A job in the armed forces is considered one of the top jobs the people can become and the army is no exception. Within the army forces there are many different career paths that you chose and it is up to you as a candidate to select the career path that you want. Another benefit of joining the army is that anyone can join regardless of qualifications. There are positions available for those who left school with their G.C.S.E’s and are looking for an exciting challenging career path. Or even those candidates who have been all the way through the education system and have achieved college or university degree’s. These candidates can often enter at a higher level but the point is that there is an opportunity for everyone.

Whether it is the air force, navy or army that you want to join there is a selection process you must join before you can be considered for the role. Most candidates just turn up to army selection day without really understanding what is required of them. Army officers can earn anything from £23,000 per year to £97,000 depending on your rank and how quickly you progress. With a number of promotion opportunities available there a no limits to what you can achieve in your officer career. To become an officer in the army you will need to apply to the Army Officer Selections Board which is also known as the AOSB. If you are successful in your application you will then need to attend a selection process that lasts for 3 days and this will test both your physical and mental suitability to the role of an army officer.

These mental tests will involve a number of psychometric tests which can often be difficult to pass and a great deal of practice is required for these. You will also need to show you have a high level of fitness as this is essential to your role as an officer in the army and those that demonstrate a poor level of fitness are unlikely to be successful. The final part to the selection day will involve an interview with the AOSB interview board and you will need to make sure you are fully prepared for this stage as it is the final stage of the process. During the interview you will be asked a number of questions relating to you, how you see the role of the officer and will be tested on whether you match these criteria.

Nuclear decommissioning is an expensive business. It is estimated that the decommissioning of existing sites in the UK will cost in the region of 70 billion GBP, but this is not taking the timescale of such operations into account. As the process happens in stages, the true cost is hard to determine.

In the UK the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) is the body responsible for sourcing contractors to carry out nuclear site cleanup. It aims to provide cost effective decommissioning of existing sites and implementation of long term management of sites while they are being dismantled. It is not just power plants that require decommissioning; although concern about the safety of such nuclear establishments are at the forefront of public concern, there are also a number of other industries that require the same treatment when it comes to shutting down.

Particle accelerators, such as the much publicised Large Hadron Collider (LHC), uranium mines and isotope production plants all require the services of a safe decommissioning contractor. The official stance on the process is to return the buildings and the site itself to a safe and decontaminated state so that it can be dismantled or reused with no risk of nuclear contamination.

Due to the increase in demand for energy, the mid 1900s saw the introduction of nuclear power facilities; and it is these facilities that are coming to the end of a lifetime of service. The need for economic and safe treatment of such plants has reached a crescendo as the new generation of reactors are ready to take their place. There could be as many as 10 new-style reactors required to meet the energy needs in the UK and although the new designs mean that less fuel will be used and will last longer, there is a chance that existing decommissioning and waste storage techniques will not be adequate.

The crux lies in the fact that the new rods have a higher burn-up rate, which in turn creates a much more radioactive substance when it comes to disposal. The increased radioactivity of the uranium generates more heat, which becomes a problem during storage after use in a reactor. Being able to consider a flexible approach to the storage of nuclear waste requires an open minded appreciation of the route the development of nuclear power facilities could take. Keeping the estimated and real costs of decommissioning down becomes more difficult if the fuel is more radioactive. In addition, if more repositories are required to enable the safe storage of super heated rods, the costs are going to increase in the reclamation of sites post-nuclear use.

According to NDA, the radioactivity of the new type of uranium rod from the proposed reactors will be twice the level of our existing radioactive waste today. Although the disposal of the waste and the decommissioning of the sites will not be carried out until 2080, leaving the problem for the next 70 years is not an option. Far too often the industry is accused of leaving the safe handling of nuclear waste, fuel and facilities for future generations to work out, and at a time when we are currently paying a high price for safe nuclear decommissioning, we should appreciate the implications this may have on the future decommissioning contractors.