COVER STORY | JET STREAMS
JET and future fusion decommissioning
JET began the transition into decommissioning at the start of 2024.
What lessons does this complex process offer to future fusion decommissioning projects and how can its progress help to inform a mechanism to ensure such costs can be met by fusion operators?
By Steve Gilligan, Engineering Integration Manager, JET Decommissioning and Repurposing
THE JOINT EUROPEAN TORUS (JET) Decommissioning & Repurposing (JDR) programme offers important insights for shaping future fusion decommissioning policy. It is the first full-scale effort to dismantle a deuterium-tritium fusion research machine since the Tokamak Fusion Test Reactor (TFTR) at the Princeton Plasma Physics Lab was dismantled in 2002. Operated by the UK Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) for nearly 40 years, JET delivered its final experimental pulses in 2023 and then entered a decommissioning phase projected to last until 2040. Ahead of JET’s transition into decommissioning at the start of 2024, the UKAEA presented four strategic costed options to the UK’s Department of Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ), a reflection of the complexity not just to take apart the UK’s largest tokamak but also remediate the site. By late 2027, the DESNZ aims to identify a proportionate mechanism to ensure costs for decommissioning can be met by fusion operators. JDR’s progress can potentially help to inform and influence such a mechanism.
JET concluded its plasma operations at the end of December 2023 and is being decommissioned. Source: UK Atomic Energy Authority
Policy factors A key contextual factor is JDR’s tranche-based funding model, tied to periodic government Spending Reviews. Funding is allocated in multi-year segments, with budgets reconsidered each cycle. This has both positive and negative effects on the programme. Positives include developing an agility in
planning and delivery; improving accuracy in budgetary forecasting (and thereby building credibility and reputation with policy-makers and key stakeholders); and entrenching a data-driven approach to cost-benefit analysis work to inform decisions around what to proceed with, to defer, or to cancel. However, there are also inherent risks, not least an inability to develop longer-term workforce planning; potential loss of institutional knowledge that would bring efficiencies and cost savings over an extended period; and reducing the likelihood of technological and scientific research covering multiple tranches. From a policy perspective, having a culture of comprehensive, transparent and honest communications between the delivery body and sponsors is essential. This helps to achieve a balance between short-term and longer- term funding requirements, minimise seismic shifts in strategic direction, and support consistency and workforce retention. National priorities have also evolved, particularly with the
UK’s commitment to build a prototype fusion power plant – STEP Fusion – by 2040. As part of its Net Zero and Innovation strategy, the government is investing £2.5bn ($3.4bn) over five years in fusion R&D, including £1.3bn ($1.7bn) for STEP and £932m ($1.3bn) for the UKAEA. In a fiscally challenging environment, this commitment – which continues a theme established by the previous government – reflects the belief in Whitehall that fusion can provide baseload power in the future and stimulate regional and national economies. This focus on future commercial fusion has, at times,
overshadowed the decommissioning of JET. However, policy must recognise that decommissioning is an integral life cycle stage, essential for regulatory compliance and capturing knowledge that will inform future fusion facilities. Political and regional considerations also influence support. The decision to site STEP Fusion at West Burton, not Culham, aligns with successive government’s stated desires to create opportunities and prosperity across the country. This illustrates how fusion decommissioning programmes may face fluctuating political emphasis, making it vital for JDR to demonstrate the agility to align with shifting, as well as more static national objectives. This could include the changing priorities of an individual party or prime minister, as well as the more established goals related to net zero and regional economic development. JDR involves a wide range of stakeholders. The UK Government expects the programme to deliver safely, efficiently, and cost effectively. Regulators require compliance with health, safety, and environmental standards; local communities and industry partners seek transparency and
20 | July 2026 |
www.neimagazine.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45
