store Retreatment Plant (SRP)” to treat and repackage plutonium.

Sellafield’s plan in 2016 was to convert a 25-year-old laboratory on the site, which would replace the 70-year-old lab, under the “Replacement Analytical Project.” The outline business case was approved in 2019 with an estimated cost of between £486 million and £1 billion ($626 million – $1.3 billion).

It later emerged that it could take until December 2034 to deliver the full capability, while cost could reach £1.5 billion ($1.93 billion). Sellafield “strategically paused” RAP in February 2024.

In a report this week, the House of Commons’ Public Accounts Committee said: “Sellafield Ltd’s performance in delivering major projects (such as new buildings to store waste or make it safe) has historically been very poor, with large cost increases and delays occurring all too frequently.

“There are signs of improvement – however, given Sellafield’s track record, we are yet to be fully convinced that this is not another false dawn. Another reason to be skeptical is Sellafield’s poor management of the RAP. At the point it paused work, the forecast cost had risen by £820 million, and the project was five years delayed,” the PAC report said.

After abandoning the RAP, Sellafield plans to convert a different building to support a Store Retreatment Plant, which re-treats and repackages existing plutonium material, making it more suitable for durable, long-term storage. It also plans to refurbish the 70-year-old existing building — including replacing the roof — so it can carry on using it until 2040. The alternative plan would provide a service until 2040, whereas the RAP was expected to remain in use until 2070.

However, the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority told PMs the new plan would cost between £420 million and £840 million ($570 million – $1.1 billion), much less than the RAP. Although some of the costs from the early projects could be recouped in the new plan, the PAC said £127 million ($172 million) spent on RAP will have been wasted.

The NDA expects the clean-up of the Sellafield site to go on until 2125 and cost £136 billion ($184 billion), an estimate which has increased nearly 19 percent since March 2019. ®

June 9, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | UK, wastes | Leave a comment

Sellafield nuclear clean-up too slow and too costly, say MPs

Alex Lawson, 4 June 25 https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/jun/04/sellafield-nuclear-clean-up-mps-public-accounts-committee

Parliamentary committee raises concerns over ‘suboptimal’ workplace culture at ageing waste dump.

MPs have warned about the speed and cost of cleaning up the Sellafield nuclear waste dump and raised concerns over a “suboptimal” workplace culture at the site.

Members of parliament’s public accounts committee (PAC) urged the government and bosses at the sprawling collection of crumbling buildings in Cumbria to get a grasp on the “intolerable risks” presented by its ageing infrastructure.

In a detailed report into the site, the PAC said Sellafield was not moving quickly enough to tackle its biggest hazards; raised the alarm over its culture; and said the government was not ensuring value for money was being achieved from taxpayer funds.

In 2023, the Guardian’s Nuclear Leaks investigation revealed a string of safety concerns at the site – including escalating fears over a leak of radioactive liquid from a decaying building known as the Magnox swarf storage silo (MSSS) – as well as cybersecurity failings and allegations of a poor workplace culture.

The PAC – which heard evidence in March from Sellafield and its oversight body, the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) – found that the state-owned company had missed most of its annual targets to retrieve waste from several buildings, including the MSSS.

“As a result of Sellafield’s underperformance [the MSSS] will likely remain extremely hazardous for longer,” the MPs said.

The ultimate cost of cleaning up Sellafield, which contains waste from weapons programmes and atomic power generation, has been estimated at £136bn and could take more than 100 years.

Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, the chair of the PAC, said: “Unfortunately, our latest report is interleaved with a number of examples of failure, cost overruns, and continuing safety concerns. Given the tens of billions at stake, and the dangers on site to both the environment and human life, this is simply not good enough.”

He added: “As with the fight against climate change, the sheer scale of the hundred-year timeframe of the decommissioning project makes it hard to grasp the immediacy of safety hazards and cost overruns that delays can have.

“Every day at Sellafield is a race against time to complete works before buildings reach the end of their life. Our report contains too many signs that this is a race that Sellafield risks losing.”

