Russia’s €18.7 Billion Nuclear Cleanup Gap Shadows Its Global Expansion

Some Russian nuclear reactors are already more than 50 years old, but the money needed to retire them safely is far from secured. Rosenergoatom estimates that decommissioning — permanently closing and dismantling nuclear facilities — will cost about €21 billion, with a funding gap of roughly €18.7 billion, according to a commentary published by Al Jazeera. The figures put the eventual cleanup bill close to the centre of a much bigger energy story: Russia is selling nuclear power abroad while facing substantial unfinished business at home.

Rosenergoatom plans to decommission 35 reactors, the article says. Meanwhile, Russia is building nuclear plants in countries including Turkiye and Bangladesh, and President Vladimir Putin regularly discusses nuclear projects with foreign leaders. Moscow promotes the technology as a sustainable alternative to fossil fuels. But the commentary argues that the commercial promise needs to be weighed against costs that remain long after electricity production stops: maintaining closed sites, dismantling equipment and managing radioactive waste.

A bill that can grow for decades

Lithuania offers a measure of the challenge. Its two Soviet-built reactors at Ignalina were shut in 2004 and 2009 as a condition of joining the European Union. By 2020, the estimated decommissioning cost had reached €3.3 billion ($3.7 billion), while only 49% of the planned work was complete. The expected finishing date has moved from 2038 to 2049. In Germany, the estimated cost of dismantling the former nuclear plant at Lubmin rose from €1 billion to €10 billion, illustrating how far initial budgets can fall short.

Russia often postpones full dismantling by putting closed reactors into long-term storage, according to the article. That shifts much of the financial and technical work into the future rather than removing it. Environmental group Bellona, drawing on Rosatom’s own projections, identifies a potential financial turning point around 2037. Its warning, as presented in the commentary, is that the burden could become larger than the company’s annual earnings.

Bellona’s assessment, based on Rosatom’s projections: decommissioning and remediation obligations could exceed net profit by around 2037.

Radioactive waste adds another layer to the liability. Russia inherited approximately 774,000 cubic metres of it from the Soviet Union. Separately from the 35-reactor decommissioning plan, the article cites the forthcoming retirement of 36 reactor units at eight plants as a source of another 800,000 cubic metres. These materials require management even when the facilities that produced them no longer generate power.

Overseas customers face a long-term test

For countries buying Russian nuclear technology, the issue extends beyond construction and electricity supply. The commentary argues that host countries need contingency plans if projects cannot be maintained or eventually dismantled as intended. It also points to pressure on Russia’s public finances: national defence is the largest single federal budget item, while environmental protection receives only a small share of spending.

Independent scrutiny is another concern. Bellona and Greenpeace have been declared “undesirable” organisations in Russia, while EcoDefence has been labelled a “foreign agent” and its members have faced criminal prosecution. A report by the Environmental Crisis Group, cited in the commentary, says repression and the departure of experts and activists have weakened Russia’s environmental movement.

Russia’s nuclear industry has largely avoided the sanctions applied to other parts of its energy sector, leaving international cooperation in place. The issues to watch are whether funding catches up with retirement obligations, how long dismantling is deferred, and whether overseas customers build credible backup arrangements. The challenge is not simply delivering new reactors, but financing what happens after they stop producing power.