nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

Small modular reactor client lines up £1.1bn Wylfa early works deal

07 Sep 2026 By Harmsworth,
https://www.constructionnews.co.uk/buildings/small-modular-reactor-client-lines-up-1-1bn-wylfa-early-works-deal-07-09-2026/

CGI of former plans for a nuclear site at Wylfa Newydd

Great British Energy – Nuclear (GBE-N) has outlined plans for an early works contract worth up to £1.1bn as part of its small modular reactor (SMR) programme.

The government-owned nuclear developer said the package would cover civil engineering, infrastructure, buildings, mechanical and electrical work and earthworks at the Wylfa site in Anglesey, north Wales.

The contract has an indicative value of £730m-£1.1bn and is expected to run from June 2028 until June 2034, GBE-N said in a preliminary market engagement notice.

It also included an option to extend the contract until June 2037.

The client said it had previously considered splitting the work into two packages but ultimately decided to combine them to reduce interfaces between contractors.

The successful supplier will take responsibility for design from RIBA stage four and delivery of site-enabling works.

07 Sep 2026 By Harmsworth

CGI of former plans for a nuclear site at Wylfa Newydd

Great British Energy – Nuclear (GBE-N) has outlined plans for an early works contract worth up to £1.1bn as part of its small modular reactor (SMR) programme.

The government-owned nuclear developer said the package would cover civil engineering, infrastructure, buildings, mechanical and electrical work and earthworks at the Wylfa site in Anglesey, north Wales.

The contract has an indicative value of £730m-£1.1bn and is expected to run from June 2028 until June 2034, GBE-N said in a preliminary market engagement notice.

It also included an option to extend the contract until June 2037.

The client said it had previously considered splitting the work into two packages but ultimately decided to combine them to reduce interfaces between contractors.

The successful supplier will take responsibility for design from RIBA stage four and delivery of site-enabling works.

Work will include species relocation, remediation, site clearance, site establishment, construction utilities, drainage and haul roads supporting bulk earthworks.

The works are intended to establish ground levels, provide construction access and create the physical platform required for later phases.

GBE-N said the programme will cover planning, licensing, design and construction needed before its technology partner installs and commissions SMR technology.

September 9, 2026 Posted by | business and costs, politics, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, UK | Leave a comment

Key parts for a new UK nuclear power station will be made in the North East.

The Siemens Energy plant in Byker, Newcastle, will manufacture steam turbines for Rolls-Royce’s flagship small modular reactors (SMRs) being built on Anglesey in North Wales.

It is the first time that such components will be produced for a small modular reactor anywhere in Europe.

Energy secretary Miatta Fahnbulleh visited Siemens Energy’s Shields Road facility on Thursday morning and said that the deal showed “what our golden age of nuclear looks like in practice”…………….
Ms Fahnbulleh said that the SMR station, which is due to open in the mid-2030s, would help deliver long-term energy bill savings for families……………

Rolls-Royce SMR selected Siemens Energy as its global turbine supplier in 2025 and has also secured contracts for similar nuclear power stations in Sweden and Czechia……………………

Rolls-Royce SMR CEO, Chris Cholerton, called Siemens Energy a “world class” supplier.

He said: “This is a perfect example of reindustrialisation and the golden age of nuclear bringing that to life.” https://www.northumberlandgazette.co.uk/news/politics/nuclear-power-station-parts-to-be-built-in-the-north-east-under-deal-for-siemens-energy-factory-8960138

September 9, 2026 Posted by | Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, UK | Leave a comment

Ministry of Defence withheld information about nuclear test veterans’ records, ex-minister claims

He said the information was “deliberately withheld” by the MoD and claimed there was an effort to delay its release until surviving veterans had passed away.

2 Sept 26, Tabby Wilson, https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3d787k9kpyo

Former veterans minister Tobias Ellwood has accused the Ministry of Defence (MoD) of deliberately withholding the medical records of Cold War veterans who oversaw nuclear tests, calling it “an absolute cover-up”.

Ellwood told BBC Newsnight he now believes some information he gave to Parliament about the UK’s nuclear programme, based on MoD briefings, was “a complete lie”.

Veterans have campaigned for the release of their medical histories, arguing blood and urine test results could help them prove that nuclear exposure damaged their health.

An MoD spokesperson said the government had conducted an “extensive records discovery exercise” to address questions about the programme, with its findings published in full.

