Plans for new nuclear reactors in Scotland brought forward
The GMB Scotland union has brought forward the sector estimates as it called on the Scottish Government to lift its moratorium on new nuclear.
It has called for an 'urgent review the potential of new nuclear plants to cut emissions, secure energy supplies, and boost economic growth'.
The union, one of the biggest across the energy sector, is urging ministers to lift the ban on new nuclear power in Scotland and convene an expert summit to discuss its potential to 'underpin the drive to Net Zero and create thousands of skilled, well-paid jobs and apprenticeships'.
GMB Scotland said that industry-based research shows potential for two new large-scale reactors at Torness and direct station wages would equate to £90-100 million with £30-35m additional spending on contractors.
However, the tension between Holyrood and Westminster is clear, with the UK Government pointing towards funding but adding that 'the Scottish Government continues to block any movement on this safe, green energy that would turbocharge the Scottish economy'.
The Scottish Government stood firm and signalled research showing a potential 80,000 renewables jobs in Scotland within 25 years.
EDF, the French state-owned energy giant and operator of Torness, told The Herald the site is suitable for new nuclear, but that it respects the Scottish Government stance and instead is concentrating on England.
Torness is currently a significant site. Based on EDF's 2024 financial results, it generated more than a fifth of the UK's total nuclear output and more of its nuclear earnings in this country.
It comes as the UK Government announced £14.2 billion for the creation of the Sizewell C plant south of the Border. The UK Government and EDF jointly own more than 80 per cent of the Suffolk site that will provide 10,000 jobs, including 1,500 apprenticeships.
Ed Miliband, UK energy secretary, promised a 'new golden age' of nuclear power with the announcement.
The news brought the new nuclear debate again to the fore as Torness moves towards its decommissioning.
EDF said: 'If you consider the [Torness] site, in isolation from government policy, it would be suitable for new nuclear. There is available land, good road, rail and grid connections and it has a community which is used to hosting nuclear.
'However, we respect that the Scottish Government doesn't support new nuclear just now, so EDF is focussing its nuclear development ambitions on England and expanding its renewables business in Scotland.'
The company manages eight UK nuclear power station sites and owns five of the eight designated new nuclear sites.
Paul Forrest, Torness station director. (Image: Gordon Terris) The news is revealed as we examine the impact of the planned closure site near Dunbar which has around 500 staff and around 200 full-time contractors, the surrounding community and the region's economy as it moves towards shut-down.
Paul Forrest, Torness station director, said it is 'a valuable asset to the UK' that has contributed more than £16bn to the economy since generation started in 1988.
He said: 'Torness Power Station continues to play a significant role in EDF's UK operations. It is one of five generating stations and, based on 2024's financial results, generated 21.5% of the UK's total nuclear output and contributed 22.6%to the Ebitda (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortisation) of UK's Nuclear Operations business.
'In March 2025, Torness achieved a cumulative generation total of 300 terawatt-hours since its commissioning, that is enough to power every Scottish home for 36 years and solidified its status as Scotland's most productive low-carbon asset.
'Torness is a high performing site which has met its output targets for four out of the last five years and is on plan for this year.'
READ MORE:
Nuclear power wins vote of confidence as life of last Scottish plant extended
He said that 'beyond that, it is a vital part of the East Lothian community', adding: 'Through construction and generation, thousands of local people have developed highly skilled, well-paid careers at the station.
'Generations of families have worked there, building their lives around the site, and the security that has brought has been a boon for the local economy.'
Additionally, the company said, three further planned refuelling outages will bring in an extra 800 workers 'who come to the site spending money in hotels, restaurants, take-aways and with taxi firms while they stay here' each time.
The 2030 decommissioning will happen in stages with the removal of spent fuel from the reactors taking about four years and will be carried out by EDF, which, at its other decommissioning facility at Hunterston B in Ayrshire, now at the defueled stage, employs around 250 moving forward to 'nuclear restoration services'.
At this point it will take around 15 years to remove all the buildings from site, with the exception of the reactor building. It will be left in situ, in a state called 'safestore', for around 70 years, until the final clearance of square-mile site.
