Putting pwr out of submarine at rosyth Could cause radioactive contamination
Executive summary
Removing a reactor or its intermediate-level radioactive waste (ILW) from a submarine at Rosyth is part of the UK’s developed dismantling plan and the demonstrator ex-HMS Swiftsure is in its final dismantling stages; the MoD and industry say the staged process is designed to prevent environmental releases [1] [2] [3]. Local councillors and campaign groups nonetheless warn of risks to nearby communities and ask that reactor removal is “a stage too far,” while past incidents and slow national solutions for ILW storage amplify public concern [4] [5] [6].
1. What is actually happening at Rosyth — staged dismantling, not a crude “reactor dumping”
The Submarine Dismantling Project uses a three-stage process: remove low-level waste (LLW) first, then extract intermediate-level waste (ILW) and major reactor components, and finally ensure the platform is cleared of radioactivity [1] [2]. Swiftsure has been used as the demonstrator vessel; the project reports milestones such as fin removal and a ceremonial cut to mark the start of the final phase, with the MoD/SDA saying Swiftsure should complete dismantling by 2026 [1] [2] [3].
2. What experts and official sources say about contamination risk
Official project materials and reporting emphasise regulatory compliance and safety engineering: the staged approach and public consultations were designed to meet regulatory standards and minimise environmental risk [1] [2]. The Submarine Delivery Agency and contractors stress the demonstrator’s role in developing a “proven dismantling method” and recycling about 90% of Swiftsure’s weight while managing radioactive inventories [7] [8].
3. Why some local voices say reactor removal could increase contamination risk
Local councillors and community campaigners argue that removing the reactor — the most radioactive part remaining — is “a stage too far” given homes, schools and businesses near Rosyth, and they question whether emergency arrangements (for example distribution of iodine tablets) would be sufficient if something went wrong [4] [5]. These concerns reflect anxiety about operations that involve ILW, which is recognised as more hazardous and harder to store than LLW [9] [10].
4. History and context that fuel public worry
The UK has a long backlog of decommissioned submarines — 21 awaiting disposal, seven at Rosyth — and earlier delays and slow progress have eroded public confidence [11] [12]. Campaign bodies such as the Nuclear Free Local Authorities link sluggish MOD action on other contamination sites (e.g., Dalgety Bay) with frustrations about submarine dismantling timescales and transparency, which heightens local suspicion that risks may be underestimated [6].
5. What the technical reporting and inventories actually show about waste volumes and handling
Public inventories and reporting show Rosyth’s role in defuelling and phase‑1 LLW removal, and they document forecasts for wastes at Rosyth and Devonport; the UK Radioactive Waste & Materials Inventory provides site-level data for stakeholders to consult [10]. Some public-facing sources cite large ILW tonnages historically associated with reactor compartments, which is why ILW removal and interim storage are key program elements [9] [10].
6. Competing narratives: safety-by-design vs. community precaution
The MoD / industry narrative stresses a regulated, iterative programme that has completed LLW removal on several boats and is refining methods via the Swiftsure demonstrator [3] [8]. The community narrative contends reactor removal escalates risk near populated areas and demands stronger reassurance on emergency planning and long‑term ILW disposal arrangements [4] [5] [6]. Both perspectives are grounded in factual program progress and in historically slow national solutions for radioactive waste.
7. What is not answered in current reporting
Available sources do not mention specific modeled probabilistic releases from reactor removal at Rosyth, detailed emergency-response capacity for a full-scale ILW release, nor independent environmental monitoring datasets published contemporaneously that would quantify baseline and operational radiological levels beyond programme statements (not found in current reporting) [1] [2] [3].
8. Bottom line for readers
The work at Rosyth is active, staged and presented by MoD/contractors as engineered to avoid radioactivity releases; nonetheless, credible local opposition and a national legacy of slow waste solutions mean public anxiety is grounded in real program limits and historical context [1] [3] [6]. For definitive answers about the probability and scale of any contamination from reactor removal you should seek the specific regulatory risk assessments, emergency‑planning documents and independent environmental monitoring that are absent from the articles cited here [10] [6].