As many as 25,000 members of the UK armed services, scientists and civilians took part in the nuclear testing programme between 1952 and 1967 at sites including Australia and several islands in the Pacific Ocean.

Veterans have claimed the tests caused severe lifelong health problems, alleging they have suffered cancers of the liver, bone, bowel, skin and brain, as well as leukaemia, heart disease, stillbirths and generational birth defects as a result of their exposure.

Ellwood, who served as a junior defence minister between June 2017 and July 2019, said he believed ministers over the years had been briefed to say they had no evidence to help nuclear test veterans, despite thousands of documents about the programme being held.

He said the information was “deliberately withheld” by the MoD and claimed there was an effort to delay its release until surviving veterans had passed away.

“The more you unpick this story, the more murky, the more shady, the concerning it becomes,” Ellwood told Newsnight, calling it bigger than the infected blood, Windrush and Post Office scandals “because of the longevity… and the number of people that have been involved”.

“This is a scandal. It’s absolutely tarnished the reputation of the MoD.”

Calling for an independent tribunal into the matter, Ellwood asked: “Why it is that the MoD – rather than help veterans, provide the information – closed ranks and said ‘nothing to see here’, and then told ministers such as me ‘actually we haven’t got that information and we’re not willing to help the veterans’?”

The ministry in 2024 promised to embark on a comprehensive examination of any information the department held on the issue, and has since released five reports.

In those, it said there were a number of factors affecting the way medical records were kept, including the lack of a centralised approach and high levels of Cold War “secrecy”.

Ellwood conceded that some documents were to be handed to the National Archives, but said they would still be heavily redacted: “They have to be declassified. This isn’t enough to help the veterans, who understandably remain deeply angry.”

An MoD spokesperson said the government had examined “tens of thousands of documents to address long-standing questions from veterans about blood and urine testing policies during the nuclear testing programme”.

They said it had been published in its entirety “following regular engagement between Ministers, nuclear test veterans and community groups throughout the process.”

“We owe an enduring debt of gratitude to the more than 22,000 Service personnel, scientists and civilians who contributed to the UK’s nuclear testing programme and helped safeguard our national security,” the spokesperson said.

September 7, 2026 Posted by | health, secrets,lies and civil liberties, UK | Leave a comment

UK government does not know what datacentres are being used for, FoI request shows

Lack of information raises fears over environmental impact of the AI boom

Pippa Neill Environment reporter, Wed 2 Sep 2026 ,
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/sep/02/uk-datacentres-ai-boom-foi-environment

The UK government does not know what the country’s datacentres are being used for despite fears over the growing environmental impact of the AI boom.

When asked in a freedom of information (FoI) request who was using the largest sites and what for, the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology said it did “not hold the requested information”. The ministry has since been dissolved.

With hundreds of datacentres awaiting planning permission and 315 queueing to connect to the National Grid, there is growing concern over a lack of transparency and justification for these projects given their environmental impact.

Ministers announced plans in January to allow qualifying datacentres to opt into the Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project scheme. This lets developments bypass local planning committees by securing approval from the government. Campaigners say this “insulates” datacentres from local scrutiny.

Zack Polanski, the Green party leader in England and Wales, said: “The government plans to steamroller over local opposition so private companies can build these facilities – yet they can’t even explain what the benefits are and who is benefiting.”

Datacentres use a huge amount of resources. The Guardian revealed last month that two planned sites will have higher carbon emissions than ExxonMobil in the UK, with concerns raised over how this will fit within the country’s carbon targets.

The government designated datacentres as critical national infrastructure in 2024 and campaigners fear this could mean the water-hungry sites are prioritised over households in times of drought. Water UK, the trade body representing water companies in Britain and Northern Ireland, warned in July that the UK did not have enough water for the datacentre expansion.

Polanski said: “What is more ‘critical’ than people’s access to water? What is more ‘critical’ than our need to transition to a low-energy, low-pollution world so we can put the brakes on climate extremes?”

While there is consensus that datacentres can provide some essential services, there are concerns that developments with a huge environmental impact and local opposition are being prioritised regardless of their use.

Oliver Hayes of Global Action Plan, the environmental charity which submitted the FoI request, said: “It’s highly likely that we’re going to end up seeing datacentres given favourable and preferential treatment when it comes to resources that are actually running chatbots or enabling people to do benign and very wasteful, pointless things.

“At the more serious end, these datacentres could be powering chatbots that enable people to nudify teens without their consent and much worse, frankly.”