MPs noted that one project, a now-paused replacement of an on-site lab, had resulted in “£127m wasted”.

The cost of cleaning up Sellafield has caused tensions with the Treasury as the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, attempts to tighten public spending and spur growth. Sellafield, which is home to the world’s largest store of plutonium, said in February that nearly £3bn in new funding was “not enough”.

Last year, Sellafield apologised and was fined £332,500 after it pleaded guilty to criminal charges over years of cybersecurity failings.

The PAC noted that the timeline for a government project to create a long-term deep underground store for nuclear waste, including that held at Sellafield, had slipped from 2040 to the late 2050s. The government is considering sites in Cumbria and Lincolnshire, although Lincolnshire county council is expected to withdraw the latter from the process after vocal local opposition.

The MPs said they had found “indications of a suboptimal culture” at Sellafield, and noted that the NDA paid £377,200 in 2023-24 to settle employment-related claims. Alison McDermott, a former HR consultant who raised concerns over bullying and a “toxic culture” at the site, said she felt “vindicated” by the report.

The PAC urged the government to set out how it would hold the NDA and Sellafield to account over its performance. It said Sellafield should report annually on progress against targets and explain how it is addressing the deteriorating condition of its assets. The NDA should publish data on the prevalence of bullying and harassment at nuclear sites, it said.

Clifton-Brown said there were “early indications of some improvements in Sellafield’s delivery” but said the government needed to do “far more” to ensure bosses safeguard the public and taxpayer funds.

The NDA’s chief executive, David Peattie, responding on behalf of Sellafield, said: “We welcome the scrutiny of the committee and their report. We will now look in more detail at the recommendations and consider how best to address them.

“We take the findings seriously, and the safety of the site and the wellbeing of our people will always be our highest priorities.”

A spokesperson for the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero said: “We expect the highest standards of safety and security as former nuclear sites are dismantled, and the regulator is clear that public safety is not compromised at Sellafield.

“We continue to support the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority in its oversight of Sellafield, while driving value for money. This is underpinned by monthly performance reviews and increased responsibility for overseeing major project performance, enabling more direct scrutiny and intervention.

“We have zero-tolerance of bullying, harassment and offensive behaviour in the workplace – we expect Sellafield and the NDA to operate on this basis, investigate allegations and take robust action when needed.”

June 6, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | UK, wastes | Leave a comment

Sellafield’s race against time: nuclear waste clean-up not going quickly enough, Public Accounts Committee (PAC) warns

Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown MP, Chair of the Committee, said: “The intolerable risks presented by Sellafield’s ageing infrastructure are truly world-class. When visiting the site, it is impossible not to be struck by the fact that one can be standing in what is surely one of the most hazardous places in the world.

“Our report contains too many signs that this is a race that Sellafield risks losing.”

4 June 2025, https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/127/public-accounts-committee/news/207132/sellafields-race-against-time-nuclear-waste-cleanup-not-going-quickly-enough-pac-warns/

Report highlights latest picture on delays and cost rises in c.£136bn 100-year nuclear decommissioning project.

The retrieval of waste from ageing buildings at the most hazardous nuclear site in the UK is not happening quickly enough. In its report on decommissioning Sellafield, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) warns that the estimated £136bn cost of the project would rise even more if work is further delayed, while expressing scepticism as to whether or not recent signs of improvement in performance could represent another false dawn.

The PAC found in 2018 that government needed a firmer grip on Sellafield’s nuclear challenges, and now warns that not enough progress has been made in addressing its most significant hazards. One building, the Magnox Swarf Storage Silo (MSSS), has been leaking radioactive water into the ground since 2018 – the PAC calculates, at current rates, enough to fill an Olympic swimming pool roughly every three years. The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) accepts this leak is its “single biggest environmental issue”, but that the radioactive particles are “contained” in the soil and do not pose a risk to the public.

The PAC’s report finds that Sellafield Ltd has missed most of its annual targets for retrieving waste from several buildings on the site, including the MSSS. The PAC’s inquiry heard that the MSSS is the most hazardous building in the UK, and as a result of Sellafield Ltd’s underperformance will likely remain extremely hazardous for longer. The report seeks answers from Government on how it will hold the NDA and Sellafield Ltd to account in ameliorating the site’s greatest hazards.