The firm said it does not have 'visibility of figures that would allow us to make an assessment of whether renewables projects in the area will create those long-term employment opportunities on a like-for-like basis'.
However, Mr Forrest said: 'There will be a range of retraining opportunities as the station moves beyond generation and we will use the experience from other defueling sites to support staff.
'For example, at Hunterston B people have been trained to take on project management roles, which the station needs more of now. People have also been supported to gain additional qualifications in HGV driving or electrical skills which are needed on site during defueling but can also be used to build a career outside of the nuclear industry.
'Now Hunterston B is getting ready to transfer to nuclear restoration services there are further opportunities for retraining to take on jobs the station will need during decommissioning like health physicists and waste technicians. We expect to see the same kinds of opportunities at Torness when it reaches this stage.'
The new Sizewell C site in Suffolk. (Image: EDF) The latest Economic Impact of the Civil Nuclear Industry report, compiled by Oxford Economics and commissioned by the Nuclear Industry Association, shows the sector generated an extra £350m for the Scottish economy in gross value added (GVA) in 2024, up from £1.1bn in 2021, a 32 per cent rise, and much it from south of the Border.
It reported: 'Scottish workers are playing a vital role in building the new nuclear power station at Hinkley Point C in Somerset and 170 Scottish firms have contracts to work on the new power station with over £280m spent with Scottish firms to date.'
Tom Greatrex, chief executive of the NIA, said: 'Scotland is benefiting from the jobs and growth coming with new nuclear plants being built in England, but with no new nuclear of its own, Scotland will lose out on billions in investment and thousands of well-paid, skilled jobs.
'Scots have always been a significant part of the nuclear industry – with renowned engineers and physicists coming through the Scottish education system, but despite the integral role nuclear plays in keeping electricity in Scotland green, without future plants young Scots will lose out on those opportunities at home.'
READ MORE:
It said: 'We are promoting and exploring the potential of Scotland's renewable energy resource and its ability to meet our local and national heat, transport and electricity needs, while also contributing to meeting our ambitious emission reduction targets.
'By 2030 we aim to generate the equivalent of 50% of Scotland's overall energy consumption from renewable sources, and by 2050 we aim to have decarbonised our energy system almost completely.'
It said it is backing the development of the hydrogen sector and carbon capture and storage, promoting the development of on and offshore wind, marine energy, geothermal energy, hydropower and hydrogen.
A UK Government spokesperson said: 'Investing in nuclear power represents energy security and a gateway to thousands of skilled jobs.
'It would bring millions of pounds in wages and economic growth to communities all over Scotland. The Scottish Government continues to block any movement on this safe, green energy that would turbocharge the Scottish economy. As long as they maintain that position jobs and investment that could be coming to Scotland will head elsewhere."
Gillian Martin, Scottish energy secretary, told The Herald: 'The Scottish Government is focussed on supporting growth and creating jobs by capitalising on Scotland's immense renewable energy capacity rather than expensive new nuclear energy which takes decades to build, creates toxic waste which is difficult and costly to dispose of.
'However, we recognise the significant value that Torness and its workforce has contributed to Scotland's economy and local community.
