nuclear-news

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

Ministry of Defence’s nuclear clean-up project brings new risks.

21st February, By Lynn Jamieson, chair, Scottish Campaign Nuclear Disarmament:

ROSYTH dockyard leads in the clean-up of retired nuclear
submarines as part of the Submarine Dismantling Project (SDP). Addressing a
legacy mess affords opportunities for building a skilled workforce.


But please, no more mess. Rosyth may become more deadly if operational
nuclear-armed submarines station there. As a contingency docking station
for the nuclear-weapon system now under construction, radioactive risks
will increase from nuclear reactors and weapons. T

he Ministry of Defence
(MoD) has not ruled out nuclear bombs being onboard a temporarily docked
submarine at Rosyth. In 40 years, newly built reactors become a long-term
legacy of nuclear waste, sitting in another generation of retired
submarines to be decommissioned at enormous cost.

Since the 1980s,
intermediate-level radioactive waste in the form of retired nuclear-powered
submarines – currently seven in total – sit at Rosyth, a hazard costing
money every day. Fifteen more sit in Devonport Royal Dockyard, Plymouth. Of
the 15 vessels at Devonport, 10 retain the highly radioactive fuel rods
that once powered them.

 The National 21st Feb 2026,
https://www.thenational.scot/politics/25874840.mods-nuclear-clean-up-project-brings-new-risks/

February 22, 2026 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

Why can’t people grasp that there’s much more to renewables than wind?

L McGregor, Falkirk. https://www.heraldscotland.com/opinion/25860226.cant-people-grasp-much-renewables-wind/

Why do Malcolm Parkin (Letters, February 12) and many others keep going on about the need for small nuclear reactors because the wind does not blow all the time, as if there were no other highly successful ways to produce energy

Have they never heard of the numerous other means of production? What about pumped storage? Nearly 50 years ago, I visited the Cruachan pumped storage site and learned how that could, when demand is high, release the water to produce electricity to fill any shortfall, and pump it back up to store for the next use. There are already places in Scotland where small, local, pumped storage systems are in operation and numerous larger ones are in construction, or operational, such as Foyers on Loch Ness. These systems could power millions of homes, wind or no wind.

Mr Parkin and others seem unaware that there are wave-powered and tidal systems already operating in Scotland and being further developed, for example around Orkney and the Pentland Firth. These have the advantage that there are two tides a day and constant waves all round our coasts, which would never stop providing energy. Such projects could have been much further advanced had Westminster not, years ago, withdrawn the funding for a major one of these schemes, thus retarding progress. Nevertheless, Scotland is a world leader in these technologies, providing 50% of the world’s such energy.

What need is there to consider any form of nuclear reactor? Whilst nuclear power produced may be clean, the building process and materials have an exorbitant cost, take years, and are highly carbon-producing. Storage of waste presents an insurmountable problem, with severe risks for centuries. Witness the ongoing occasional discovery of radioactive particles contaminating the beaches around Dounreay, years after the plant closed.

Small nuclear reactors are not yet fully developed, and our taxes are currently contributing to the “UK-wide” project, Hinckley Point reactor in South-east England, already 10 years late, nearly three times the original cost and still not completed. Moreover, we are now to share the cost of Sizewell C, of the same outdated design in the same area, final cost and operation date still unknown.

Meantime, Scottish renewables producers pay an exorbitant sum to connect to the Grid, whence 40% of their product goes to England, while our consumers pay the highest costs in Europe, and perhaps the world. Rather than moaning about wind energy and supporting nuclear, Mr Parkin and friends might ask why the Scottish Government does not receive payment for this export – an income which could help speed up our transition and make wind turbine eventually obsolete..

February 21, 2026 Posted by | ENERGY, UK | Leave a comment

Ch4 doc shows Starmer’s ban on Palestine Action was done to protect the arms industry

10 February 2026,Jonathon Cook Blog

Channel 4’s documentary last night on Palestine Action’s proscription as a terrorist organisation was a game of two halves. The first half, which built the government’s case for proscription, was presumably the “balance” needed to avoid a pile-on by the rest of the establishment media. The second half then proceeded to tear down the government’s case brick by brick.

Here are the five main takeaways from the second half:

1. The film reminded us that the government’s proscription of Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation was done at the behest of Elbit Systems – the Israeli arms firm making killer drones for use in Gaza that Palestine Action was chiefly targeting.

Government officials regularly met with Elbit. A 2023 internal Home Office email, two years before proscription, states: “Reassure Elbit Systems UK and the wider sector affected by Palestine Action that the government cares about the harm the group is causing the private sector [arms industries].”

2. A senior Home Office official told the film-makers that there was a widespread belief among staff that the government was “wrong” to proscribe Palestine Action, and there was “disquiet” that the government was using Palestine Action as a way to curtail rights to protest and speech more generally.

3. Lord Hain, a former Labour government minister, explained that, when MPs and Lords were presented with an amendment to the Terrorism Act in 2020 under which Palestine Action has now been proscribed, the government had made explicit reassurances that criminal damage to property – Palestine Action’s modus operandi – would not qualify as terrorism.

