The British experience with nuclear submarines reveals a litany of public health risks as well as delays and cost blowouts, and it can confidently be predicted that problems will beset the AUKUS submarine programme ‒ the joint development of nuclear-powered submarines by the UK, the US and Australia.
My new report prepared for Friends of the Earth Australia demonstrates that the development of a nuclear-powered, conventionally-armed nuclear submarine (SSN) fleet entails multiple public health risks and would inevitably suffer from delays and cost-blowouts.
Operational risks of SSN deployment include radiological pollution of marine and coastal environments and wildlife; risks of radioactivity doses to coastal populations; and the serious risk of dangerous collisions between civilian vessels and SSNs, especially in the approaches to busy naval and civilian sea ways and fishing grounds.
Building this big complicated thing is complicated!
If only there was some way we could share the risks with a few other countries. Maybe even someone who’s tried it and fucked it up.
UK & US : “We need a new
gunea pigpartner to test this shit before we do it. We haven’t got a clue!”I know you’re trying to be funny but that’s exactly what we, and they, are doing. Developing something this complex requires a lot of resources and has a lot of inherent risk. It makes sense to share that risk - everyone involved carries some.
We can’t go it alone but we definitely want the subs, we don’t want to just pay for them because then these partners have us over a barrel indefinitely.