Friday, November 26, 2010

Questions abound for the NAS (about Uranium Mining)


By The Editorial Board
Published: November 21, 2010

To the editor:

The National Academy of Sciences is accorded a reputation for authority and ethics that rivals the Ten Commandments, which is the reason its study on uranium mining in Virginia cannot be ignored.

Someone testified before the committee the in situ mining method is the popular technique for the mining of uranium (Register & Bee, Nov. 16, page A1). This person apparently held forth at length about the virtues of in situ leach as opposed to conventional underground or open pit mining and about this oversight by Virginia Uranium Inc.

The World Nuclear Association states this about the in situ process and I quote: "Uranium deposits suitable for ISL occur in permeable sand or sandstones, confined above and below by impermeable strata, and which are below the water table."("ISL" stands for "in situ leach" being the term used by WNA). WNA also stated about 18 percent of the world uranium sources is hosted in sandstone.

The Coles Hill uranium deposits are "hosted within a fault-bounded wedge of Precambrian or Paleozoic myolinitic quartzo-feldspathic gneiss and some amphibolite" according to a document entitled "Technical Report on the Coles Hills Uranium Property," page 8, dated Nov. 6, 2007, prepared by PAC Geological Consulting Inc,, for Virginia Uranium, Inc.

Further, the author of this report stated he collected a sample of the uranium deposit from a ditch along side the road.

That appears to mean the Coles Hill deposit is located in quartz and feldspar rocks and is certainly not located below the water table if samples were collected from a roadside ditch.

Since the World Nuclear Association states it is "the international organization that promotes nuclear energy and supports the many companies that comprise the global nuclear industry" (quoted from its Internet site), one would assume it is an authority on the industry.

Therefore, based on the WNA statements about ISL, it seems Coles Hill is not a candidate for the in situ leach process. Only a conventional underground or an open pit mining technique can be used.

Since the NAS study will not be site specific, how will the NAS committee determine this testimony is irrelevant? Does NAS intend to do a geological study of the hosting of uranium deposits in Virginia compared to the mines in the West?

HILDRED C. SHELTON
Danville, VA

http://www2.godanriver.com/news/2010/nov/21/questions-abound-nas-ar-665482/