Comment: Well, this paper is owned by the nukes and you can read all the propaganda on their site. However, this blog has a problem with the paper calling people names who are just worried about the safety of our families with uranium mining and describing the good people of Southside "just went off the deep end" because of worries of pollution from modern uranium mining! The so called editorial should just sign the name of "Nukes for Uranium Mining!" Please review the comments; at least the people Lynchburg recognize this paper as bunch of Nukes!
The News & Advance
Published: December 6, 2009
Word came Thursday that Virginia’s uranium mining study has gotten the go-ahead from a top panel of the National Research Council, an arm of the National Academy of Sciences.
At last, science and rational thought seem to be prevailing in this decades-long dispute.
The National Research Council (NRC) is part of nation’s premier scientific organization. .
Since the early 1980s, Virginia has had a moratorium on mining and milling in place, due to concerns as to whether it could be done safely.
Virginia Uranium Inc., the company that is seeking to mine and mill the Coles Hill deposit, successfully lobbied the General Assembly last session to ask for the study, laying the groundwork for the eventual lifting of the moratorium.
Unfortunately, the Assembly didn’t appropriate any money to pay for the study, estimated to cost approximately $1.9 million.
That’s where diehard opponents of mining just went off the deep end in their battle against uranium mining.
Southside Concerned Citizens, chaired by Jack Dunavant of Halifax County, is one of the more rabid groups fighting Virginia Uranium and Coles family. They and their supporters called into question the impartiality of Virginia Tech, the energy research center and the National Academy of Sciences itself for being willing to conduct a study paid for with “tainted” money.
Reader Reactions
Voice your opinion by posting a comment.
Flag Comment Posted by packer2dogs on December 07, 2009 at 10:55 am
Somebody tell me where, anywhere, uranium has been mined safely with no effects to the local community.
Flag Comment Posted by Why the Hat on December 07, 2009 at 10:15 am
White House Is Urged to Help States With Nuclear Plants Stockpile Thyroid Drug: New York TIMES
WASHINGTON — After the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, Congress passed a law instructing the federal government to help states build bigger stocks of a simple, cheap drug to protect people near nuclear power plants in the event of an accident or terrorist attack.
But the 2002 law left a legal loophole allowing the White House to forgo distribution if officials found that there was a better way to prevent cancer than administering the thyroid drug, potassium iodide. And after years of delays, the Bush administration dropped the plan in 2007, saying evacuations would be a better alternative. [read: RUN FOR YOUR LIFE!]
The federal government already helps the 31 states with commercial nuclear plants stock pills for people within 10 miles, and some states have already distributed them in that zone. The provision sought to extend that radius to 20 miles.
Distributing them might also have a “misleading psychological effect,” he said, suggesting that the drug would protect against all health effects, rather than just the effect of radioactivity on the thyroid.
Well, nothing to worry about.
Flag Comment Posted by Martha on December 06, 2009 at 6:26 pm
Or, David, like something you would read on this comments site by some of the folks who post here, huh? Not you!
Flag Comment Posted by David on December 06, 2009 at 6:04 pm
The N&A describes the opposition as having gone off “off the deep end” and calls one of the opponents living in a neighboring county as “rabid”. I don’t know if I am for or against the mining in close-by Pittsylvania Co. yet—there are more things to consider than the N&A’s apparent whole-hearted endorsement. However, I have a feeling that the opponents have some points as well which perhaps the N&A should have considered, discussed and then dismissed if those points deserved. However, the name calling seems undignified in an editorial opinion—more like something you’d hear said on cable television by a talking head.
Flag Comment Posted by Why the Hat on December 06, 2009 at 8:45 am
—“the rabble rousing protestors” In the Middle?
First, it is disingenuous to equate nuclear power plants with uranium mining? Second, stop pretending that this mining operation will employ Southside Virginia. Third, if you are right with regard to the safety issue you should have no trouble “insuring” it through some reputable insurance company. (good luck!)
Flag Comment Posted by Why the Hat on December 06, 2009 at 6:02 am
The question of “can” something be done safely is easily answered. Certainly it can.
The question of “will” it be done safely is unanswerable. There in lies the problem.
Historically, uranium mining has been devastating to local communities. Increased cancer death and polluted and poisonous groundwater have resulted and then been abandoned by the corporate entities that caused the damage. The profits leave town and the federal government is left to clean up the mess with taxpayers money. The taxpayers are broke. The clean up never takes place. The localities wither and die as limited liability corporations move on to new locations. It starts all over again.
Read more at:
http://www2.newsadvance.com/lna/news/opinion/editorials/article/uranium_study_finally_gets_a_green_light/22019/