He also reminded viewers that, had earlier governments adopted the same approach as Sir Keir Starmer’s government, the Suffragette and anti-apartheid movements would also have been declared terrorist organisations……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. https://www.jonathan-cook.net/blog/2026-02-10/ban-palestine-action-arms-industry/

February 21, 2026 Posted by | media, UK | Leave a comment

Further charges on health and safety offences at a nuclear construction site

 Following a pre-trial review hearing held today at Bristol Crown Court, a
trial date has been set in the prosecution of two companies charged with
health and safety offences at a nuclear construction site. Two further
charges were added to the indictment at today’s court hearing, bringing the
total of charges to four.

The organisations face a charge of failing to
plan, manage and monitor construction work without risks to health and
safety contravening Regulation 15(2) of the Construction (Design and
Management) Regulations 2015, and previously entered not guilty pleas at a
hearing held in December 2025. An additional charge that Laing O’Rourke
Delivery Limited and Bouygues Travaux Publics SAS both failed to conduct a
suitable and sufficient risk assessment of the risks to the health and
safety of their employees, under Regulation 3 (1) (a) of the Management of
Health and Safety At Work Regulations 1999, contravening Section 33(1)(c)
of the Act has now also been added. Both organisations have pleaded not
guilty to these charges.

 ONR 17th Feb 2026, https://www.onr.org.uk/news/all-news/2026/02/new-charges-added-in-rebar-mesh-wall-incident-at-hinkley-point-c

.

February 20, 2026 Posted by | Legal, UK | Leave a comment

British taxpayers bankroll French nuclear giant while Hinkley Point C quietly receives 500-tonne reactor heart.

The contrast couldn’t be starker: French taxpayers owning British energy infrastructure, while British taxpayers guarantee the profits.

For a typical family using 3,000 kWh annually, the Hinkley surcharge could add £15-25 yearly to bills once the plant is operational. That might sound modest, but it’s on top of already record-high energy costs and other energy levies.

 Olivia Hunt  February 15, 2026, https://secom.es/hinkley-point-c-receives-500-tonne-reactor-heart-british-taxpayers-bankroll/

Sarah Mitchell stared at her energy bill in disbelief. £340 for the month. Again. The single mother from Bristol had already switched off the heating in two bedrooms and started cooking with just one burner. Yet somewhere across the Channel, a massive steel cylinder was being loaded onto a ship, destined for her county of Somerset. That 500-tonne nuclear reactor vessel would eventually power her home—and she was helping to pay for it, twice over.

It’s a story playing out across Britain right now. While families ration their heating and businesses close early to save on electricity, a French-built nuclear giant is making its way to British shores. The destination is Hinkley Point C, the controversial power station that’s become a symbol of everything complicated about Britain’s energy choices.

The scene in Cherbourg was deliberately low-key. No cameras, no politicians cutting ribbons. Just dockworkers watching as France’s most sophisticated nuclear technology rolled toward a waiting vessel, bound for a country that’s paying through the nose for foreign expertise.

Hinkley Point C represents the biggest bet Britain has made on its energy future in decades. When the deal was struck in 2016, it looked like smart planning. Today, with energy prices through the roof and household budgets stretched thin, it feels more like an expensive gamble with other people’s money.

The reactor pressure vessel now crossing the English Channel is the beating heart of what will become Britain’s newest nuclear power station. Built by Framatome, France’s state-owned nuclear champion, this steel colossus will sit at the center of two European Pressurised Reactors (EPR) designed to generate enough electricity for six million homes.

“This vessel represents the pinnacle of nuclear engineering,” explains Dr. James Crawford, a nuclear physicist at Imperial College London. “But the question isn’t whether it’s impressive technology—it’s whether British taxpayers should be funding French state enterprises while struggling with their own energy costs.”

The numbers behind Hinkley Point C make for uncomfortable reading. The project has ballooned from an initial estimate of £18 billion to potentially over £35 billion. Meanwhile, British households are locked into paying a guaranteed “strike price” of £92.50 per megawatt-hour for the electricity it produces, inflation-adjusted over 35 years.Follow the Money: Who Pays and Who Profits

The financial structure of Hinkley Point C reads like a masterclass in how to transfer risk from private companies to ordinary citizens. Here’s how the money flows:

Who BuildsWho OwnsWho PaysWho Guarantees
EDF (French state-owned)EDF (66.5%) + CGN (Chinese, 33.5%)British bill payersBritish government
Framatome (French)Foreign shareholdersBritish taxpayersBritish taxpayers

The strike price mechanism means British energy users will pay a premium for Hinkley’s electricity regardless of market conditions. If wholesale prices fall, we top up the difference. If they rise above £92.50 per MWh, EDF keeps the extra profit up to a point—but taxpayers still carry the underlying risk.

