Lithuania has not generated nuclear electricity since 2009, but nuclear energy remains an active national issue. The country is managing one of Europe’s most complex decommissioning projects, building facilities for radioactive waste, preserving specialist knowledge and examining whether advanced reactors could one day restore nuclear generation.
This creates an unusual position. Lithuania is simultaneously leaving behind a large Soviet-era nuclear system and studying a smaller, more flexible nuclear future. The immediate priority is the safe dismantling of the Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant. The longer-term question is whether the skills and infrastructure developed around Ignalina can support a new generation of reactors.
Ignalina Once Dominated Lithuania’s Electricity System
The Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant, located near Visaginas in northeastern Lithuania, contained two Soviet-designed RBMK-1500 reactors. These were graphite-moderated, water-cooled reactors related to the design used at Chernobyl, although Ignalina incorporated modifications and operated under a different national regulatory system after Lithuanian independence.
Ignalina became the central asset in Lithuania’s electricity system. Its large reactors produced far more power than a country of Lithuania’s size would normally require from one site. During parts of the 1990s and early 2000s, nuclear energy supplied most of the country’s electricity and supported power exports to neighboring markets.
The plant also shaped Visaginas. The city was developed around the nuclear facility, attracting engineers, technicians and workers from across the Soviet Union. Ignalina was therefore not only a power station but also the economic foundation of the surrounding community.
Safety concerns became decisive during Lithuania’s accession to the European Union. The lack of a modern containment structure and the characteristics of the RBMK design led the EU to require early closure. Lithuania agreed to shut Unit 1 by the end of 2004 and Unit 2 by the end of 2009.
The closures removed Lithuania’s only operating reactors. They also transformed the country from a major nuclear generator into a state responsible for dismantling a nuclear complex that had originally been expected to operate for considerably longer.
Decommissioning Has Become Lithuania’s Nuclear Industry
The Ignalina site no longer produces electricity, but it remains the center of Lithuanian nuclear activity. Decommissioning involves much more than demolishing buildings. Fuel must be removed, contaminated systems must be dismantled, materials must be measured and classified, and different waste streams must be treated and stored under regulatory control.
All spent and unused nuclear fuel had been transferred out of the reactor units to a dedicated storage facility by the beginning of 2023. This reduced the risk within the reactor buildings and allowed the project to move toward more difficult dismantling work.
The next phase reaches deeper into the reactor systems. Lithuanian regulators have issued permits covering equipment such as steam drum separators, water and steam piping, fuel channels, and reactor control and safety channels. Preparatory work includes installing remote-handling equipment, adapting waste facilities and strengthening radiation-monitoring arrangements. Some of the equipment cannot be removed using normal industrial methods because it is contaminated or located in areas with higher radiation levels.
Work on major reactor components is expected to accelerate from the end of 2026. The broader decommissioning programme is scheduled to continue until 2038, when the removal of the reactor buildings and other major structures is intended to be complete.
That schedule remains demanding. Ignalina’s RBMK-1500 units were exceptionally large, and relatively few comparable graphite-moderated reactors have reached this stage of dismantling. Lithuania is therefore developing experience that may later be relevant to other countries dealing with Soviet-designed reactors and irradiated graphite.
European financial support remains essential. Lithuania closed the reactors before they could generate sufficient revenue to cover their full decommissioning cost. The EU has supported the programme since 2001 and has proposed continuing a dedicated Ignalina assistance programme during the 2028–2034 budget period.
Radioactive Waste Will Outlast the Plant Buildings
The end of physical dismantling will not end Lithuania’s nuclear responsibilities. Decommissioning produces large volumes of concrete, metal, graphite, insulation and other material. Some can be cleaned and released from regulatory control, while other material must be stored or disposed of according to its radioactive characteristics.
A repository near Ignalina has been developed for very-low-level radioactive waste. It has capacity for as much as 60,000 cubic metres and is expected to receive waste throughout the decommissioning programme. After it is filled and closed, the site will remain under active surveillance before longer-term land-use restrictions continue.
Lithuania must also manage thousands of cubic metres of bituminised radioactive waste created during plant operation. A project proposed in 2026 would convert the existing storage structure into an engineered surface-disposal facility by reinforcing it, adding barriers and installing protective layers.
The most difficult issue is spent fuel and other long-lived waste. These materials are being held in interim storage, but interim facilities are not a permanent solution. Lithuania is studying possible locations for a deep geological repository that would isolate high-level and long-lived waste underground.
Site-selection studies are expected to continue at least until 2038, while approval of a location is planned for around 2047. Construction, operation and closure would extend the country’s nuclear programme far beyond the planned completion of Ignalina’s dismantling.
Waste policy therefore links several generations. Decisions made during Ignalina’s operating life created materials that must be managed safely for decades before final disposal becomes available.
Energy Independence Has Changed the Nuclear Debate
Ignalina’s closure initially increased Lithuania’s dependence on imported electricity and fossil-fuel generation. The country subsequently invested in interconnectors, liquefied natural gas infrastructure, grid improvements and renewable generation.
A major shift occurred in February 2025, when Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia disconnected from the electricity system controlled by Russia and Belarus and synchronized with the Continental European network through Poland. This ended the Baltic states’ dependence on Russian-controlled frequency management.
The change also physically separated Lithuania’s electricity system from the Astravyets nuclear plant in Belarus. Lithuania has strongly opposed that project because of its location near the Lithuanian border and concerns about its safety, transparency and emergency arrangements.
Lithuania’s future electricity strategy is now led by offshore wind, onshore wind, solar power, storage and stronger European connections. However, a system with large quantities of variable renewable energy will also need dependable generation, demand management, storage and reserve capacity.
That requirement has brought nuclear energy back into strategic discussions. The debate is no longer centered on replacing Ignalina with another extremely large conventional plant. Instead, attention has shifted toward small modular reactors that could be added in stages and potentially operate alongside renewable generation.
Lithuania Is Testing the Case for Small Modular Reactors
Lithuania’s National Energy Independence Strategy includes an assessment of advanced nuclear technology. Government planning has called for a decision on possible small-reactor deployment by 2028. One scenario would introduce an initial 0.5 GW of nuclear capacity by 2038 and expand the fleet later as electricity demand grows.
This remains an assessment rather than a construction commitment. Lithuania must still determine whether an SMR project would be technically mature, economically competitive and suitable for the national grid. Financing, licensing, waste management, fuel supply and construction risk would all influence the decision.
Several international partnerships are supporting the evaluation. Lithuania and the United States have agreed to cooperate on technology assessment, regulation, project financing and workforce development. In February 2026, Ignalina operator Altra, Synthos Green Energy and GE Vernova Hitachi signed an agreement to study the potential use of BWRX-300 reactors in Lithuania.
A separate agreement with Newcleo is examining advanced fast-reactor technology and its possible relationship to spent-fuel management. These partnerships give Lithuania access to technical information, but they do not guarantee that either design will be selected or built.
The Ignalina site may offer valuable infrastructure, land, grid connections and an experienced workforce. However, reusing a former nuclear location does not remove the need for a complete siting and licensing process. A new reactor would be assessed under modern requirements rather than treated as a continuation of the old plant.
Lithuania’s nuclear future therefore has two very different levels of certainty. Ignalina’s dismantling, waste treatment and long-term disposal responsibilities will continue regardless of national electricity policy. New nuclear generation is possible, but its future depends on whether SMR technology becomes commercially proven and whether Lithuania can secure a realistic financing and delivery model.
The country is no longer a nuclear electricity producer, yet it has not left the nuclear sector. Its experience at Ignalina, growing demand for firm low-carbon power and desire for energy independence could support a return. The decision will depend less on nuclear history than on the cost, maturity and strategic value of the next generation of reactor technology.