I have often stood up against the practice of NIMBY-ism as I feel that we should all be able to give and take a bit in the hosting of development projects even if these projects might not be aesthetically pleasing to some.

I take a much different stance over the dumping of nuclear waste and the practice of leaving "hot" nuclear submarines to lie and rot in docks that are close to towns and cities.

We in Scotland already have seven of these radioactive hulks moored at Rosyth - just across the Forth river from Edinburgh and close to a number of towns on the same side of the river - and the MOD are planning to dump another TWELVE such nuclear submarines all around Britain and especially in Scotland.

Ministry of Defence chiefs have informed the Scottish government that FIVE sites in Scotland have been earmarked for such plans, even although they will not confirm yet which of these five sites will actually be used.

These sites are: The Clyde naval nuclear bases of Coulport and Faslane, the Rosyth dockyard in Fife, the Dounreay nuclear plant in Caithness and Hunterston nuclear power station in Ayrshire. They say that the sites eventually chosen will have to store up to five hundred cubic metres of toxic scrap from 27 submarines.

I would like to know what the people who live around the Devonport naval base in Plymouth think of the eight rusting and radioactive hulks that are sitting there at the moment and will THEY want any more of these toxic vessels to be dumped there ?

I would guess not !

That is the great and unsurmountable problem associated with anything radioactive as over the years we in Britain have allowed nuclear power stations and nuclear-powered surface and sub-surface warships to be built knowing that there is no viable plans available to deal with ANY of the radioactive waste that is produced by these ships and installations. Because of this ALL of the nuclear waste that has been produced by these ships and intallations is STILL lying around the coasts of Britain with no plans to deal with this waste in the long term. Every new ship and nuclear power station that is built simply adds to this problem and the best way to deal with it - it seems - is to put it out of sight and out of mind.

NOT...in my beloved Scotland please !

I thought it was standard practice to sell these obsolete subs to the Canadians

Nope Wrinkles, not the atomic-powered ones !

There HAS been some sales of quite modern second hand diesel-electric hunter/killer subs to Canada and Australia but no country in their right minds want the nuclear ones.

( Of course we are NOT talking here about the nuclear-weapons-carrying submarines even although they too have nuclear piles with which to use to generate electricity for long-term submersion ). Once the nuclear weapons are taken out of these subs they then too are seen as hazardous waste and added to all of the other "HOT" stuff.

Many people don't know that all of the irradiated metals and other materials that have been produced ever since we became skilled at splitting the atom are still lying around waiting to be dealt with. Many of these bits of nuclear waste have radiating isotopes connected with this industry that have half-lives of many thousands of years. ( This means that it will take hundreds or thousands of years - in some cases - for these materials just to half in their dangerous radiating properties ). They cannot be converted to any materials that are safe, all that can be done is to separate the dirty material from the clean material and store the dirty and dangerous stuff where we cannot get to it; virtually forever.

Well...do any of you want this stuff in your back yard ?

Devonport is also rumoured to be getting some.

Cheers, HG

More than "one" in Devonport I imagine, HG !

I mentioned Devonport in my original piece !

What jangles my bells HG is that they keep building these radioactive subs and nuclear power plants even although they have no clue what to do with the - soon to be thousands of tons of - "HOT" waste.