Key financial commitments include:

  • £92.50 per MWh guaranteed electricity price (2012 prices, now worth over £110 with inflation)
  • 35-year contract duration with built-in price increases
  • Government loan guarantees reducing EDF’s borrowing costs
  • Planning and regulatory costs covered by British authorities
  • Decommissioning fund contributions from British sources

“It’s the most expensive electricity deal in Europe,” notes energy economist Professor Michael Roberts from Oxford University. “We’re essentially giving EDF a 35-year annuity underwritten by British households, while they retain ownership of a strategic asset.”

Real Homes, Real Bills, Real Consequences

While the nuclear reactor makes its journey from France, the human cost of Britain’s energy choices plays out in living rooms across the country. The Hinkley Point C contract means every household will contribute to EDF’s guaranteed profits through their electricity bills for the next three and a half decades.

For a typical family using 3,000 kWh annually, the Hinkley surcharge could add £15-25 yearly to bills once the plant is operational. That might sound modest, but it’s on top of already record-high energy costs and other renewable energy levies.

The timing feels particularly brutal. As the French-built reactor vessel crosses the Channel, British families are making impossible choices between heating and eating. Food banks report unprecedented demand, partly driven by people choosing groceries over gas bills.

“My constituents are furious,” says MP Caroline Davies, whose constituency includes several towns near Hinkley Point C. “They see foreign companies profiting from guaranteed contracts while they’re choosing between turning on the heating or buying school uniforms for their kids.”

The broader economic impact extends beyond household bills:

  • Small businesses closing early to avoid peak-rate electricity charges
  • Manufacturers relocating to countries with cheaper, more predictable energy costs
  • Public services cutting back on heating and lighting in schools and hospitals
  • Pensioners rationing heating despite rising winter fuel allowances

Meanwhile, EDF’s shareholders—ultimately the French state—benefit from one of the most generous infrastructure deals in recent British history. The contrast couldn’t be starker: French taxpayers owning British energy infrastructure, while British taxpayers guarantee the profits.

The situation raises fundamental questions about energy sovereignty and democratic accountability. When foreign state-owned companies control critical infrastructure that British citizens are compelled to fund, traditional notions of national ownership become meaningless,

Energy analysts warn this model could extend to other major projects. If Hinkley Point C proves profitable for foreign investors at British expense, similar deals for future nuclear plants, offshore wind farms, and other infrastructure become more likely.

As that 500-tonne reactor vessel approaches British waters, it carries more than just sophisticated nuclear technology. It represents a profound shift in how Britain powers itself—and who controls the switch.

February 19, 2026 Posted by | business and costs, UK | Leave a comment

Major leak at Highland nuclear site triggers hunt for mystery bunkers

 A 1960s bunker at a Highland nuclear site quietly leaked radioactive water
for at least a year before the alarm was raised – and officials have now
ordered a hunt for other similar hidden structures that may be leaking too,
the Sunday National can reveal.

Dounreay, on the Caithness coast, was the
UK’s centre for experimental fast‑reactor research from the 1950s until
the 1990s and is now a major nuclear decommissioning site. The clean‑up
is funded by the UK Government’s Nuclear Decommissioning Authority and
carried out locally by Nuclear Restoration Services (NRS), which runs the
site and is responsible for managing its ageing reactors, waste pits and
other legacy facilities.

The National revealed last year that radioactive
material had been accidentally released at Dounreay between July 2023 and
August 2024 and that Scotland’s environmental watchdog, SEPA, found the
operator had breached its permit.

But now, a new internal investigation
report, released to the Sunday National under freedom of information, goes
further: it warns that other underground structures with “unrevealed
hazards” may still be waiting to be found. The original leak source was a
disused underground carbon bed filter – essentially a concrete bunker –
built in the early 1960s as part of a ventilation system for one of
Dounreay’s facilities. It was taken out of normal use decades ago and
left as a legacy structure to be dealt with during decommissioning.

The report notes that it “was never designed to retain water”, yet by 2017,
it was known to contain thousands of litres of radioactive liquor and had
already been identified as a possible source of contamination at one of the
site’s outfalls.

A spokesperson for the Scottish Environment Protection
Agency (SEPA) said: “In June 2024, Nuclear Restoration Services Ltd (NRS)
notified SEPA of a potential leak of radioactively contaminated water from
a carbon bed filter on the Dounreay site. It was subsequently established
that there was a small leak from the carbon bed filter. Monitoring by the
operator has not detected any increase in radioactivity in groundwater
downstream.

“SEPA’s investigation concluded that the operator had
breached conditions of its Environmental Authorisations (Scotland)
Regulations 2018 (EASR) authorisation. To secure compliance, we have issued
a Regulatory Notice requiring NRS to take specified steps, including
reviewing groundwater monitoring arrangements and undertaking
characterisation to establish the extent of contamination which has arisen
from the leak from the carbon bed filter.”

