The Ministry of Defence has confirmed that £340 million will be invested in infrastructure at Rosyth Dockyard to support the Dreadnought submarine programme and the dismantling of retired nuclear submarines.
The figures were set out in a written answer by Defence Minister Maria Eagle on 1 September.
Eagle stated that “the cost of planned infrastructure upgrades at Rosyth Dockyard are £340 million. The cost includes the requirement to deliver a contingent docking facility for HMS Dreadnought during its sea trial period.”
She added that “the Submarine Dismantling Project (SDP) includes infrastructure works at Rosyth to enable the removal and processing of all legacy radioactive waste from dismantled submarines.”
Work has already begun under the project. “Activity at Rosyth has begun, with HMS Swiftsure being dismantled and a further six decommissioned nuclear submarines awaiting disposal,” Eagle confirmed.
She made clear that the headline figure includes the dismantling work as well as the docking facility. “The above costings include the elements of the SDP that are being undertaken at Rosyth,” her response concluded.
The Submarine Dismantling Project (SDP) was approved in 2013 to provide a long-term approach for disposing of 27 decommissioned Royal Navy nuclear submarines. The Ministry of Defence, through the Submarine Delivery Agency, oversees the programme. Defuelled submarines are held in afloat storage, with seven based at Rosyth and fifteen at Devonport. Regular checks are carried out to maintain standards of safety and security during this storage period.
HMS Swiftsure, withdrawn from service in the 1990s, is being used as the initial demonstrator for dismantling at Rosyth Dockyard. In June 2025, removal of its fin marked the first major stage in cutting into the hull. The dismantling method aims to recycle a large proportion of the vessel’s materials, including high-grade steel. Work on Swiftsure is scheduled to continue into 2026, with lessons applied to future submarines in the programme.
The project also covers the handling of radioactive material. Reactor pressure vessels are to be removed intact and placed into interim storage until a permanent Geological Disposal Facility is available, which is not expected before the 2040s. Dismantling is planned to take place at both Rosyth and Devonport, with further infrastructure and processes to be developed as additional submarines enter the programme.
The last Paragraph contains the Interesting/disapointing bit. Neraly 80 years from design to safe disposal facility is found.
*Kicking the can down the road*
The problem is that nobody wants this storage facility on their doorstep – indeed why would they?
We don’t live in a country with a large landmass(USA etc) so this is always going to be a highly contentious issue. There will be lots of fun surrounding this decision when it is eventually made.
Not really so.
A number of communities want it – mainly those with a long nuclear history.
Trouble is you can always find someone who says ‘that would be a mistake’
It is essential that we build one but I can remember this rattling around din s I was in short trousers and this is always ‘about to be solved’ the idea of this being opened by 2040s is comedy value.
Got to disagree with you here, I haven’t seen any community volunteering for this facility. Although I will admit that those whom already deal with nuclear waste are probably going to be at the forefront of where such a facility is likely to be located. Doesn’t of course follow that they are all willing to embrace the idea either.
Yes SB, I too remember this from decades back @ Upholder Class Times and the selling off of the SSK’s going all in with N Boats and still we have no answer. It’s sadder than just comical.
The Through life costs are astranomical and no Government wants to face the economical consequences.
*I told you so*
It’s got almost nothing to do with the population, Geological Disposal Facility’s are all about the correct Geology and stability, with a very big focus on stability a GDF has to consider ice ages and they are looking at containment over a hundred thousand year period. At present there are only 3 sites in the UK that are in the running, 2 in Cumbria and one in Lincolnshire. Survey wise they think it’s going to be another decade or so and building is probably 20-25 years ( this is a massive civil engineering project going to depths of 200-1000 meters down. Interestingly the first ever GDF only opened last year in Finland.
Yup, this is where the money is and no government will race to sort it.
There is an argumant that Tech Progress might just have given other options eventually rather than the N route we took. It’s an unknown cost that seems to be without limit and that money buys a lot of Tech Development over the many decades.
There is a very good reason SSNs are only build and used by 6 nations.. it’s a vast technological challenge and even the most experienced users the US and UK have not yet got to the end processing in the life of an SSN ( the Russian approach is just fucked up).
Sweden’s storage facility starts in build this year and will be ready by 2080!
So I am not holding my breath for a civils project this big in this country.
Unless we let the Swiss or the Scandi’s build it for us!
Knowing the Swiss, It’ll be full of holes.
Oh my Cheesy humour again.
Morning SB, Firstly this issue has been ongoing since the 1950’s, the optimum geological sites were identified and some actually had other facilities built on or very close to them. Back then everything was focussed on getting ahead, producing results and zero money spent on long term storage. TBF back then it would have cost far less to build, opposition was just ignored but none really thought mankind had much of a future. If memory serves the 2 optimum sites were near Sellafield and the other was near where I spent a few happy years, near Dounreay where DIDO, FBR and HMS Vulcan were built. The latter is pretty well a no no due to SNP in the central belt, but the locals would probably not be too upset as long as creates long term employment.