As well as safety concerns, the PAC further warns of the impact that delays in the programme have on costs. In the long-term, waste will need to be stored in an underground Geological Disposal Facility (GDF) capable of storing it for thousands of years. The PAC finds that the date for the GDF has slipped from 2040 to the late 2050s, with every decade of delay meaning Sellafield could need to construct another storage building, each costing £500m-£760m. The GDF project is still at an early stage, with sites considered in Cumbria and Lincolnshire – though the PAC understands that Lincolnshire County Council has recently announced it is likely to withdraw.

The report highlights some recent signs of improvement in Sellafield’s delivery, with more emphasis put on planning in how it works with contractors and most recently-started projects being delivered in line with their business cases as a result. However, the report highlights the example of one of Sellafield’s project to refurbish an onsite lab so it could continue analysing waste samples – essential for safety.

The report finds that this very poorly managed and now-paused project has seen £127m wasted. Its failure, which resulted from a lack of understanding of what physical state its labs were in, and from not doing the right remedial work to address their deterioration, illustrates the need to improve asset management at Sellafield. The report urges Sellafield Ltd to explain how it is addressing the deteriorating condition of its assets, which its safety experts have warned is making the site increasingly unsafe.

The PAC’s report also finds indications of a sub-optimal culture at the site, with concerns raised in the report given that the exceptionally hazardous nature of many of Sellafield’s activities means that it is imperative that all employees and contractors on the site feel able to raise any concerns that they have without fear of consequences. The PAC is aware that the NDA paid £377,200 in 2023-24 to settle employment-related claims.

Further, the PAC previously noted that non-disclosure agreements have been used elsewhere in the public sector to cover up failure. The report finds that Sellafield Ltd has signed 16 non-disclosure agreements in the last three years. It further seeks publication from the NDA of information around the prevalence and perception of bullying and harassment in its annual report.

Chair comment

Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown MP, Chair of the Committee, said: “The intolerable risks presented by Sellafield’s ageing infrastructure are truly world-class. When visiting the site, it is impossible not to be struck by the fact that one can be standing in what is surely one of the most hazardous places in the world. This is why we expect Sellafield’s management of its assets, and the delivery of the project to decommission it, to be similarly world-class. Unfortunately, our latest report is interleaved with a number of examples of failure, cost overruns, and continuing safety concerns. Given the tens of billions at stake, and the dangers onsite to both the environment and human life, this is simply not good enough.

“As with the fight against climate change, the sheer scale of the hundred-year timeframe of the decommissioning project makes it hard to grasp the immediacy of safety hazards and cost overruns that delays can have. Every day at Sellafield is a race against time to complete works before buildings reach the end of their life. Our report contains too many signs that this is a race that Sellafield risks losing. It is of vital importance that the Government grasp the daily urgency of the work taking place at Sellafield, and shed any sense of a far-off date of completion for which no-one currently living is responsible. Sellafield’s risks and challenges are those of the present day. There are some early indications of some improvement in Sellafield’s delivery which our report notes. Government must do far more to hold all involved immediately accountable to ensure these do not represent a false dawn, and to better safeguard both the public purse and the public itself.”  

June 5, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | UK, wastes | Leave a comment

  Lincolnshire will not be used to store nuclear waste after the county council voted to withdraw from the process. 

 BBC 3rd June 2025

“People haven’t been able to sell their houses, to do whatever they want to do, to move on with their lives, so we are delighted they now can.”

Nuclear Waste Services (NWS), a government body, had earmarked an area near Louth, in East Lindsey, as a possible site for a Geological Disposal Facility (GDF).

Speaking after the vote to end the talks, council leader Sean Matthews said communities had been subjected to years of “distress and uncertainty”.

NWS said it would take “immediate steps” to close down the consultation.

NWS originally earmarked the former Theddlethorpe gas terminal site, near Mablethorpe, for a storage facility.

A community partnership group was formed to open talks with local communities and councils.

The government body later announced it had moved the proposed location to land between Gayton le Marsh and Great Carlton.

Lincolnshire County Council today voted to follow East Lindsey District Council’s decision to quit the partnership group.

It means that the project cannot progress in Lincolnshire because it does not have the required “community consent”.

‘Treated appallingly’

Matthews, who represents Reform UK, said the authority’s former Conservative administration should “hang its head in shame” for allowing the process to continue for four years.

“I would like to apologise to the communities who have been treated appallingly,” he said.

However, Conservative opposition leader Richard Davies said his party had “always listened to the community” and “led the charge to say no”.

Mike Crooks, from the Guardians of the East Coast pressure group, which was set up to oppose the project, said the wait for a decision had left people “unable to go on with their lives”.

“People haven’t been able to sell their houses, to do whatever they want to do, to move on with their lives, so we are delighted they now can.”

In a statement, Simon Hughes, NWS siting and communities director, said it had granted £2m to support local community projects which had “left a lasting positive legacy”.

Analysis by Paul Murphy, BBC East Yorkshire and Lincolnshire Environment Correspondent.

For the sleepy coastal village of Theddlethorpe, the four year-long “conversation” about the disposal of radioactive material has been a source of anger, distress and bewilderment…………………………………………………………..

That strong opposition grew, despite the promise from NWS of millions of pounds of investment, skilled jobs and transformative road and rail infrastructure.

Questions are being asked about how and why it took the county and district councils so long to reject the proposals when public opposition was being so powerfully expressed.

A similar nuclear disposal plan for East Yorkshire provoked similar furore and was kicked out by the local authority after just 28 days of public consultation.

The prospect of an underground nuclear disposal site in Lincolnshire appears to be dead and buried – unlike the UK’s growing pile of toxic waste from nuclear power stations.

The problem of finding a permanent and safe home for this deadly material is no longer Lincolnshire’s issue, but it hasn’t gone away. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce81471p313o

June 5, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | UK, wastes | Leave a comment

Dysfunctional: review reveals South Copeland GDF partnership at war

The NFLA has highlighted trouble on the South Copeland GDF Community
Partnership, which appears to be in disarray, with members in conflict with
an overbearing Nuclear Waste Services (NWS), and increasing opposition
within the local community. NWS has commissioned an ‘external review of
the South Copeland Partnership and suspended meetings during a critical
period when the Area of Focus in South Copeland was announced.

29th May 2025, https://www.nuclearpolicy.info/news/dysfunctional-review-reveals-south-copeland-gdf-partnership-at-war/

June 2, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | UK, wastes | Leave a comment

UK government’s Spending Review needs to allocate nuclear clean-up funds 

Letter David Lowry: Julia Pyke, joint managing director of the planned
giant new nuclear power plant at Sizewell C in Suffolk (news, May 26)
asserts that the nuclear industry “prices decommissioning and waste
disposal into the price of its electricity”.

This is misleading. It is true that ministers have established a Nuclear Liabilities Fund, which aims to cover the future costs of dealing with the stewardship of radioactive
waste created from nuclear generation and with defunct contaminated
buildings at closed nuclear plants.

However, resources recovered from the
electricity bill payer, included in the cost of nuclear-generated
electricity, may not foot the full bill. The problem is that cleaning up
the radioactive residue from nuclear power is not a decades-long task, but
one that will last centuries. Nobody yet knows the final bill, but
experience tells us that it is likely to be higher than projected.

The top-up costs will fall to future taxpayers, even though Sizewell C will be
majority privately-owned. When the chancellor is considering allocating
billions of pounds in construction funds for Sizewell C in next month’s
spending review, she will need to allocate nuclear clean-up funds too.

 Times 29th May 2025, https://www.thetimes.com/comment/letters-to-editor/article/times-letters-no-benefit-child-payment-cap-rc8xnsrn3

May 31, 2025 Posted by Christina Macpherson | UK, wastes | Leave a comment