 The National 15th Feb 2026, https://www.thenational.scot/news/25854472.major-leak-highland-nuclear-site-triggers-hunt-mystery-bunkers/

February 19, 2026 Posted by | environment, UK | Leave a comment

Rot at the Top: The Elite’s Darkest Secrets Spill Out

February 12, 2026,  by Joshua Scheer, https://scheerpost.com/2026/02/12/rot-at-the-top-the-elites-darkest-secrets-spill-out/

In a political moment defined by secrecy, impunity, and the open decay of democratic institutions, few conversations cut as sharply as this one. Chris Hedges — Pulitzer Prize–winning former New York Times Middle East bureau chief — joins George Galloway to dissect the explosive Epstein files and the global elite they expose. What emerges is not a scandal at the margins, but a portrait of a ruling class so insulated, so depraved, and so unaccountable that its corruption has become a structural feature of Western power.

From the redactions shielding Trump and Netanyahu, to the British political meltdown engulfing Starmer’s inner circle, to the bipartisan rot in Washington, Hedges argues that the Epstein revelations are not an aberration but a window into a collapsing order. As he puts it, the files reveal “a depraved corrupt ruling global elite that has created a club that has locked the rest of us out,” one now reaching for authoritarian tools as its legitimacy crumbles.

This is a conversation about the Epstein affair — but also about the death spiral of American democracy, the rise of police‑state tactics, and the dangerous volatility of a declining empire whose leaders are losing their grip on reality. And with the Persian Gulf once again on the brink, Hedges warns that the same unaccountable forces exposed in the Epstein files are steering the world toward catastrophe.

If you want to understand the moment we’re living through — the corruption, the cover‑ups, the authoritarian drift, and the geopolitical brinkmanship — this exchange is essential.

Key Highlights

1. The Epstein Files as a Window Into Elite Rot

  • Hedges calls the documents “a depraved corrupt ruling global elite that has created a club that has locked the rest of us out.”
  • He argues the files expose not just individuals but the structure of unaccountable power across the US, UK, Israel, and Europe.

2. Trump’s Deep Exposure in the Files

  • Mentioned “38,000 times” in emails, according to Hedges.
  • Hedges says the redactions were designed “to protect Trump and Netanyahu.”
  • The Republican Party’s resistance to releasing the files “crumbled,” forcing Trump’s hand.

3. UK Political Meltdown


  • Galloway details cascading scandals around Starmer’s appointments — from Mandelson to a newly exposed associate tied to a convicted pedophile.
  • British media saturation contrasts sharply with US silence, which Hedges says reflects “the breakdown of democratic institutions.”

4. Bipartisan Complicity in the US

  • Hedges names Clinton, George Mitchell, and even Noam Chomsky as figures caught in the web.
  • He stresses that both parties are implicated, making accountability structurally impossible.

5. The Missing Videos & Intelligence Links

  • Epstein’s mansion contained a “closet‑sized safe” filled with recorded material.
  • Hedges: “It’s a question to what extent Epstein was working for the Mossad.”
  • Clear ties to Ehud Barak and Israeli intelligence raise the specter of kompromat.

6. Trump’s Cognitive Decline

  • Hedges cites Trump claiming he imposed tariffs on Switzerland because of its “prime minister” — a position that doesn’t exist.
  • He warns that a mentally deteriorating commander‑in‑chief is dangerous amid multiple potential war fronts.

7. The Rise of American Death‑Squad Policing

  • Hedges describes ICE and federal agents as “death squads… killing with impunity,” ignoring court orders.
  • He frames this as the defining feature of a police state.

8. Will Trump Attack Iran?

  • Pentagon opposition remains strong.
  • Netanyahu’s repeated visits suggest he’s not getting the commitment he wants.
  • Hedges: Trump is impulsive enough that “he could wake up tomorrow” and reverse course.

9. Epstein as a Global Operator, Not a Lone Predator

  • Epstein involved in Ukraine, Somaliland, even “a potential coup against Putin.”
  • Hedges emphasizes his inexplicable rise: “He can barely write English… that is the enigma.”

10. The Authoritarian Turn as Self‑Protection

  • As elites are exposed, Hedges argues they are “rapidly imposing authoritarian states” to maintain control.
  • He cites both US and UK crackdowns on dissent as evidence.

February 15, 2026 Posted by | politics international, UK, USA | Leave a comment

EDF makes distorted claims about Hinkley C fish deterrent.

Tuesday 10 February 2026, https://www.wildlifetrusts.org/news/edf-makes-distorted-claims-about-hinkley-c-fish-deterrent

The developers of Hinkley C continue to misrepresent the impact that the nuclear plant will have on nature

Today EDF has published a press release which misrepresents the cost of its acoustic fish deterrent and the impact that the Hinkley Point C nuclear plant will have on wildlife.

It comes as England’s leading nature groups and over 60 MPs publish a letter calling on the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, Ed Milliband, to reject the three recommendations of the Nuclear Regulatory Review which threaten to undermine protections for nature. 

Matt Browne, head of public affairs at The Wildlife Trusts, says: 


“The developers of Hinkley C continue to misrepresent the impact that the nuclear plant will have on nature. Today’s press release claims that a number of plant safety measures are fish protection measures. This is highly misleading and allows EDF to pretend that £700 million is being spent to protect nature, when the real figure is closer to £50m. It also misrepresents the number of fish affected by the proposed plant – they spotlight the suggestion that just two salmon will be killed per year when Environment Agency experts warn that 4.6 million fish will die every year – including critically endangered species such as European eel. 

“It’s shocking that these claims were accepted without interrogation by the Nuclear Regulatory Review. On the basis of these false claims,  the Government is now considering progressing recommendations which will lead to nature protections being severely compromised.  


“The leaders of England’s largest nature groups and over 60 MPs have written to the Government today to express concerns about errors in the Review, and the damage its recommendations would cause to wildlife that is already on the brink.”  

The Wildlife Trusts recently published ‘Why the Nuclear Regulatory Review is flawed – and how it could turn the nature crisis into a catastrophe’ which exposed the faulty evidence behind recommendations to cut environmental protections made in the Government’s review of nuclear delivery. 

It revealed that: 


  1. The review claimed that fish protection measures at Hinkley C nuclear power station will cost £700 million. The actual cost of the fish deterrent system is £50 million. This £50 million is in the context of an overall project cost of £46 billion, up from an original £18 billion due to ballooning costs that are nothing to do with the environment.  
     
  2. The review claimed that that fish protection measures at Hinkley C will protect just 0.08 salmon, 0.02 trout and 6 lamprey per year. The actual numbers from research carried out by Environment Agency suggest that 4.6 million adult fish per year could be killed per year without protection measures, a scale of wildlife destruction which would have significant consequences for ecosystems across the internationally important Severn Estuary. Many of these fish are already rare or endangered.  

Natural England wrote yesterday: “The Severn Estuary has the highest recorded number of fish species in the UK and is the nursery ground for many of the young fish that our fishing industry depends on. The estuary also plays a crucial role in the lifecycle of a range of endangered migratory fish species including Atlantic Salmon. It is for these reasons that the estuary and some of its species are protected by law.” 
 

Read more about the deceptions driving deregulation

February 15, 2026 Posted by | spinbuster, UK | Leave a comment

Dounreay workers among 200 allowed to leave Nuclear Restoration Services’ UK in early exit scheme

 By Iain Grant, John O’Groat Journal 10th Feb 2026

About 30 workers at Dounreay are believed to have been offered early leaving terms in a scheme designed to trim the size of Nuclear Restoration Services’ UK-wide workforce.

Many others at the Caithness site who applied for the mutually agreed voluntary exit (MAVE) initiative were unsuccessful.

The scheme, which has raised the hackles of unions, offers one month of salary per year of service, capped at 21 months of pay or £95,000.

No numbers for Dounreay have been made available but about 500 applied at NRS’s 14 sites throughout the country. Of those, about 200 have been made offers.

It is part of a wider Treasury drive to cut the public sector payroll following its growth during the pandemic.

About 1200 are employed by NRS at Dounreay though that will increase by more than 300 when plans to put NRS in charge of the neighbouring MoD plant at Vulcan come to pass.

Dounreay provide £128k over 3 years for STEM activities for Caithness and Sutherland primary pupils

Read More

The MAVE scheme is opposed by Prospect, which along with GMB and Unite, is running a What a Waste campaign, to highlight the loss of scarce, skilled specialists in the nuclear sector.

They claim the job cuts will cost the government more in the long term as it will put a spoke in the programme to decommission redundant nuclear sites and mean it has to fork out to rebuild the workforce in the future……………………..

In addition to Dounreay, NRS runs nuclear sites at Berkley, Bradwell, Chapelcross, Dungeness, Harwell, Hinkley Point, Hunterston, Oldbury, Sizewell, Trawsfynydd, Winfrith and Wyfla and the Maentwrog hydro-electric plant. https://www.johnogroat-journal.co.uk/news/dounreay-workers-among-200-allowed-to-leave-nrs-in-early-exi-426869/

 

February 15, 2026 Posted by | employment, UK | Leave a comment

REVEALED: Labour said Scottish nuclear study could be seen as ‘waste of money’

 by Tom Pashby, The Canary 11th Feb 2026

The UK government has admitted that a study into the suitability of Scottish sites for new nuclear power projects could have been “a waste” of money. The government commissioned Great British Energy-Nuclear (GBE-N), a public body, to carry out the study.

The revelation came after Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) secretary of state Ed Miliband told Scottish journalists in October 2025 that:

given the growing interest in nuclear in Scotland, I’m asking GBE-N to assess Scotland’s capability for new nuclear power stations, including at Torness and Hunterston.

This is going to be a very, very big issue in the Scottish election campaign. We are saying yes to new nuclear in Scotland.

Labour hoping to end SNP ban on new nuclear in Scotland

Scotland is due to go to the polls to elect a new Scottish parliament and Scottish government in May 2026. Labour is hoping to wrest back control from the Scottish National Party (SNP).