With reports that the Scottish government is inching toward a moratorium on new datacentres, there is growing pressure for the UK government to follow suit.

Friends of the Earth is calling for a ban on new sites until environmental safeguards are in place. The campaign group wants the government to publish clear environmental rules for new and existing datacentres, including requirements for 100% additional renewable energy generation for new projects.

Anisah Khan, the campaigns manager at Global Action Plan, said: “When individuals across the country are facing hosepipe bans and essential housebuilding is being delayed because datacentres are gobbling up grid connections, what we need is not more chatbots at any cost.”

The government did not respond to a request for comment over its failure to say what large datacentres were being used for.

A spokesperson said: “A pause on building new datacentres would simply send investment and good jobs abroad, while leaving Britain dependent on other countries for the processing of sensitive health and defence data. Put simply: it would be a disaster for jobs and national security.”

September 7, 2026 Posted by | technology, UK | Leave a comment

I inadvertently misled parliament over a British nuclear scandal. Now I’m calling for justice

Tobias Ellwood, 3 Sept 26,
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/sep/02/british-nuclear-tests-compensation-for-veterans

Thousands of service personnel took part in dangerous cold war-era nuclear tests. The government owes them the truth – and compensation.

In December 2018, as defence minister, I inadvertently misled parliament. Asked whether blood samples had been taken from service personnel for radiological monitoring during the nuclear bomb tests, I relayed the line provided to me by the Ministry of Defence: it was “unable to locate any information” suggesting blood samples had been taken for radiological monitoring at the tests.

I now know the reality was very different – these samples were taken across the armed services branches. But those veterans seeking compensation for serious illnesses developed after radiation exposure have been unable to access them. This is among the greatest scandals in Britain, and it must be addressed.

More than 20,000 armed forces personnel took part in dozens of nuclear tests and nearly 600 radiation experiments, the majority between 1952 and 1967. This was for the entirety of the cold war. The science was deemed necessary. How effective were our own bombs and, just as importantly, how well could our military function if the Soviet Union used theirs against us? Test after test was conducted in the Australian desert, at Christmas Island in the Pacific, and we also sent service personnel into the atomic clouds of allies and enemies. Yet their medical records for the period are missing.

Other nuclear nations, such as the US, France and the Soviet Union, did the same. Yet they acknowledged that it happened and created dedicated compensation schemes for nuclear test veterans who subsequently developed serious illnesses. Britain stands apart here. In Britain, the burden was placed on veterans to prove their case. But how do you claim what happened decades earlier when potentially vital records are missing or inaccessible?

In 2007, about 1,000 nuclear test veterans and families took the MoD to court seeking compensation. Pilots had been instructed to fly through mushroom clouds. Service personnel sailed and crawled through fallout. Others witnessed nuclear explosions, in some cases just two miles from ground zero. Surely our service personnel deserved better?

This is where the scandal turns ugly. To deal with the veterans’ litigation, the MoD instructed the Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE) to collate relevant documentation into a searchable database called Merlin. More than 28,000 documents were eventually assembled, covering radiation, precautions, health monitoring and what was known about the possible biological effects of the tests. Yet the veterans’ lawyers had no practical access to this vast archive. Thanks to the extraordinary investigative journalism of Susie Boniface, historical documents began emerging referring to blood and urine testing.

When I saw the evidence, I raised it in November 2022 as chair of the defence committee. The MoD finally acknowledged that the AWE held copies of blood-test results and urine-radioactivity measurements for “a small number of individuals”. That took me straight back to my parliamentary answer four years earlier.

I challenged the then defence secretary, Ben Wallace. If this information existed within the MoD, why had ministers not been given the full picture? He agreed that withholding relevant medical information would be “deeply wrong” and undertook to investigate.

The dam was beginning to burst. Searches of Merlin for “blood” and “urine” subsequently identified 151 documents. Then another extraordinary twist. A software change meant the AWE could no longer provide a historical audit trail showing who had accessed Merlin.

September 7, 2026 Posted by | secrets,lies and civil liberties, UK | Leave a comment

Devonport nuclear submarine dock upgrades could be accelerated


 Navy Lookout 3rd Sept 2026

The MoD hopes to speed up two major dock renewal projects at Devonport following the site operator’s release from 12 years of enhanced nuclear safety oversight. A parliamentary answer this week confirmed that acceleration of work on 10 and 14 Dock is being explored as part of the £7.1Bn Project Royal Oak investment in the base.

