Goalpost moved on nuclear waste

Shetland MSP Tavish Scott has voiced his support for the council’s concern on the government’s policies regarding the storage of high activity radioactive waste.

Back in March the council’s infrastructure committee agreed on a strongly worded response to the government’s consultation process.

At the time, heritage officer Austin Taylor had told councillors that the Scottish government’s position on radioactive waste storage appeared to be “softening” as proposals for storing radioactive waste under the seabed were being considered.

The meeting was unanimous in voicing its concern that the Scottish government was moving towards an “out of sight – out of mind” approach on nuclear waste.

It has now emerged that the disagreement centres on the question of how to define “near surface facilities” for nuclear waste.

Mr Scott said last night (Monday) that a senior government official had told the Dounreay Stakeholder Group that the disposal facilities could be as deep as 100 metres, or even more.

Advertisement6 of 11

He said that that was very different from the “tens of metres” mentioned in the consultation document and has now called on environment minister Richard Lochhead to extend the consultation period so that the issue could be clarified.

“Such waste cannot, within sensible timescales, be disposed of; it has to be stored in as safe a way as possible.

“That means that it has to be securely stored but in such a way that it can be closely monitored and retrieved if necessary.

“The legacy of radioactive waste we are handing to future generations is an onerous legacy, and we need to minimise the burden we are passing on by handling it responsibly.

“We cannot just stick it deep in the ground and hope that it can be forgotten about.”

He added: “If the definition of ‘near surface’ is being stretched to include depths well below 50 metres, depths at which the ability to monitor and retrieve the waste would be compromised, then Liberal Democrats would be concerned.

“I am sure that others would share that concern. So, if the goal posts have been moved in the way suggested, then the consultation must be extended.”