Welcome to the APM podcast, brought to you by the childhood body for the project profession. This episode is part of our series of senior leader interviews hosted by APM Chief Executive Professor Adam Bodison. This time Adam is in conversation with Sir Nigel Thrift, Chair of the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management, or Quorum. Korum's role, as Sir Nigel describes it, is to give independent scientific and technical advice to UK Government on all aspects of the
management of radioactive waste. Sir Nigel is one of the world's leading human geographers and previously served as Vice Chancellor and President of the University of Warwick and as Pro Vice Chancellor for Research at the University of Oxford. Listen on to hear him chat with Adam about dealing with a football stadium's worth of radioactive waste. The environmental impact of megacities and how to enable better long term thinking in government departments.
Hello, welcome Sir Nigel Thrift to the APM Podcast. It's a real pleasure to have you on today.
You're currently Chair of the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management, but before we talk about that role, I think it'd be useful to give our listeners an overview of your extensive academic career, particularly your time as Vice Chancellor at the University of Warwick. So I wonder if you might spend a little bit of time giving us some background on your academic career and also maybe your primary areas of specialism? Yeah, sure. So straightforwardly.
Adam I was basically an academic until my mid 40s, early mid 40s, and I'm still an academic in that I publish a book. Every two or three years. But somehow the other in the early or mid 40s, I got interested in management. So it's interesting to understand why that is, I think. So I I had actually early. Academic experience at Cambridge. At Leeds, at. ANU at Lampeter and then I basically moved to Bristol University and in time I became Head of Department of Geography.
At Bristol. And it's a very. Good. Department, I might add, and I at the same time met a man called Sir John Inderby, who? It was and. Is a remarkably famous. Physicist. And he was concerned about the university. 'S research. Performance. And he asked me to come onto this little panel that he was doing, which was basically blitzing the university in one way or another. And that genuinely got me really interested in all sorts of ways.
And it also exposed me to every single discipline in the university, which was wonderful. Actually, so I was. Then doing parallel tracks. I was still. Doing an academic. Career, I told her. All kinds of places during the time I was. At Bristol. At Macquarie ETH. UCLA, Vienna, National University of Singapore, couple of institutes. Of advanced study, but at the.
Same time I was also doing this parallel track in management anyway in. Bristol I. Kind of run a ran out of road and basically almost on. Spec I applied for a job at Oxford as head of. Division and I got it and I went to. Be a. Head of Division at Oxford and then. The pro vice chancellor research that's basically. The person who's nominally, and I say nominally, in charge. Of research at Oxford after two or three years there. I was headhunted to. Go as a vice chancellor at Warwick.
And I did that for 10 years and then after that. I thought. What am I going to do next and? Luckily, a really. Interesting job came up. As executive. Director of a thing called Schwartzman Scholars, and that's working in Beijing and in New York to set up a new college at Tsinghua University. Which is. I think the best university in China and then going on from that. I took up my current job as chair of the government committee on. Radioactive waste management.
For the last six years. Wow, It's, it's probably something we can spend a lot of time talking about. And, and I think what's really interesting is the, the, the number of different pivots actually at different points in the career, which I'm I'm sure we'll come back to. But you talked about management there, Nigel.
And I suppose if I extend that a little bit further to think about project and programme management, it's not something that people would necessarily instinctively associate with something that's been relevant to an academic career or to running a university. What what's your experience been of of of that particular aspect of management? I think the most important thing to.
Say, is that people? Often have quite strange notions of what universities are like, and in particular I think it's worth remembering that many of them nowadays. Are very large. They have. Turnovers, you know, in some cases in the billions of. Pounds Oxford. And Cambridge, I think 2.22 point 3 billion a year and basically.
When you've got that big. And you've got that many academics and that many students, and you're trying to do things like building buildings to actually mean that people can actually do work as academics and students. You have to use. Project management. It's not really an option, you know. Project management is a full. Stop and whether it's. Rolling out new working practises, building new facilities, planning big. Empirical science research.