Responding to a written Parliamentary question, Defence Minister Luke Pollard, who is also MP for Plymouth Sutton and Devonport, said: “opportunities to accelerate work on 10 and 14 Dock are being explored”. Following the nuclear regulatory review, delivery of both projects is being driven forward. Work on 10 Dock was originally scheduled to be completed in late 2027, but the current target date for handover is unclear.


The Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) review concluded in March 2026 and returned Devonport Royal Dockyard Limited (DRDL) to routine regulatory attention. The site had been under ‘enhanced attention’, effectively special measures, since 2014 over concerns about ageing facilities, organisational capability and control of work. ….. With enhanced oversight lifted, there should be fewer regulatory obstacles to progressing complex nuclear construction work at the site.

Faster progress cannot come soon enough. The RN currently has just three facilities able to take a nuclear submarine out of the water: the shiplift at Faslane and 9 and 15 Docks at Devonport. 9 Dock is occupied by HMS Victorious in deep maintenance, while HMS Audacious only vacated the refurbished 15 Dock in June after becoming the first Astute-class boat to dock at Devonport. HMS Astute will take her place as she begins a lengthy mid-life validation period.

Under a £750M contract awarded in 2023, 10 Dock is being modernised to provide a second Devonport dock certified for both SSN and SSBN maintenance. Any acceleration would directly benefit submarine availability.

Work on 14 Dock addresses a different but equally longstanding bottleneck. Its recommissioning will allow submarine defuelling to resume at Devonport for the first time since 2004, when the old facilities were judged to fall short of modern standards. Of the 14 decommissioned boats stored afloat in 3 Basin, 10 still contain nuclear fuel, while their storage and maintenance costs around £30M annually. The old defuelling cranes have been replaced by a Reactor Access House that moves on rails over the reactor compartment, with roughly one boat per year expected to be defuelled once operations begin.

As part of Project Royal Oak, £7.1Bn will be invested in Devonport naval base and dockyard over the next decade, the largest share outside Faslane of the £26Bn naval infrastructure programme confirmed in July’s Defence Investment Plan. The scale of the investment reflects historic underinvestment as well as evolving operational requirements.

The upturn in work is visible in DRDL’s newly filed accounts for the year to 31 March 2026, with revenue rising 6.7% to £1.87Bn, driven by increased submarine maintenance across both the Astute and Vanguard classes. Operating profit reached £131M despite a one-off £5.9M charge relating to a closed group pension scheme, while profit after tax jumped from £76M to £132M, helped by a lower tax charge and higher interest income.

DRDL’s long-term order book fell from £2.1Bn to £1.7Bn, reflecting completion of Year 5 of the Future Maritime Support Programme (FMSP), only partly offset by a six-month bridging contract. This gives added importance to the Gateway Agreement now being negotiated with the MoD, a successor contract intended to run from September 2026 until March 2032, covering the period in which SSN-AUKUS work begins to build.

DRDL is a Babcock subsidiary and employs around 10,200 people, with staff costs of £670M. The Secretary of State for Defence also continues to hold a £1 special golden share in the company, providing powers to overrule ordinary shareholders in extreme circumstances. https://www.navylookout.com/devonport-nuclear-submarine-dock-upgrades-could-be-accelerated/

September 7, 2026 Posted by | business and costs, UK | Leave a comment

Great British Energy -Nuclear (GBE-N) reveals £20bn SMR TP Contract forecast breakdown after saying it didn’t have budget details

Tom Pashby, Sep 03, 2026, https://tompashby.substack.com/p/gbe-n-reveals-20bn-smr-tp-contract?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=6735486&post_id=213980624&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=ln98x&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

Great British Energy – Nuclear (GBE-N) has admitted it does have a breakdown of the forecast £20bn initial estimate for its small modular reactor (SMR) technical partner contract (TP Contract), despite having previously said it didn’t have details of the budget.

GBE-N is the UK Government’s body responsible for building the UK’s first government-supported SMRs. Rolls-Royce SMR has been selected by GBE-N to built three of its SMRs at the Wylfa nuclear site in North Wales.

In May, GBE-N announced it had awarded Rolls-Royce SMR stage 1 of the SMR TP Contract. It said: “The forecast Stage 1 price of the TP Contract is £359,000,000. This forecast price may change.