In an article about the same interview published in October 2025, the Scotsman newspaper reported that a “senior UK government source” had said they were considering submitting planning applications for new nuclear developments at Torness and Hunterston because they expected a Scottish Labour victory at the Holyrood election.

The UK Labour Party and Scottish Labour support nuclear power and nuclear weapons. This position is coming under pressure as the Green Party of England and Wales, which vehemently opposes all nuclear, increasingly challenges Labour in public opinion polls.

Under the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act, the government released documents to the Canary about Miliband’s request to GBE-N. These included a Q&A document prepared by DESNZ officials. It revealed that officials knew there would be concerns about new nuclear proposals in Scotland.

No new nuclear can be built in Scotland because planning policy is a devolved matter, and the ruling SNP opposes nuclear power. The rebuttal in the DESNZ Q&A was that there is “cross-party interest in new nuclear” in Scotland.

Energy department officials contradict each other on responsibility for study

The documents released under FOI also revealed that a DESNZ official, whose name was redacted, had sought to reassure GBE-N colleagues that DESNZ was not “behind the briefing” in an email sent on 22 October 2025 at 4:02pm.

That position was contradicted by an email in a separate earlier conversation where, on 21 October 2025 at 6:46pm, John Staples, DESNZ director for new nuclear strategy and fusion energy, said:

our SpAds [special advisors] want SoS [secretary of state] to be able to say the below to Scottish journalists.

‘Below’ in the email were lines drafted for Miliband which included:

I will ask Great British Energy – Nuclear to begin assessing Scotland’s capability for new nuclear power stations.

The internally prepared Q&A included a question which asked:

Isn’t this study a waste of money?

The DESNZ answer said:

New nuclear projects can deliver millions of pounds of investment and thousands of high-quality jobs to a region – UK ministers want to understand the potential for new projects right across Great Britain.

The Canary approached the Labour Party for comment, which deferred to DESNZ. DESNZ did not respond to a request for comment.

‘Obvious’ that study would be ‘waste of money’ – Scottish CND

A Scottish Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) spokesperson told the Canary:

It is obvious that an assessment of the viability of new nuclear sites in Scotland would be a waste of money, since the foremost issue is not the viability of sites but Scottish government policy.

Energy policy is devolved to Holyrood and the Scottish government very sensibly opposes new nuclear plants in Scotland.

There are a whole host of reasons why new nuclear plants in Scotland would be a terrible idea, including the absolutely exorbitant cost of nuclear plant construction, the reliance on destructive and unjust international uranium supply chains, and the enormous and cross-generational burden of decommissioning nuclear plants, which in the case of Dounreay is expected to take hundreds of years.

In particular, the notion that Scotland, which is a net energy exporter and has the potential to become an international renewables powerhouse, should pivot to costly nuclear projects at this stage is somewhat absurd.

Investing the same sums invested in nuclear power plants – scores of billions and climbing for Hinkley Point C and Sizewell C – into the grid, home insulation and the renewables sector across Scotland would be an immeasurably better investment.

For Scottish CND, another concerning element of the renewed push for nuclear power is the deep imbrication [overlapping] of the ‘civil’ and military nuclear industries, as openly promoted in the 2025 Industrial Strategy.

From this perspective, investment in new nuclear power plants can be seen as defence spending by stealth and a means of shoring up the UK nuclear weapons industry – something which is of no benefit to Scotland and indeed causes major risks and harms in Scottish communities.

New nuclear would be incredibly expensive – Scottish government minister………………………………………………….

SNP criticises ‘Westminster obsession with nuclear’………………………………………………

‘New nuclear would waste time, money and political attention’ – Scottish Greens……………………………………… https://www.thecanary.co/uk/news/2026/02/11/scottish-nuclear-study/

February 15, 2026 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Nuclear Power – A White Elephant in the Energy Debate

By Pete Roche, David Hume Institute 12th Feb 2026,
https://davidhumeinstitute.org/latest-news/2026/2/12/nuclear-power-a-white-elephant-in-the-energy-debate

As Scotland prepares for elections, pro‑nuclear lobbyists are urging the Scottish Government to lift its ban on new nuclear developments.Yet the evidence shows that building new nuclear power stations would be an expensive white elephant — too slow, too costly, and ultimately unnecessary for tackling climate change.

Investing in nuclear now risks diverting resources from cheaper, faster, and safer renewable alternatives that are ready to deploy and without the risk of hazardous waste.

Nuclear makes us more vulnerable

Recent events in Europe underline nuclear’s vulnerabilities in a warming world. In summer 2025, prolonged heatwaves forced several French nuclear plants to reduce output or shut down entirely because the rivers and coastal waters used for cooling became too warm to operate safely. At sites including Golfech and Blayais operators had to curtail production, while the Gravelines plant faced additional disruption when swarms of jellyfish clogged its cooling systems. These incidents show how our changing climate can turn nuclear plants into operational white elephants at precisely the time electricity demand is high as people try to cool homes and buildings.