If you really want it built properly, on time and budget get the one country that’s actually built and commissioned a GDF to do it, and they are the Gold Standard ! Finland.
As for the NIMBY arguments, the answer is to stop kicking the ball down the pitch, grow a pair and select the optimum site, then just do what was done to build Harwell, Aldermaston, Dounreay, Sellafield etc etc etc build it on MOD / Government land.
The 2023 Securities Act gives the Government absolute control of “designated areas”, and it can set them up without any Parliamentary approval. The legislation exists and it just needs to be used !
What do you expect this is the UK piss poor at throughlife capability which includes disposal!!
At least disposal is occurring.
Beer in mind it is another cash stream from RN’s hyper stretched budget.
I wouldn’t be shocked if there were 30 N Boats awaiting full disposal by the 40’s. there are some 20 sitting around currently. Including the R Boats.
How long is it forecasted to get rid the backlog?
I wonder if we will be able to do one per year with the two sites we have
No, Devenport won’t be done till the 2040s
I don’t believe anyone really knows and TBH, I would suspect that no one wants to put any dates or costs to it either.
The simple fact is an N Boat has staggering through life costs attached, not just Build but Maintanence, Facilities, Inspections, storage and disposal.
I would love to hear from ULYA (I shouted her name as she might not hear it) on this subject and what her fellow Countrypersons are doing with theirs.
Come on ULYA, do that magic appearance thing again🤔
I believe Russia is working a a four pronged strategy:
1) Massive continent sized country with vast tracks of land nobody gives a shit about
2) tiny populations in areas no one gives a shit about, that no one gives a shit about ( and when it comes to giving a shit a double negative does not make a positive)
3) almost zero government accountability and the fact the government can do what the hell it wants and
4) who cares as long as it’s not a Moscow or European Russian issue.
I thought they dumped them at Murmansk and let the snow cover them up ?
*Out of sight, out of mind*
Almost.. seriously though they just dump everything in the high north, the Kara sea and Barents Sea.. they have dumped all the old cores in those seas, in some cases they just dumped the whole sub in the Kara sea fuel rods and all. All there civilian nuclear waste goes the same way.. they have dumped literally 10,000s of shipping containers worth of nuclear waste into the seas of the high north as well as simply poor in the liquid waste.. the Kara sea is a nightmare as is the Barents.. Norway is constantly freeking out about it.
Hi SB Mmm not necessarily, there are other options to finance a GDF but it would require HMG to work outside of the box. Sellafield doesn’t just store our Nuclear waste but other countries as well, it’s a bi product of the fuel reprocessing. We have been sending it back to them for years and none of them has a GDF.
We have by far the biggest problem in terms of volume, in Europe, Germany, Italy & Switzerland are all in the same situation as us, where do we put the waste ? Japan is in the worst jam of all, fairly large volumes but no stable Geology.
We however have a unique problem as over a 100 tonnes of ours can’t go anywhere due to NPT, it has to be stored here in UK (or the US). We absolutely have to build a site, we have some of the most stable geology on earth, so why not bite the bullet and talk to them about a joint programme, we build, we store and they pay for it.
That’s not really fair as no nation has actually done the full end of life processing of an SSN, the UK, France and US have just stacked it all up safely until they can bury it safety for a couple of hundred thousand years a kilometre below ground in a hardened facility.. Russia has just fucked it all into the Kara sea and turned the seabed into a radioactive death trap that’s likely to pollute the whole high north for a geological age, China has not even considered it yet neither has India.
Both India and China are huge countries too…..there are certain areas of China where Xi doesn’t much care for the locals…..in India the tribal politics are such that….
I suspect the Chinese will do a semi decent job of it [less corruption and a few dodgy materials] then encase the thing in concrete somewhere and hope for the best.
TBH doing what we are doing which is to leave them to cool off for a good long time and then chop the easy bits off and then try and trim as much as possible off the reactor and then leave that to cool further before a final trim down and disposal could actually be a sensible strategy.
Ha, you make that seem like a great Plan.
If we left the reactor to cool off for 10,000 years, then we could just pop it under the tap and recycle it.
I like that Plan.
There is a balance between letting it radioactively cool and letting physical degradation take place.
There does come a point where getting the reactor out of a damp(ish) marine environment does have to take place to ensure that it has integrity for the next stage.
In the end, the reason there is little motivation is none of this is about now, it’s about the next 100,000 years. Which is hard for people to get their heads around.. because you could entomb the lot as you say with a reasonable job in a 100 foot deep concrete sarcophagus and that would probably do the job for 200 years… but then you screw over your great great great great grandchildren’s generation… and if you ask most people to agree to spend 3-5 billion of taxpayers money on a theoretically risk to people in 5-10 generations time they will look at you like your crazy.
Surely Rosyth will require a nuclear licence if any of the Dreadnought class have to go there?
Rosyth also has the hole in the ground on the west wall which could easily store all the decommissioned reactor compartments and then just cover them with concrete. After all they have been berthed alongside for years.
Those at Devonport can can make their own arrangements.
It already has a nuclear licence granted back in 1997.