“The forecast Stage 2 price of the TP Contract is approximately £8,168,000,000. This forecast price is indicative only as the pricing mechanism for Stage 2 remains subject to negotiation during Stage 1.”

Taken together, that placed the forecast cost of the total TP Contract at £8,527,000,000. It is worth noting that the TP Contract does not capture the full cost of GBE-N’s Wylfa SMR project.

The contract award announcement also said: “The estimated total value within the tender notice for the two-stage TP Contract was £20,000,000,000 excluding VAT. This value was indicative only and based upon GBE-N’s initial understanding of the potential costs of developing a first of a kind technology.

“This estimated total value was based on the fact that in the tender notice GBE-N reserved the right to make up to four awards, although GBE-N also reserved the right to award three, two or only one contract(s). GBE-N has ultimately decided to award only one TP Contract and the contract award notice value reflects this.”

Given that the notes say GBE-N had an initial estimated £20bn for the TP Contract, and that it reserved the right to make up to four awards, it could reasonably be assumed that it had estimated each contract would have a value of £5bn. However, this was unclear.

Via the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act, GBE-N was asked to provide a breakdown of the £20bn figure.

In response, New Civil Engineer revealed that GBE-N said: “Following reasonable and proportionate searches of our records, we confirm that Great British Energy – Nuclear (GBE-N) does not hold the information you have requested.”

20 Working Days challenged this response via a request for an internal review and GBE-N chief financial officer Neil Cooper responded to say that upon further inspection, the organisation did have a breakdown of the figure.

“In our original decision, we concluded that GBE-N does not hold the information requested,” Cooper said.

He went on to say that, following the internal review, GBE-N concluded that it “does hold information within the scope of your request.

“Our review has found that our original decision did not identify this information because it sits within a document whose predominant purpose is not to explain the calculation of the £20bn figure and which was therefore not considered to fall within the scope of your request.

“We consider it was reasonable to have concluded initially that the document did not contain information within the scope of your request. On further review, however, we are satisfied that it does, and we have therefore continued to assess whether the information we hold is disclosable under the EIR (Environmental Information Regulations).”

However, he added: “Our review has concluded that the information held by GBE-N should be withheld from disclosure under the exceptions in Regulation 12(5)(e) (Confidentiality of commercial or industrial information) and Regulation 12(5)(b) (The course of justice and inquiries) of the EIR.”

He went on to explain this further, saying: “We are withholding the requested information in reliance on Regulation 12(5)(e) of the EIR, which permits a public authority to refuse to disclose information to the extent that disclosure would adversely affect the confidentiality of commercial or industrial information where such confidentiality is provided by law to protect a legitimate economic interest.

“The information you have requested includes inter alia vendor cost estimates, government funding assumptions, the approach to negotiation strategies, and assessments of vendor capability relating to the Small Modular Reactor Technology Selection Process.

“Much of this information was obtained through confidential market engagement, and the information is identified as being market-sensitive.”

Cooper did find that he was able to provide an explanation for the £20bn figure without releasing internal documents.

“Although we have concluded that the information that you have requested is exempt from disclosure, we have set out below an explanation of how the £20bn figure was derived,” he said.

“The £20bn estimated total value in the Contract Notice of 2023 was an indicative, best-estimate at the time figure, published to meet the legal requirement to state the total potential value of the contract award including all options on the number of sites and technology providers.

“It was arrived at on an objective basis reflecting GBE-N’s understanding at the time, and anticipating a procurement capable of supporting up to two small modular reactor projects (broadly £10bn per project), across the whole life of a project, from early development through to commercial operation.”

It is unclear whether a single SMR ‘project’ would cover the three Rolls-Royce SMRs which are proposed for the Wylfa site, or whether that would mean a single reactor.

Cooper continued: “Because the technology is first-of-a-kind and yet to be developed, the estimate necessarily carried significant uncertainty, as the Contract Notice made clear.

“The detailed assumptions underpinning the figure comprise commercially sensitive vendor cost information and funding and negotiating assumptions obtained through confidential market engagement, and to the extent that they fall within the scope of your request these are withheld under regulation 12(5)(e) of the EIR for the reasons set out in this response.”

GBE-N was approached for comment.