All energy sources produce carbon emissions over their lifecycle, but nuclear power stations typically emit more CO₂ per kilowatt-hour than wind or solar when construction, uranium mining, and waste management are included. For example, Sizewell C, currently under construction in Suffolk, is not expected to offset the emissions generated during its build phase until the late 2030s — well after the UK should have largely eliminated fossil fuels from electricity generation. Renewables, by contrast, deliver low-carbon power from day one.

Nuclear increases risk

Nuclear also carries long-term environmental and security risks. Coastal and riverside sites face rising sea levels and heatwave-induced water shortages, creating further potential for nuclear plants to become white elephants. They produce long-lived radioactive waste with no permanent disposal solution, are vulnerable to terrorism or armed conflict, and uranium mining causes serious ecological damage. 

Advocates argue nuclear is needed for “baseload” power because wind and solar are variable. But baseload is an outdated concept.

Modern grid operators emphasise flexibility — blending renewables, storage, and demand management — rather than relying on inflexible generators. Large nuclear plants cannot easily ramp output to match demand and risk creating the same mismatch that critics cite for renewable variability. Proposed small modular reactors (SMRs) are similarly problematic: only two operate commercially worldwide, they are unproven at scale, and early evidence suggests they may be even more expensive per unit of electricity while producing more toxic waste — another potential white elephant. 

Voters need real solutions, not white elephants

Meeting Scotland’s energy needs with renewables is feasible and cost-effective. Analyses suggest a renewable-first strategy could save the UK hundreds of billions compared to nuclear-centric plans, making the most of Scotland’s wind, solar, and engineering expertise. In contrast, costly nuclear projects risk becoming long-term white elephants — expensive, slow, and unsafe — at a time when voters need solutions that work now, not in a far distant future.

February 15, 2026 Posted by | ENERGY, UK | Leave a comment

Whitehaven’s Polluted Harbour is “Riviera of the North” NuSpeak Lives

FEB 10, 2026, Lakes Against Nuclear Dump

This months Cumbria Life has a gushing “People and Places” article “A Day Out in Whitehaven” with the strap line “Cornwall and Cannes eat your heart out- Discover a popular seaside town on the Cumbrian Coast” Words and Photos by Geneve Bartholomew – Brand.

The article makes much of the Sellafield funded Beacon Museum and Edge water sports centre along with the also Sellafield funded new gaming centre called LEVELS “a new digital and gaming hub located at the Grade 11 listed former Whittles building in the heart of the town.” The gaming hub will no doubt be a recruitment source for the next generation of AI robotics operators at Sellafield.

The heart of the town is being bought up by Sellafield with a pithy letter in the 4th February Whitehaven News from former councillor Tim Knowles saying “I was recently concerned that Whitehaven had experienced some kind of emergency. The town seemed full of people wandering around in high visibility clothing but with no apparent purpose. I was later told that this is the latest in Sellafield outfitting…..is the Hi Vis -uniform becoming a rather “in your face” badge of relative wealth around town.” The letter goes on to remark about “the number of sheds and fences painted in the famous “BNFL blue” all around West Cumbria.” (takeaways still happen) 

Many £Millions of pounds of taxpayers money are being poured into Whitehaven filtered through the big brother hands of Sellafield. That is not all that is being poured into Whitehaven.

What the “Riviera of the North” article in Cumbria Life fails to mention is the outrageous state of the harbour with water that can no longer be called water in the docks. The ongoing pollution event started in 2022 and has continued ever since with the acid mine pollution from historic mines which includes the sulphur producing Anhydrite Mine at the old Marchon site (now scandalously approved for housing) . The ‘water’ only ran clear for a short time last September when Silt Buster machines were in operation in the rail tunnel which drains to the culvert in Queen’s Dock.

We recently released FOI answers to the authorities and the press. BBC online did cover this albeit not telling the whole story but with much more openness that that previously aired and certainly without the rose tinted specs of the Cumbria Life article. If this ongoing pollution event was happening in Cornwall or Cannes there would be banner headlines worldwide. But here in Whitehaven there are vested interests in keeping schtum about the impacts of deep mining because guess who wants to mine out the biggest void ever on the Lake District coast – yep our generous benefactor Sellafield.

The BBC online article can be read in full here extract below [on original] https://lakesagainstnucleardump.com/2026/02/10/whitehavens-polluted-harbour-is-riviera-of-the-north-nuspeak-lives/?page_id=1772

February 15, 2026 Posted by | media, UK | Leave a comment

Nuclear weapons workers vote for strike action

David Gilyeat, South of England, BBC 10th Feb 2026

Workers that build and maintain the UK’s nuclear weapons have voted to strike over a planned restructuring of the organisation.

Prospect said the Atomic Weapons Establishment’s (AWE) staff were being “pushed to the brink by the repeated errors” of its leadership, affecting sites including Aldermaston and Burghfield in Berkshire.

The union said in November 500 jobs were at risk, with another 750 posts recruited for. Last month it said potential redundancies had increased to 800.

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) said it was “disappointed” by the result but was looking for a “constructive resolution”.

Prospect said 95% of staff who voted were in favour of action short of a strike, with 81% in favour of strike action.