You're bound to be using it and. Size, especially the. Number of students, which has really increased quite massively in many universities and financial pressures which at the moment are extreme, mean that university administrations have had to become more and more professional and project management is a part of that. And actually one of the interesting things is it's actually now appearing quite strongly. In big empirical science
research, you'll start to see. People really running project. Software. In order to cope with actually putting research together in various ways, not just nationally but internationally, we're talking about vast systems at this point in time. The main problem for universities now, against that background, is if. You're not very careful. You start. To look like an industrial combine rather than a university. And I do think. That's a real issue. But actually, I don't really
think that the. Sector has really. Had a proper discussion about that. But there we are. We're not trying to make universities, if you like, into bland blobs. We're trying to make them into incredibly exciting places and you have to be very careful therefore not to iron out all of their. Quirks we, we've started kind of drifting into the, this idea around perceptions of
universities. I wonder if you might talk about perceptions of the project profession, because my sense has always been that the profession has somewhat of an image problem or project management itself as an image problem. And even though it's matured a lot over the past 25 years, you know, its role, its values to society isn't necessarily always well understood by the general public, by businesses, by leaders. What what? What's your sense of the image of the project profession?
I don't really see. Project management as having the the image problem that that you think it does. I mean it's. True that people don't. Appreciate don't really understand the sheer amount of effort that has to go, for example into managing really big projects which would not. Be possible? Without project management, it's in. I can't imagine how you could do it, not nowadays for example. You only have to. Think of something like the building of Hinkley C nuclear power station.
That's the largest construction project in Europe. You. You have a look at the project management outputs from their. Software. And you go no. This is quite extraordinary. You know the detail, the timings and so on and so forth how you link things together. So I think to. Begin with it may be that people. Don't appreciate it? But I don't think that means it has a bad image as such. Once you start. Talking in the terms, well, how in heaven's name else would you
do some of these things? I think people come round pretty quickly. It's. Also, they may not realise that actually a lot of the time they are doing project management, you know that. A lot of. People are using project management and programme management. Software, full stop. They need tools to plan to schedule to. Track to collaborate to report on projects. And they are using them. They use them. Academics are using them as I.
Said to set up research. Or they think maybe another question is that project management is a kind of. Technical activity. And they're basically project managers are kind of the boffins of organisation, if I can put it that way. And again, I just don't think that's. True if. You look at it. Actually, the really. Great project managers. Are also really great. People managers. You have to be because you're. Threading things together in. All sorts of ways. And I think. Therefore that.
Maybe it's. True that project. Management is sometimes undersung, if I can put it that way. But actually when you start. Looking at it large. Parts of it are. Thriving and it's extending into all kinds of areas that it was never used before. So I wouldn't worry unduly. You talked earlier on about your books and your academic
research. I know you've written a lot about the role of cities and cities of course are host to many of the largest infrastructure programmes around the world, including transport programmes. How do you see the role of cities and major programmes developing in, in the coming years, particularly in a post pandemic era and, and, and particularly when there's a big drive now towards net zero and, and, and really having a net zero future? Well, I think the first thing to
say is I mean. There are lots of cities, but the real. Issue I think becomes how how to actually deal with the mega cities. These are cities. That are kind of 10 / 20 million in some. Cases of people often, if you're lucky, quite. Highly concentrated. Though there are some cities. That really sprawl massively. Really massively. So there are interesting things I think around that. So project management. Yes, of course, all those. Construction projects going on,
many of which. Still have to. Green up, I think it's. True to. Say though the industry. Is is. Trying hard, but I think the thing that for me has always been an issue and this comes back to work I've done, there's been maintenance and repair. One of the problems. I think is actually maintenance and repair is. Thought of a lot. Of the time too late in the day and actually you then find that construction projects are being built. Which are very difficult.
To maintain and repair. But it's worth remembering that everyone talks about. How you you know buildings only have a? Set life cycle but actually truth to. Tell most of them are extended into. Quite long periods of. Time and you know. For example in the. UK the number of houses pre 1919 is surprisingly high and. They were never built. To last. As long as they have. But maintenance and repairers made sure they do. And that's a good.
Thing because that means you're not using loads and loads of carbon to build new houses. So I think that's something to think about. The second thing is. Very straightforwardly that, as you say, we've got to do. Something about cities at the moment if you look at them. You could say that. They're incredibly environmentally destructive in many ways. They're almost like tyrannosaurs. You know, eating everything in their path and infrastructural innovation can help in lots of ways.
Green concrete, new carbon. Free power sources sponge. Cities, all of these different kinds of things. But actually, truth to tell. Turning these cities, especially these large cities, into. Really positive forces. Is less about major. Infrastructure programmes, though, they have their. Place and I'm not trying to suggest. Otherwise. But more about actually getting the politics right in these
cities at the moment. When you look at a lot of these major infrastructure programmes, they benefit certain sections of the population far more than they do others. And actually the sections of the population they don't benefit very much are the ones that often have all the externalities from those projects. Loaded onto them so. Something has to happen to make sure those.
Kinds of practises change. We hinted earlier on that we were going to talk about your role on the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management, where you are indeed the Chair. So I wonder if you can tell us a little bit about what your role is there and and also the remit that the committee has, because I, I suspect lots of people haven't heard of this committee. Basically it's. It's remit, it's very. Straightforwardly to give responsible, accurate scientific
and technical advice. To UK government and the and the devolved administrations. It was founded in 2003 as an independent arm's length body and it has to be independent. I don't think there's any doubt about that. Interested in all aspects of the management of Radioactive? Waste we go across the spectrum. And in the. UK this is particularly. Important, of course. Because the UK store of. Radioactive waste continues to grow and only the US, France, China and Russia currently have
a larger inventory. So there's a lot. Of it around that needs working with and are putting away and basically what we look at is how in a sense you can actually deal with and manage this waste, which is partly an organisational problem. But it's also partly a scientific problem of. That there is no doubt at all. What kinds of waste are you getting? For example, what's actually in them? Can you neutralise? Some of that. How do you pack? It etcetera, etcetera.
So that's the first thing we do. Scientific and technical advice. We also. Scrutinise the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, the NDA and it's waste subsidiary Operation Nuclear. Waste Services, which is. NWS in SO. Far as they relate to radioactive waste. And that's important as well, because nuclear decommissioning. Authority has a large. Budget and it is trying to put away quite a. Lot of this waste. And then the third thing that we do. Is. Public engagement of one form or another.
And. We want to be seen as independent in. Part because we want the. Public to understand that we are independent so even though. Individual members of the. Committee may have. Personal views. The committee. Itself is neither pro nor anti nuclear. It's there to deal with the waste and that's basically a task. Whatever. Happens and remember as well at the same time, a key premise of nuclear policy. Is that its waste? Will be definitively dealt. With and nuclear.
Policy, in a sense, in this country depends on. That, so that's important. Little bit about make up twelve members of the. Committee. And they cover a massive range of interests. Three nuclear. Scientists. A geoscientist, the country's leading. Nuclear lawyer and environmental. Planner, a former senior. Regulator, who's also. Worked for Old Fashioned Bays, an underground mining construction. Expert A Top.
Project manager and former Bayes director and anthropologist, and me. I'm a geographer. Many of them have run. Large organisations, so they've. Also got a practical sense of what's possible and of. Course, at the moment quorum, as it's called, is in a particularly active phase, and there are a set of reasons for that. One of them is making progress on the early stages of citing a. Geological disposal facility and. We'll, we'll talk about that
later. The second is Fusion, which is not going to produce much in the way. Of radioactive waste. But it has to be looked at and it. Could be extraordinarily important then, of course. There's a new energy. Security policy which has a 24 GW. Target for nuclear by. 2050. Which includes 3 new nuclear power stations increase C Sizewell. C and possibly Wilva it involves. Small. Module reactors and advanced. Module reactors, SMRS and AMRS as they're known, and.