'Decommissioning Scotland's nuclear sites will take decades and will require the retention of a highly skilled workforce. Meanwhile, the significant growth in renewables, storage hydrogen, carbon capture and decommissioning are key opportunities for our future energy workforce in Scotland – with independent scenarios from Ernst and Young, showing that with the right support, Scotland's low carbon and renewable energy sector could support nearly 80,000 jobs by 2050.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
37 minutes ago
- Telegraph
There will be no second chance for Labour
The ANC were the first to coin the slogan 'make the country ungovernable' as they sought to depose the apartheid government in South Africa. An unruly people would weaken the centre, extract concessions and push tensions until they became contradictions. From there, you get the real prospect of regime change. Britain remains a relatively prosperous and secure nation. But it is becoming palpably less governable by the day. This is not confined to one party or leader. The lifespan of prime ministers and their cabinets are getting shorter. Parliament is sovereign once again, but it does not feel that way. Successive governments have failed to grip the centre and act decisively to overcome Britain's malaise. This is the task that falls to Labour. These are not easy times in which to govern. The Government has little room for manoeuvre. The bond markets are tetchy, gilt yields are higher than they have been for decades, pushing up the cost of borrowing. The failure of the leadership to shave £5 billion off welfare spending only increases the nervousness. Scleroticism has taken hold in seemingly every institution. How have we got here? And how can Labour get us out of it? From the 1990s through to 2016, the political class on both Left and Right was characterised above all by complacency. These were the fat years. Growth was good, largely because of a booming services economy centred on London and the south east in general and the City of London in particular. This growth enabled New Labour's economics of redistribution that supported the country's heartlands. After years of hardship, Blair's model seemed to finally bring the warring factions of the country back together again. The 2008 crash should have shaken the political class out of its complacency, exposing the precarity of our heavily financialised economy and the malaise that lurked beneath the surface of our now fragile economic model. While services had grown, our productive capacity had been denuded. Strategic industries had been closed down, outsourced or sold off to foreign investors. Regions once massaged by public sector employment opportunities and welfare found these tools were no longer powerful enough to smooth the cracks left by deindustrialisation. The recession marked the juncture at which Britain began to decline relative to the US and most other European nations, yet it prompted little critical reflection. Austerity was the coalition government's answer – and it was an expensive one. Huge structural weaknesses in our economy were reduced to a matter of simple accounting. Investment dried up and infrastructure could not keep pace with maddeningly high levels of immigration. Growth, productivity and real wages flatlined. Complacency was still the order of the day for a political class who had grown decadent and far-removed from the real conditions of the country. Whatever else it may have done, the vote to leave the European Union punctured this complacency. Blue Labour had been warning since 2009 that all was not well in the body politic, that lurking beneath the glitzy New Labour veneer social disaffection was growing. Blue represented melancholia as much as conservatism. Now all was out in the open: the disconnect between the political class and the country it sought to govern; the towns that had been left behind, their economic purpose in a global economy obscure; and the dysfunction of government, parliament and our public institutions. The Conservatives proved incapable of exiting this quagmire. The 2019 government began with an 80-seat majority and ended in ignominy and an announcement of a new fund for chess players. Lacking the will or confidence to take on Treasury orthodoxy, immigration trebled and levelling up was abandoned. The civil service was left unreformed. Growth continued to stagnate as judicial overreach and regulatory constraints made building impossible. A few brief spasms aside, inertia replaced complacency as the defining feature of our political class. As little as a year ago, you could still find echoes of complacency in the political and media class when they spoke of Labour's election win as a victory for the 'grown-ups'. But fixing a broken political system, a dysfunctional state and a stagnant economy requires more than a clean suit and tie. It has taken Labour one year to discover what took the Conservatives 14 years: that Britain, its economy and its institutions, are barely functioning. Too many in Labour defined themselves solely in opposition to the Conservatives and thought a new Government need only focus on 'delivery', with a few technical fixes here and there. Others wanted to reduce the task of governance to a form of altruism for those in need. Their vibes-based politics has no resonance in the country, no acknowledgment of the hard reality of trade-offs in a low growth economy, and no solutions for Britain's malaise. If there is a divide in Labour it is not between Left and Right, New Labour or Blue Labour, but between those who understand the severity of the country's situation and those who do not. The future success of this Government depends on this understanding. It must be an insurgent on behalf of the people, willing to grip the centre and take on its own party and the scleroticism of our institutions as it rebuilds a shattered country, shifting resources to the productive economy, to build, make and grow, driving social and economic development, radically reducing immigration and speaking for the whole country as one people united in a shared national identity and purpose. This is the choice facing Labour, the fork in the road in this inauspicious moment – a retreat into the comfort zone of liberal progressivism confined to the prosperous areas of the country, doing things for a client electorate, promising the impossible, or a striving for a radical rebuilding of the national economy, renewing our sovereign democracy and building our national revival on a broad, cross-class coalition. This way lies a second term and a new political settlement. The first year has not gone well, but there will be no second chance for Labour.