September 6, 2026 Posted by | business and costs, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, UK | Leave a comment

Reforming nuclear regulation


Innovation News Network, 2nd September 2026

The Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) explains how it is responding to government recommendations to reform the UK nuclear regulatory framework, and what this means in practice,……………………

 The independent Nuclear Regulatory Taskforce, commissioned by the Prime Minister, published its final report in November 2025, setting out 47 recommendations for reform of the nuclear regulatory framework. The government accepted all 47 in its implementation plan, Building Our Nuclear Nation, published in March 2026. ………………

The Taskforce’s central finding was that the UK’s nuclear regulatory framework had become more process-heavy than the actual risks warranted. Safety cases had grown in volume and complexity, regulatory interactions across multiple bodies were sometimes duplicated rather than coordinated. A tendency towards caution had taken hold.……………….

The Taskforce’s recommendation to establish a commission is the long-term solution to this issue. Until legislation can enact the commission, ONR has been designated as the interim lead regulator for the nuclear fission sector, with formal arrangements in place across what we have described as the ’super six’ regulatory bodies. We convened the inaugural Lead Nuclear Regulator Group meeting in early 2026, agreeing terms of reference and identifying priority projects for coordinated action. We are now focused on demonstrating the practical benefits of this approach through delivery on real projects…………………….

ONR Together will transform how we work, outlining the modernisation of processes, leveraging modern technology, and empowering us to make timely and proportionate decisions…………………

Bringing defence and civil nuclear regulation closer together

The government has committed to merging the Defence Nuclear Safety Regulator into ONR……………….

International harmonisation

We are investing significantly in further strengthening our international collaboration – one of the areas with the greatest potential for practical benefit to the UK’s nuclear programme.

We are already working with the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission on collaborative design assessments, including for the BWRX-300 reactor. …………………………….

Building capacity for what lies ahead

All this reform work sits alongside a very significant expansion in the UK’s nuclear programme – Sizewell C, the Wylfa SMR project, Hinkley Point C, The Dreadnought submarine programme, the ongoing decommissioning of legacy nuclear sites……………………………………………………….. https://www.innovationnewsnetwork.com/reforming-nuclear-regulation/73452/

September 6, 2026 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

Nuclear power is not the answer for energy needs.

1st Sep 2026, Paul Dorfman, University of Sussex, Brighton

Brian Wilson suggests that renewables are the problem, with fossil fuels and nuclear as the way forward (Scotsman, 29 August). Perhaps he should consider the following:

In 2025, wind and solar became the bedrock of European energy self-reliance, with power generation from renewables in Europe reaching a new record of 384.9 TWh. Meanwhile, Norway has just said no to nuclear power, and Nato now backs renewables as the solution to energy security.

In 2025 renewables made up 85.6 per cent of all new global power capacity additions. Renewables are now 53 per cent cheaper than nuclear for total system costs and, with a doubling cost over-run, nuclear remains the most expensive power source. With construction of just one station taking 20 years-plus, nuclear projects in Europe run years behind schedule and vastly over budget. Nuclear power construction has an average time over-run of 64 per cent.

The fact is, each year nuclear adds only as much net global power capacity as renewables add every two days. For Scotland, the direction of travel is clear. The challenge now is not just generation, but how quickly grids, batteries and flexibility can be deployed.

Too dangerous, is the worst possible time for Brian to be promoting nuclear power.

George Morton, Rosyth, Fife

I have quite a high regard for Brian Wilson, but am dismayed by his ongoing advocacy of nuclear power in his article on energy supply.

His cost argument fails to include guarding dangerous fission-products for centuries, and the fact that nuclear power plants have the advantage of being state-insured against litigation for environmental damage.

Most importantly, they’re potential war-targets (we know that from Iran and Ukraine). And it needn’t be a strike on a reactor; even a destroyed waste-storage facility would, on an adverse wind, require the evacuation of hundreds of thousands. Just think of Chernobyl.

The US predictionists at Polymarket are offering odds of 25 per cent (a one in four chance) of a NATO/Russia clash before the year is out (excluding cyberattacks). Now is the worst possible time for Brian to be promoting nuclear power.

September 5, 2026 Posted by | ENERGY, UK | Leave a comment

Britain ‘must brace for more Iranian cyber attacks’

Former US security chief expects UK infrastructure to be targeted again, following unprecedented breach of power plant

Rozina Sabur, National Security Editor, Telegraph, 29 August 2026

nfrastructure could face further attacks from Iran, a former US cyber chief has warned.

The Telegraph revealed last week that hackers affiliated with Tehran shut down a British power plant for four days in an unprecedented cyber attack.

And Britain, the US and other Western allies should “expect attacks like this to continue” as Tehran ramps up its cyber warfare, according to Jen Easterly, the former director of the US cybersecurity and infrastructure security agency (CISA).

In an interview with The Telegraph, Ms Easterly said companies that failed to heed alerts from the Five Eyes intelligence network in particular would be seen as “low-hanging fruit”. Five Eyes is an alliance between Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK and the US……………………

With Tehran under growing diplomatic and economic pressure amid its confrontation with the US and Israel, the regime has dramatically stepped up its cyber attacks on the West.

Intelligence officials describe Iran as a capable adversary in the online domain, with its cyber apparatus working in concert with its wartime aims.

In the incident revealed by The Telegraph last week, hackers affiliated with the Iranian regime succeeded in closing down an energy facility in the UK…………

The shutdown is understood to have occurred at the same time as a series of attacks on US water infrastructure last month, which affected multiple states……………………………………. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/08/29/britain-must-brace-for-more-iranian-cyber-attacks/

September 1, 2026 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

This is how we can regulate data centres in Scotland

There’s an increasingly loud uprising happening in Scotland around AI data
centres. Possibly the biggest I’ve seen since the 2016 uproar over shale
gas fracking. Data centre companies are actively lobbying the Scottish
Government as we speak and are basically asking for John Swinney to open
the gates to them to flood Scotland with as many data centres as he’s
willing to make us all swallow.

It’s easy to see what the companies get out
of it. Scotland has plenty of space, a good amount of water and while
electricity prices are high they can often negotiate preferential rates
that we could only dream of. What does Scotland get out of it? Higher
energy prices, higher demand on increasingly scarce water, about
three-and-a-half jobs, and the Scottish Government gets to claim that the
“inwards investment” line goes up? Perhaps I can see why Swinney would
take that deal.

The National 27th Aug 2026,
https://www.thenational.scot/news/26498669.can-regulate-data-centres-scotland/

September 1, 2026 Posted by | technology, UK | Leave a comment

Germany in talks to help fund Trident

Berlin could bolster Britain’s nuclear programme under plans to end Europe’s reliance on America for defence

Joe Barnes Diplomatic Editor. James Rothwell Berlin Correspondent. James Crisp Europe Editor,  26 August 2026

Germany is in talks to invest in Britain’s nuclear deterrent, The
Telegraph understands. Berlin is considering offering financial support for
Trident as it spearheads efforts to reinforce Europe’s nuclear umbrella.
One well-placed source said Germany wanted to better integrate itself into
the existing British and French nuclear deterrents rather than pursue its
own bomb because of the nation’s wartime guilt.

“We have a very strong
interest that the existing nuclear powers in Europe extend their
capabilities,” the source said. The discussions between Paris, Berlin and
London have accelerated in recent months amid fears the Trump
administration will withdraw its military from Europe.

Telegraph 26th Aug 2026, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2026/08/26/germany-talks-help-fund-britains-trident-nuclear-deterrent/

August 31, 2026 Posted by | Germany, UK, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Claim about Scottish support for nuclear power doesn’t add up

Ni Holmes, St Andrews, 27 Aug 26

I WAS not surprised to find, when I got to the foot of a letter challenging Paul Kavanagh’s assertion that “Scotland does not need nuclear energy and most in Scotland don’t want it” as being “wrong on both counts” (Aug 26), that it was written by Lincoln Hill, the Nuclear Industry Association’s director of policy and external affairs.

Mr Hill appears not to be too good at maths. He cites a YouGov poll showing that fewer than a third of people in Scotland consider nuclear power as the most important energy source and that a similar number identified it as their preferred source of energy. To my understanding, the remaining two-thirds of Scots who do not support nuclear power are indeed most of the people in Scotland.

Mr Hill goes on to assert that Scotland needs “more than one source of electricity”. This suggests that lack of basic counting skills is the foundation of his weakness in maths. We already have multiple sources of electricity: we have had hydro-electric power for decades, we have wave generators, we have onshore and offshore wind turbines, and new technology is making solar power viable even in our climate. By my count those five already add up to the “more than one” that Mr Hill claims we need. We will still have more than one source after the last nuclear power station in our country is finally decommissioned.

It seems to me that it is Mr Hill that is wrong and Mr Kavanagh was entirely correct on both counts. We neither need nor want nuclear power in Scotland, the Nuclear Industry Association, or for that matter the Westminster Labour Party’s small-scale reactors and Starmer’s “GB Energy”. What we do need is our independence so that we can make our own choices in the interest of Scotland and the all of its people, rather than English energy requirements or the wealthy seek to profit from energy production.

August 31, 2026 Posted by | spinbuster, UK | Leave a comment

UK seeks to tighten security of supply chains after Iran-linked cyber attacks

 The UK government is seeking to change the law so that it can block
companies from buying products from high-risk suppliers, in a move that
comes shortly after news that a hacking group had shut down a small energy
facility.

Ministers could demand companies in critical sectors such as
energy, healthcare and telecoms take extra security measures such as
implementing a phased removal of certain vendors or be banned from
acquiring technology from them under proposals announced on Monday.

The vulnerability of key UK infrastructure was highlighted by Sunday’s
revelation that hackers thought to be linked to Iran had forced a small gas
plant offline. The National Cyber Security Centre has also warned that
companies must do more to guard against cyber attacks. The government’s
plans were introduced via amendments to the Cyber Security and Resilience
Bill and are subject to parliamentary approval. They will seek to safeguard
the supply chains of companies, which are often used as a “soft
underbelly” by hackers seeking to target larger groups.

 FT 24th Aug 2026,
https://www.ft.com/content/3d46e4cb-4dee-4f49-adc1-0bb0f63d4c49

August 30, 2026 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

Britain’s Storm Shadow tech transfer to Ukraine will lead to more escalation. We need dialogue!

Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, August 25, 2026, https://cnduk.org/britains-storm-shadow-tech-transfer-to-ukraine-will-lead-to-more-escalation-we-need-dialogue/?link_id=1&can_id=0a448bf4278898648e02a8f6dea4650f&source=email-britain-pushes-for-more-escalation-in-ukraine-aukus-webinar-register-for-cnd-agm-policy-conference&email_referrer=email_3374903&email_subject=britain-pushes-for-more-escalation-in-ukraine-aukus-webinar-register-for-cnd-conference

Britain’s decision to join France in transferring classified Storm Shadow blueprints to Ukraine so it can domestically produce the long-range cruise missile will only increase nuclear risks, warns CND.  

Prime Minister Andy Burnham made the announcement about the technology transfer during a visit to Kyiv on Monday.

The Storm Shadow is co-produced with France by the multi-national arms company MBDA and has a range of 155 miles (250km). The air-launched missiles also have bunker-busting warheads and are capable of hitting Russian targets in its territory. In November 2024, the British government, in coordination with the US administration, gave permission for Ukraine to use these weapons to hit targets deep inside Russian territory. This was in spite of Russia’s threat to use its nuclear weapons against such long-range attacks. 

France already agreed to hand over its own blueprints for the SCALP-EG (its French export name) in July, as part of a wider arms deal that included Rafale fighter jets and interceptor missiles.  

On Sunday, Russia’s foreign ministry said it had withdrawn its ambassador to London, Andrei Kelin, accusing Britain of choosing a “path of confrontation.”  This comes after Russia announced that there would be consequences for attacks on civilian infrastrcutrue by British-made long-range drones. Some reports have suggested that this could mean British drone factories could be attacked by “unknown sources.” 

Burnham’s announcement has been interpreted as an attempt by Britain and France to push the US into giving Ukraine its Patriot interceptor technology so it can produce them locally. During July’s NATO summit, Donald Trump told Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky that the US would give a licence to produce Patriots only to backtrack on the promise weeks later saying it “a hard thing to give away.”

The reversal coincided with an escalation in the US’s illegal war on Iran in July. That conflict, ongoing since February, has led to a shortage in stocks of both Patriot and Tomahawk as the US and its Gulf allies use them to counter Iranian ballistic missiles and drones. It’s estimated that only 1,000 Patriot missiles remain in US stocks and current annual production is currently 600. Plans are already in place to set up new production lines in Germany and Poland to help replenish their stocks given to Ukraine, while Zelensky is also calling for a line to be set up in Ukraine. 

CND General Secretary Sophie Bolt said:
“The British government’s strategy of escalation is very dangerous. We have already seen the nuclear risks from such escalation in 2024 when Russia threatened to use its nuclear weapons against long-range missiles. Burnham needs to end this reckless war-mongering and focus on dialogue and de-escalation.” 

August 29, 2026 Posted by | UK, Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »