select search filters
briefings
roundups & rapid reactions
before the headlines
Fiona fox's blog
Government plans to find a site for an underground nuclear waste store in the Lake District were rejected by Cumbria County Council.
Dr Barrie Lambert, member of the Society of Radiological Protection, said:
“The ultimate fate of the legacy of high and intermediate level radioactive waste has been debated ad nausem for decades, not least by CORWM. The safest option is underground disposal in a repository (rather than a depository).
“Whatever the arguments are for and against nuclear power, we have the waste and something must be done with it. The containment facilities at Sellafield are secure but not suitable for very, very long term storage and from the point of view of, say, terrorist attack, the waste is more secure underground.
“I can understand Cumbria CC’s worry that the Lake District will be linked for ever with the disposal site; but Sellafield, where about 70% of the waste is located, has hosted the UK’s reprocessing plant for the last 60 years and it has provided thousands of jobs and, amazingly, more recently, a significant tourist attraction. The geology may not be absolutely perfect but the risks involved in transporting the material to some other UK site would surely outweigh this, even if such a site could be found.
“The time has come for a realistic and pragmatic appraisal of the long term situation. We have the waste; now what is the least risky option for disposal?”
Dr Richard Shaw, Radioactive Waste Team Leader, British Geological Survey, said:
“Following the decision by Cumbria County Council to say ‘no’ to moving to the next stage of the Managing Radioactive Waste Safely process, the Government has reaffirmed its commitment to finding a suitable site to host a Geological Disposal Facility (GDF) for the UK’s radioactive waste by a process of voluntarism.
“Most geologists believe that building a GDF at depth in a suitable geological setting is the safest way of dealing with our radioactive waste over the very long timescales that it needs to be isolated from the surface environment. There are a number of distinct geological environments which are suitable for building a GDF and it is important to consider that an individual site has to be good enough – it does not have to be the best site.”
Dr Paul Norman, senior lecturer in nuclear physics from the University of Birmingham, said:
“Despite today’s decision, it is clear that the UK still needs to find a way forward for disposing of its nuclear waste. It also seems likely that we will need new nuclear power as part of our energy mix in the short to medium term future.
“Regardless though of new nuclear power stations or not, a solution for our radioactive waste disposal needs to be found, and we need to be careful that we are not now running out of options.”
Prof Bill Lee, Co-Director of the Centre for Nuclear Engineering at Imperial College London, said:
“This is a disappointing decision by Cumbria County Council (CCC) to reject any further part in this process. But it is only a blip, and in the big picture the UK’s programme of managing radioactive waste safely will continue to look for volunteers.
“We can’t simply leave the waste in temporary container storage, it has to go into a proper disposal facility underground. That needs a combination of a community willing to host it and the right geology.
“Even if CCC had said yes there was still a long way to go before we were convinced the geology was suitable. Cumbria have withdrawn much too early in my opinion. The technical arguments put forward against the site were not scientifically convincing, and the process would have benefitted from much more scientific analysis to make sure any decisions were based on facts and not myths. That can not now happen.
“We should remember that, contrary to some claims by campaigners, this facility is not being pushed on anyone, it is a voluntary decision. It is a national issue but it has to go somewhere. It is now up to other communities to come forward.
“The offer of payment to the region which agrees to accept the waste has been criticised by some as being a bribe. But whichever community comes forward will be providing a national service, and it is only right that they be rewarded.”
Prof Neil Hyatt, Professor of Radioactive Waste Management at the University of Sheffield, said:
“Today’s vote by Cumbria County Council has effectively halted, for the present, consideration of radioactive waste disposal in the Cumbria region.
“The county council had concerns over both the right of withdrawal, as the planning process progressed, and the suitability of the local geology. What happens now is an open question. There are currently no other local communities with a declared interest in hosting a radioactive waste disposal site.
“Whatever happens, it is clear that, in the future, Government will need to support both closer engagement with volunteer communities, and much more scientific research to build confidence in the safety of radioactive waste disposal.”
Prof Robin Grimes, Co-Director of the Centre for Nuclear Engineering at Imperial College London, said:
“I am sure the UK will continue to face up to the challenge of finding a permanent residence for our nuclear waste. Nevertheless, this halt in the investigation in Cumbria will, for now, deprive us of finding out if this region might offer us the practical solution that we require.”
Dr Nick Evans , Senior Lecturer in Radiochemistry at Loughborough University, said:
“This is a short-termist, self-serving decision that does nothing to solve the legacy problems at Sellafield, and which will cost the country and locality much more cash in the long term.”