Scotsman
38 minutes ago
- Scotsman
Readers Letters: If UK Government will support English refinery, why not Grangemouth?
A tale of two refineries puzzles reader Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... On 30 June BBC News reported that the UK Labour Government is funding the Official Receiver to ensure the safe operation of the Prax Lindsey oil refinery which is located in North East Lincolnshire. Speaking on the matter in the House of Commons, Energy Minister Michael Shanks stated: 'The government will ensure supplies are maintained, protect our energy security and do everything we can to support workers.' Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad While any action on the part of the government to save jobs is commendable, I know that Michael Shanks and his fellow Scottish Labour MPs are aware of the recent closure of the Grangemouth oil refinery, which was every bit as important to Scotland's energy security as the Prax Lindsey refinery is to the people of the East of England. It is not an unfair question to ask Mr Shanks and the UK Labour Government why they were prepared only a few months ago to sit back and watch the Grangemouth refinery and its workers being thrown onto the scrapheap, yet now when a refinery based in the East of England comes under threat of closure, immediate measures are being put in place to save it? Prior to last year's general election Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar went on record to state that if Labour was elected it would prevent the closure of Grangemouth. The people of Scotland now know Labour did nothing to save Grangemouth. The Labour Party, and particularly, Messrs Shanks and Sarwar, need to explain why keeping open the oil refinery in Lincolnshire is more important than the same action for Grangemouth. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad During the 2014 independence referendum the Labour Party in Scotland was in the vanguard of the Better Together campaign. Some workers who've lost their jobs at Grangemouth might be asking themselves, 'Better for whom'? Jim Finlayson, Banchory, Aberdeenshire Disaster masters Kenny MacAskill of Alba attributes the rundown of the North Sea to Ed Miliband. Mr Miliband has indeed come over as an eco-zealot in his time in office, obsessed by impossible timescales and unimaginably expensive dreams of net zero, oblivious to the human misery and energy deprivation involved in what he proposes. However, in the greater scheme of things the SNP are by far the greatest single cause of the disaster of ending North Sea oil and gas decades prematurely. Compared to the nationalists and their Green allies' constant denigration of the industry over many years, including Grangemouth, Ed Miliband has been a recent and minor figure and has only held office for a year. The nationalists have their own super and not-so-smart eco-zealots. What other countries, not having the UK's natural wealth in energy, must think with these innocents in charge of our resources is mindboggling. Alexander McKay, Edinburgh End dependency Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad A 40 per cent increase in small boat crossings and a year of U-turns has Labour struggling to maintain the trust of its voters, as well as its own MPs. With 11 million people of working age not working something radical needs to be done. Of 3.7m claiming Personal Independence Payments, 2.4m are new claimants, mainly for mental health reasons. The Scottish Government spends over £33 billion a year on welfare, more than Health. Like the UK Government, which spends proportionately less at £275bn,it cannot stand by and avoid making savings or, as Labour are doing, make a hash of what will be just a 1 per cent welfare saving. Around a quarter of working age people are not working and when pensioners are included, as many adults are in work as not working. This is unsustainable and it seems Labour will need to freeze tax thresholds. If pensions, defence and health are going to be protected something else has to give. Going 'further and faster' on growth also demands getting a grip on the burgeoning welfare bill. If escalating borrowing for future generations is to be avoided the dependency culture in Scotland and the rest of the UK must end without impacting the most vulnerable. Neil Anderson, Edinburgh Not a poor show Recent analysis shows that levels of relative poverty in Scotland have been lower than in the UK as a whole for the last two decades. This is surely a vindication of the policies pursued and adopted by successive Scottish governments over that time and strongly suggests that Holyrood administrations have been far more effective in looking after the needs of the people they represent than those in Westminster and the Senedd. To give some examples, in 2024 the level of relative poverty in the UK was 21 per cent while Scotland stood at 20 per cent (England and Wales were slightly above the UK figure). In terms of child poverty Scotland's percentage fell from 25 per cent in 2021 to 23 per cent last year. In both England and Wales rates in 2024 were 31 per cent, exactly the same as in 2021. (Steve Witherden, Labour MP for Montgomeryshire and Glyndwr has indicated he would be in favour of the Welsh government introducing something similar to the Scottish Child Payment.) The relative poverty rate for people of pension age in Scotland was 15 per cent in 2024 compared with 16 per cent for the UK as a whole. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad If the Scottish Government can outperform the UK and Welsh administrations in such a key measure of quality of life with one hand tied behind its back, as at present, we can only imagine how far ahead an independent Scotland would be. Our country simply cannot afford to be held back any longer! Alan Woodcock, Dundee Britain needs PR The Labour Welfare Reform Bill, after multiple concessions, stumbled over the line, despite 49 backbenchers rebelling. How many arms were twisted en route to this pyrrhic victory, which leaves the Party mortally wounded and the Government perhaps terminally unpopular? The only victor in all of this is the increasingly likely figure of Nigel Farage. A recent poll makes him more popular than Keir Starmer. Both Labour and the hapless Tories, under the even more unpopular Kemi Badenoch, are sleepwalking into a Farage premiership at the next general election. Our crazy first-past-the-post voting system could see that result with Reform UK winning with just 28 per cent of the vote. Labour, a year ago, polled just 34 per cent of a low turnout to win a stonking majority. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Please, let's bring in a proportional representation form of polling before it's too late. Ian Petrie, Edinburgh New approach It is reported that the SNP has a 'massive £5 billion budget black hole' which can only result in cuts to services or tax rises. Let us not forget that it is the same folks behind this fiasco who back the campaign for 'Scottish independence'. Then we learn of the SNP's opposition to defence spending, particularly, of course, towards nuclear weapons. Just what sort of fairyland do the SNP live in if they fail to recognise the dangers of conflict in today's unsettled world? Do they suppose that violent dictators respect the wishes of uninformed pacifists? Just when will the good people of Scotland realise that they are governed at Holyrood by what amounts to a minority administration with, until recently, unelected Green Party support? Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad What Scotland needs urgently is a fresh approach to the regional government at Holyrood, or closure of this unsuccessful institution. Robert I G Scott, Northfield, Ceres, Fife Tapestry tragedy It was interesting to read about Martin Roche's visit to the Borders, particularly his take on The Great Tapestry of Scotland based in Galashiels ('Why troubled Borders region is pinning its hopes on 'game-changer' Center Parcs', 1 July). He must be one of the very few visitors to the attraction which he ranks in the top ten. I hope his piece encourages readers to flock to it. Residents have a very different perspective. When considering taking on the tapestry – which no other area wanted – Scottish Borders Council engaged expensive consultants who told them 50,000 people would visit the Tapestry each year, that is 1,000 per week. It doesn't happen – barely a fraction of that number visit. The only well-supported part of the venue is the coffee shop. To subsidise the Tapestry the council is shutting essential, enjoyed and valued community services. Most of the fellow Border residents I speak to would prefer to have community centres and swimming pools than the Tapestry. I do hope the proposed Centre Parcs development near Hawick lives up to expectations. Mary Douglas, Glendearg, Galashiels Truth out there? Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad I have an odd phenomenon to report. Perhaps a reader can help me out on this? It was on the night of 2-3 July and my wife and I had stayed up watch some pre-recorded nonsense on TV. It was rather late – or, perhaps, early – being at 12.50am. To our surprise, a sudden, bright light appeared to our south, so over the Morningside Drive area. The light was like a ball of flame and just as bright. It appeared to be no more than a couple of hundred feet up. It lasted no more than two seconds and was gone. We have double-glazing, so I don't know if there was any sound, but I opened the window and stuck my head out and there was silence. What could it have been? A meteor would surely not have just been a sudden flash? Peter Hopkins, Edinburgh Write to The Scotsman
South Wales Guardian
an hour ago
- South Wales Guardian
Migrant policies ‘creating more barriers to child safety', says charity