Basically, the idea is to get to about 1/4 of. UK Power being generated by nuclear. And the way that you can look at this is. Through a new UK wide policy on managing radioactive substances and nuclear decommissioning which actually came out this year and all of our. Reports and our studies and our blogs are on the. Core and website, and we're a very active committee, believe me. So that's a kind of quick roundup.
Wow, that's a huge remit. You, you talked about policy there and, and the kinds of initiatives that you're talking about. We're not talking about policy, which is, you know, with an outlook of three, five years, you're talking about decades, potentially 100 plus years for some of these, for some of these programmes. Governments I think are sometimes criticised for, I suppose, thinking in kind of parliamentary cycles, which are, you know, typically five years depending on who's in power.
What's your view on that? The kind of the tension there between political thinking, which tends to be in political cycles and therefore policy is often grouped in, in, in, in that respect versus the kind of demands of something like nuclear where the the thinking needs to be really strategic and really long term. Long term thinking is is is quite difficult in a lot of UK major programmes. Everyone actually knows that. OK.
I, I think that you think anyone with the denier, but somehow not all that much gets done about it. And I think there are lots of reasons there's no separate facility for long term thinking in government departments, the pre eminence of short time, short term financial settlements in government and indeed in the British economy. The lack of foresight skills and, as you say, the dominance of short term political pressures. And this is a real problem. I I don't think there's any
doubt about that. What you do about it? Is another issue. The Welsh. Government, for example, has its well-being of future direct generations law, which means that any. Piece of. Legislation that comes up. To the Welsh. Senate. Has to actually go. Through inspection to see. What it will? Do in if you like, impacting future generations. We could do something similar in England and I I think that would be sensible.
What I'd like to see is something like the Finnish National Preparedness Commission, and it has a practise of building up a systematic compendium of, if you like, answers to each and every. Breton. Problem and potential disaster. Which? Might occur in the future and that I think has made the fins fins unusually. Well prepared for the inset onset. Of those kinds of events. It it's. We we don't have institutions that do this. That's. The problem so until. We have.
Some of those institutions and until we believe that long term thinking is it in itself a discipline, we're not going to get all that far. Yeah, really, really interesting points there and and my big take away from what you said there is there are lessons that we can both learn and apply from really effective practise and thinking that's happening globally and maybe that's something we need to as a country I think maybe maybe get better at. Let me ask you about safety.
You know, people often worried about nuclear, particularly the kind of safety aspect of it. It's clearly a big priority in the nuclear sector. I mean, I was at an event recently up in, in Sellafield where I heard the, the leaders of this event say what we need from our project management community is boring predictability.
And I suppose I'm, I'm interested in how we maintain those really high, much needed high safety standards, but also make sure that we don't inadvertently lose the kind of innovation, the new technologies and so on that's needed to drive nuclear forward and, and bring it through to the, the, you know, the next phase of its evolution really. Safety is at the heart. Of nuclear and has been now. For for several decades. And you can't move without safety briefings. Without the someone.
Having to produce it each meeting a new means of. Producing safety and. So on and so forth and. That's right, you I don't think the. Population would expect anything less and neither should they, so I think that's an important thing to say in its own right. I don't think that's boring, if I'm honest. I really don't. It's the safety itself requires. All kinds of innovations. To be really effective. So you should see the engineering.
That has to be. Done in nuclear power stations before the fact in order to make sure that they can be decommissioned properly, and they actually do. Have to think a long. Term into the future and produce. Boutique solutions for. All kinds of things. And I think, you know, people underestimate just how smart some of these people are and the things that they're doing. But even if you didn't think that safety and nuclear anyway, is enforced by a raft. Of regulatory bodies, the office.
For nuclear regulation, the Environment Agency, the health and safety. Executive and lots of others, but that hasn't. Stopped innovation in nuclear. Especially recently, there's a lot of it about. Current we've, we've talked about fusion, there's small modular reactors and advanced modular reactors. The the thing that I think is different from a lot of industries is it takes a long time for these innovations.
To get authorisation to proceed. If I can put it that way, because they have to be seen to be safe, there's nothing wrong with that and I don't see a way round. It I don't. Think anyone in Britain would not want? These safeguards and. I think. You you'd be impressed by the sheer. Amount of effort that goes into safety in the industry and no one can say that anything untoward will ever happen but. People. Strive constantly to make. Sure that it doesn't.
We're APM, the only chartered membership organisation for the project profession. When you become an APM member, you'll receive the resources and support you need to make an impact, delivering better projects with better outcomes. Plus, you'll access exclusive training and benefits to support your ongoing career development. Find out how we can help you reach your potential by visiting apm.org.uk. Because when projects succeed, society benefits.
You, you gave us a teaser earlier on Nigel, when you, when you mentioned the GDF, the geological disposal facility. I wonder if you might tell us a bit about it and what the primary challenges are in delivering this really important nuclear waste project. I think the the most important thing is to understand the scale of the problem, OK? So the UK total. Amount of. Radioactive waste produced after about. 70 years of operations is
about 4400 and 50 million cubic. Metres by total package volume you can go. Online and find this straight away. But actually, if you look at it after all this waste. Has been packaged. It's estimated its final volume if you put it all. Together, which you wouldn't, would equate to a space. Similar to. That of a large modern football stadium. So. After 70 years of operation, it's not at least an extraordinary volume that we're talking about.
According to the NDA 2022 inventory, about 94.5% of the radioactive waste volume in the UK is currently classed. As low level waste. About 5.4% is what's called intermediate level waste, and less than. 0.04. Percent is. Classified as high level, but and going the other way by degree of radioactivity, the. Corresponding figures are 0.004% for low level waste, 18.5% for intermediate. Level waste and. 81.5%. For the high level waste. I don't. I think you can draw your own conclusion.
About that. So some of the stuff is difficult. And some of it isn't and some of it is. Very difficult, so Simply put, current. Plans in England, Wales are like those in most countries, to dispose of the most hazardous. Waste. All of the high level waste and some of the intermediate. Level waste are. Actually, in a geological. Disposal for facility which is deep. Underground where it will reside. For the foreseeable. Future isolated from the biosphere and.
From future populations. So that radioactivity emitted by the ways can. Decay to safe levels. And it's important to note that. That was first recommended by Cora. To the government in 2006 and the geological. Disposal facility. The GDF. Will be 200 to 1000 metres in depth. So it could be as deep as a. Kilometre and is likely to be in shore. That's under the sea, within territorial waters. So it could. Be on shore.
It'll be. Over 20 square kilometres in underground extent with only a square kilometre of land. Used at the surface. And it'll consist of tunnels in which waste will be of various kinds will be lodged and left in place and this this facility. Won't be. Built all in one go. It'll be a gradual thing where you build. Some tunnels and you build the mainframework, but then you close off some tunnels and you open some new tunnels and so on and so forth, so.
It's it's a. Big construction project, but it's certainly. Not an impossible construction project and 1:00. Of the reasons for that is because technology's come on, as as you well know, and in particular modern underground technology in the last 20. Years or something has really gone on like a shot and we now. Have a GD. F actually pretty well.
Complete in Finland, and there are plans for others in places like France and Canada. They're a bit farther on, I think, than we are, but we're doing the best we can. There's a lot of debate. About where you can. Put these particular facilities. And I think the main thing is you've got to have the right rock type and that means building in inactive. Geologies which will restrict. Groundwater flow. You don't want water flowing through radioactive waste. And the main preference.
Therefore is for salt, it's for halide Sykes, for it's, it's for clay, or it's for Hard Rock such as. Granite, which is usually. Not heavily fractured and because of the timescale of the the GDF which is. Probably from now to when it's actually closed. About 180 years to finish to replace. All the foreseeable. Waste, and it may be for. Some of the waste. It has to be there for many thousands of years. It inevitably means that it's. About as a project. Reducing uncertainties and
going. Back to it, especially. In the safety case and it's. Clear as I've already. Mentioned at least under. Government policies. The inventory of Radioactive. Waste if. Nuclear continues to grow. Will itself grow. So there are interesting things about that. I think as well it's worth. Saying there are challenges. Having said that, with producing a geological disposal facility, there's a whole set of hoops that have to be jumped through.
First in placement of waste for example in a GDF has recently been put back from the twenty 40s to the 20 fifties and the high level waste will only begin to be in place from 2075. So we're talking. Really about a long time scale at the. Same time, the sighting policy is another challenge. It. Relies on what's called. Volunteerism, that is. That a community has. Basically to say yes.
And that means there has. To be a test of public support which allows a. Community to provide an opinion. On whether a. GDF can be cited in its area and if that opinion is negative. It's off. Simple as that. Following on from the process of working with a successful community to. Achieve a successful test of public support. And then you've. Got all. Kinds of other things you need to. Do for example boreholes you have to get all the requisite. Consents and safety permits. And you also.
Had to get a development consent. Order because the GDF. Would be a nationally significant. Infrastructure project and that's what you have to do. And then of course, all of these kind of things when you add them. Together first in. Placement of waste in the 20 fifties to final closure from now, that's about 180 years. And then one final challenge. There's enormous. Skill shortages in nuclear. At the moment. Because so much is going. On and that is not.
A trivial issue actually, but the. Government is doing things about that. And so actually are many of the. Private companies we started. Our conversation today talking about image, about public perceptions, nuclear strikes me as one of these industries where there's probably a lot of misconceptions and myths about the the about the industry. What would you say are those big myths? And maybe you could set a few straight forwards today. Yeah. Yeah, well, I think the main one is.
Basically radiation. Is seen by many people per southeast is dangerous. But you have to be really careful about this. Because radiation is something we all experience in our daily lives as natural background is that people will tell you in in all sorts of places they always love the. Example that even bananas give. Off some kind of radiation going on from that. Of course, another thing is that not all radioactive material is being used for bad purposes. There's nuclear power, of
course. That's important in its own. Way and it's carbon free but. Also, it's worth remembering. All of the medical uses of of nuclear. Research. Reactors and psychrotrons. That are used then. In scanners, some medical. Procedures and so on, but that isn't to. Say of course. It's once trying to. Kind of minimise the fact that the radioactive way. Somebody is certainly. Extremely problematic, but it is to. Say that you.
Can overdo it. Finally, of course, there's the secrecy myth, the myth that somehow all of the all of this is. Kind of taking. Place behind closed doors, and so on and so forth. I don't know whether that was. True or not? But I don't think it's true now. If you most people. Are just amazed by the amount of. Information that's actually available online. They don't believe in the. 1st place that. It's there so they don't go looking for it, but it's not. Difficult to find these. Things.
For example, the inventory of all the waste in some detail is there from 20. Two. 2022 online and the whole series of these kinds of different things and a lot of the kind when you see these barriers around various nuclear facilities and that kind of thing, that's for people's protection. Let me be very clear about that and was trying to make sure that you don't have people wandering around where they shouldn't be. Nigel, it's been. A pleasure to have you on the podcast.
Thank you so much for your time. And maybe we'll invite you back in a few years to see how some of these things are getting on. And we wish you and the committee well with your task. OK, Adam, thank. You very much. It's been enjoyable talking to you thanks to Adam and. Nigel for taking time out to share their conversation with the APM Podcast. Don't forget to rate and review us wherever you get your podcasts. You can find out more about Nigel's work with Quorum on
gov.uk. And if you want to get in touch with your feedback, suggestions, or ideas for topics we should cover, e-mail us at APM Podcast at thinkpublishing.co.uk. Spotify users can also send us feedback directly within the Spotify app by responding to the Q&A. That's it for this episode. Thanks again for listening.