UK Government happy to ‘endure’ another 300 years of nuclear contamination in Scotland

Thanks to reader cuckooshoe for alerting us to this:

In a weirdly titled ‘Promotional material: Dounreay 2023‘ published 3 April 2023’:


The objective of decommissioning is to reduce and remove the radiological, chemical and industrial hazards and leave the site in a condition that is safe for future generations. Decommissioning generates a variety of radioactive, chemical and industrial wastes and these must be stored or disposed of in a way that protects future generations from harm, too. The first site-wide decommissioning plan published in 2000 envisaged a 60-year programme of work. Innovation, new technology and experience made it possible to accelerate these timescales. Dates for the completion of decommissioning – known as the interim end state, when the hazards have been reduced or eliminated, and the site enters long-term care and maintenance – are being reviewed.

Particles in the marine environment

Radioactive swarf from the historic dismantling of spent fuel is known to have entered the site’s effluent system prior to 1984 and was discharged to sea. The seabed around the disused outlet was cleaned up between 2008 and 2012. Monitoring of local beaches continues to detect radioactive particles that are a legacy of these discharges.

Interim end state

This is the time when all the major hazards have been reduced or eliminated, the historic facilities have been decommissioned and the site and the environment is in a safe state for future generations. This will be followed by a period of care and maintenance that will endure for a further 300 years.

Why are the civil servants writing this so calm? They live in Surrey?


4 thoughts on “UK Government happy to ‘endure’ another 300 years of nuclear contamination in Scotland

  1. Nuclear power stations, certainly in the UK state,have a pretty good safety record.
    The problem is with waste material which is created by the fission process which has to be made safe for potentially thousands of years.
    Very,very expensive process and not guaranteed to be safe over such an extended period.
    No country in it’s right mind would embark on this type of energy supply if it had a cheaper and safer means to do so.
    Of course,if you haven’t,then you may have no option but to do so.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. Early fuel element designs were pretty crude as all that wasrequired was to produce plutonium.
    Electricity generation was the simplest way of dumping the heat generated
    Think of it like picking up a new car with a full tank.
    Run it until the gauge shows 90% full.
    Remove the fuel rods and send for reprocessing after putting them in a water tank for 3 months to cool down.
    Fit new rods and reset the gauge to 100%.


    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.