Young children hide under tables when they think they hear the sound of sirens because they are commonly scared of the police, according to organisation Project Play, who raised concerns of teargas and evictions. Advocacy coordinator Kate O'Neill, based in northern France, told the PA news agency there has been a rise in police violence which is disproportionately harming children. She said: 'Ultimately the children we're meeting every day are not safe. 'They're exposed to a level of violence, whether it's they are directly victims of it or the witness. 'We're ultimately at all times putting out fires… the underlying issue is these policies of border securitisation… that are creating more and more barriers to child safety and child protection.' She said there was hope when the Labour Government took office a year ago that there would be some improvement, adding: 'This is not at all what we've seen. 'They continued to make conditions more difficult and more dangerous.' She said: 'The smash-the-gangs narrative is not effective and it's harmful because ultimately the only way to put the gangs out of business is to cut the need for them.' It comes as the grassroots organisation published a report that said at least 15 children died trying to cross the English Channel last year, more than the total of the past four years combined. The charity that offers play services, parental support and safeguarding casework to children aged 0-18 living in sites around Calais and Dunkirk, documented rising violence, trauma and child deaths linked with UK border policies and funding to the French to ramp up enforcement in 2024. In February this year, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper agreed to re-purpose £7 million of cash to French counterparts to bolster enforcement action on the nation's coastline to tackle Channel crossings. 'What we really need to see is some cross-border accountability for the incidents and the fatalities in the Channel,' Ms O'Neill said. The campaigner said one of the main calls as a result of the group's research is for an official source of the number of deaths and information on these deaths to be recorded. Figures for the report came from International Organisation for Migration, Calais Migrant Solidarity and other networks in northern France. 'We don't have the identities of all of them. 'In fact, these deaths are going unrecorded and unreported,' she said. One in five crossing the English Channel between 2018 and 2024 were children, according to Project Play. Meanwhile, Ms O'Neill said tactics for French police to intervene in crossing attempts in shallow waters is already happening despite the changes needed to the rules to allow this having not yet come into force. She said: 'This is not a new tactic… it's something that has been happening for a long time in Calais and surrounding areas. 'My feeling is that this is increasing based on the number of testimonies we're receiving from children and their families recently.' 'It's really dangerous because the children often are in the middle of the boats.' But on Friday, Ms Cooper said intervention in French waters was 'critical'. 'That's one of the big things that has changed, the way in which the boats operate in shallow waters,' she said. 'We have to have the action on those because that's that is where the prevention needs to take place.' Ms Cooper also pressed the case for introducing the new criminal offence of endangering life at sea under the Government's Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill, after seeing 'awful cases' of children being crushed to death in the middle of overcrowded boats. Project Play worked with more than 1,000 children in 2024, and believes in the last few weeks there have been a 'very large amount' of children they worked with who were born and went to school in a European country, such as Germany, Denmark and Sweden. Ms O'Neill said families' visas granted five or 10 years ago in other European countries for refuge have since expired and they have not been allowed to stay, which she said is behind the increase in crossings to the UK. She said since Brexit meant the UK left the Dublin regulation, the country is a 'viable option'. The European Union law set out that the first EU country an asylum seeker entered was responsible for processing their claim, and the UK can no longer send asylum seekers back to other member states since leaving the bloc. Ms O'Neill said: 'Most people we're speaking to, that is why they're going. 'They're not going to claim benefits from the UK or to do anything for free, but it's the next nearest safe place they can be. 'This needs to be addressed… as a European-wide issue instead of just a UK-France thing.' A Home Office spokesperson said: 'We all want to end dangerous small boat crossings, which threaten lives and undermine our border security. 'Through international intelligence sharing under our Border Security Command, enhanced enforcement operations in Northern France and tougher legislation in the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill, we are strengthening international partnerships and boosting our ability to identify, disrupt, and dismantle criminal gangs.' The Pas-de-Calais Prefecture was contacted for comment.