The union has warned action could cost AWE millions of pounds at a time when the government has said it will invest £15bn in a new nuclear programme.

“This crucial investment risks being derailed if this restructure continues to cause internal chaos,” Prospect said.

But it said a “failed reorganisation could have much greater consequences for the future of the organisation”.

Prospect also accused AWE of “drip-feeding” information over weeks so full consultation with its scientists and engineers was “impossible”.

The union said the nature and timing of the industrial action would be “announced in due course”……………………….
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c743l4rr4g1o

February 14, 2026 Posted by | employment, UK | Leave a comment

Sizewell C opponents to appeal High Court decision.

Mariam Issimdar, BBC. Suffolk, 8 Feb 26

Opponents of Sizewell C nuclear power station have submitted an appeal against the High Court’s decision to refuse an application for a judicial review of the plant’s flood defences.

Together Against Sizewell C (TASC) launched an action in June on the basis the power station could add extra coastal defences which were not outlined in the original planning application, and they would “disrupt nearby protected areas of wildlife”.

The group appealed for the judicial review, but it was refused by a High Court judge in December.

At the time, Sizewell C said it was pleased the legal claims had been dismissed.

In a statement on Monday, the pressure group said: “TASC is determined to use every avenue open to us to ensure public scrutiny and environmental assessment of the two additional huge sea defences that Sizewell C have committed to install in an extreme sea level rise scenario.”

Development consent for the new plant near Leiston was granted in July 2022 before the government committed £14.2bn towards it last June.

In the approved plans, Sizewell C said the power station would be built on a platform 7m above the current sea level and protected by a “sea defence structure which will be more than 14m above mean sea level”.

Chris Wilson, of TASC, said: “It is a scandal if it is deemed legal that a developer, in this case Sizewell C, is allowed to pick and choose which parts of a project it wants to include in its development consent order application.”

He added that the developer, EDF Energy, knew “as far back as 2015 that two additional huge sea defences would be needed to keep the site and its 3,900 tonnes of spent fuel safe from flooding in an extreme sea level rise scenario, yet chose not to include them in their 2020 planning application – a classic example of ‘salami-slicing’.”

Sizewell C said its “sea defence will be adaptable and could be raised in future if sea level rise turns out to be greater than current predictions”.

TASC claimed the power station wanted to build two more flood barriers, 9m and 10m high, further inland.

Sizewell C previously declined to comment on the extra details of how the flood defences could be changed.

TASC argued there should be a consultation on the defences, and it approached Energy Secretary Ed Miliband, asking him to revoke or change the development consent order.

That was not accepted, so the group opted for a judicial review and argued that Miliband had breached his obligations and duties…………………. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98q5z1jez5o

February 14, 2026 Posted by | Legal, UK | Leave a comment

£700m plan with ‘fish disco’ could save 90% of marine life, says Hinkley Point C study

Scientists find underwater acoustic project to stop fish being sucked into cooling systems could save 44 tonnes a year

Jillian Ambrose , Guardian, 10 Feb 26

Scientists have found that plans that include a “fish disco” to deter migratory marine life from the nearby Hinkley Point C nuclear reactor could help save 90% of fish from the power plant’s water intake pipes – but the measures are set to cost its developer £700m.

EDF Energy, which is building the Hinkley Point C nuclear plant in Somerset, said research it commissioned from scientists at Swansea University had found that using an acoustic deterrent system helped to ward off the “vast majority” of fish it tagged for the experiment.

The part of the costly system that is informally referred to as a “fish disco”, is designed to use more than 300 underwater speakers to emit sound pulses to repel fish from the water intake pipes, which will suck in water from the River Severn to help cool Hinkley’s reactors.

EDF said it expected to spend about £700m on the full solution, or 1.5% of the total cost of building the £46bn project, which would give Britain’s first new nuclear power plant in a generation “more fish protection than any other power station in the world”.

This should help to save about 44 tonnes of fish a year – equivalent to the annual catch of a small fishing vessel. The company declined to speculate on the total cost per fish saved over the 25-year life of the reactor’s subsidy contract.

EDF has argued against the requirement to fit an acoustic deterrent in the past, instead suggesting that it could construct salt marshes to help protect marine life.

Under EDF’s subsidy contract it will earn a set return for the electricity generated by Hinkley, meaning it will need to absorb the extra cost of the fish disco rather than add it on to household bills.

The full system is expected to include special mouths fitted to the intake pipes to slow the water suction and allow fish to escape from as close as 2 metres away, and a fish recovery system which returns fish sucked into the pipes.

The scientists found that only one of its tagged twaite shad fish came within 30 metres of the test intake pipes when the speakers were turned on, compared with the 14 seen in the same area without the system turned on………………………………………….

The results of the research will be submitted for regulatory consideration and approval by the Marine Management Organisation later this year. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/feb/10/hinkley-point-c-plan-could-save-fish-being-sucked-into-pipes-study-finds

February 14, 2026 Posted by | environment, UK | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »