The cost of replacing Trident has now topped £200 billion, according to campaigners.
The new calculation comes just months after the Ministry of Defence admitted that the price of building new submarines had soared from £25 bn to £31bn.
Read more: Trade union's call to 'back the bomb' puts Labour splits on Trident at heart of election
Defence chiefs also admitted that they had set aside an extra £10bn in a contingency fund.
The UK Government has consistently refused to put a figure on the overall cost of the decades-long programme to replace the ageing nuclear weapons system on the Clyde.
But the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) said its estimate was that the scheme would now cost £205 billion.
Read more: Tories will back Labour members and trade unionists who want Trident renewal, Ruth Davidson says
Kate Hudson, CND general secretary, said: "For too long the pro-Trident lobby has been in denial about the real cost to our economy of Trident replacement.
"These new calculations, drawn from actual government figures, show that the bill has spiralled beyond all expectations.
"£205 billion of public money is a huge amount. Pouring it into a nuclear weapons system that experts say could be rendered obsolete by new technology is hardly a wise choice. Far better to spend it on industrial regeneration, building homes, tackling climate change or meeting our defence needs in usable ways.
"The world has moved on since nuclear subs were first designed and procured – politically, economically and technologically and it’s time for our politicians to catch up."
SNP defence spokesman Brendan O’Hara said that the figures showed that the project was "out of control".
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel