Rush to judgement (uranium socioeconomic study)
SoVaNow.com / January 13, 2011
Dear Viewpoint,
The uranium socioeconomic study initiated by the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission cannot, on its current timeline, produce meaningful results. It will not consider the findings of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) regarding uranium mining, milling, and tailings disposal in Virginia or the volatile price of uranium. It will be a waste of $200,000.
At a December 8 meeting in Richmond, the commission’s Uranium Mining Subcommittee listened to 5-minute study proposal presentations, asked no questions of the six presenters, allowed no public comment, and voted unanimously to award the study contract to Chmura Economics and Analytics. There was no evidence that the subcommittee members had read the proposals or given careful thought to the objectives of a proper study; one commented that legislators know the Richmond firm.
The commission’s request for proposals asked for a report by December 1, 2011 at a cost of no more than $200,000. In its request, the commission provided no boundaries for the region to be studied and no scientific basis for estimating potential health and environmental costs. The commission did not require evaluation of the range of outcomes that could occur, depending on uncertainties such as the price of uranium or the effects of severe weather events. The commission did ask for “a statement of any major assumptions.”
Chmura, in its proposal, stated at least two invalid assumptions. Chmura incorrectly assumed “a collaborative connection between the Chmura Team and NAS,” which is not possible due to the NAS standard policy of disclosing only final findings. Secondly, they assumed “sufficient sustained market demand for uranium so that the ongoing operations of the mine can sustain the demand as long as it is technically feasible.” Not only is future demand highly uncertain, starting with the assumption that uranium mining in Virginia will automatically be continuously profitable seems to state a conclusion before doing the study.
The purpose of the socioeconomic study is to ground speculation about the social and economic implications of lifting Virginia ‘s ban on uranium operations in reality — the facts and uncertainties under investigation by the NAS, including a volatile uranium market which may not need uranium from Virginia .
Chmura did not propose the comprehensive socioeconomic study we need to make a wise public policy decision. Nevertheless, defying common sense, the commission contracted with Chmura for a report due by December 1, 2011, the target date for public release of the NAS report, which therefore cannot inform Chmura’s study.
For example, the NAS will analyze the health and environmental impacts of uranium mining at existing uranium operations and assess what’s known about the potential short- and long-term health and safety risks, including risks from exposure to toxic heavy metals and radioactive particles. This information is needed to help bring public perceptions in line with reality and to estimate any health costs.
The NAS will also review global and national uranium market trends and identify the main types of uranium deposits worldwide, including the types possible in Virginia . Information about known worldwide uranium reserves will shed light on the competitiveness of uranium found in Virginia .
If the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission wants to do a comprehensive study of uranium mining, milling, and tailings management in Virginia , it will allow sufficient time for people, including the Chmura research team, to read and learn from the NAS report.
Virginia Uranium Inc. claims that waiting for the NAS results would cause a “delay,” as though its corporate interest in rushing legislation to lift the uranium mining ban should outweigh public interest in a truly comprehensive study. The problem is not delay, but haste — haste that is irresponsible and an insult to the many people who want to learn from credible sources.
The commission should make up for its previous lack of diligence by amending the contract with Chmura and by refraining from introducing uranium mining legislation in the Virginia General Assembly until 2013.
By Katie Whitehead
(Katie Whitehead is a native and resident of Pittsylvania County and an active participant in the uranium study process, working toward an evidence-based policy decision.)
Read more:
http://www.thenewsrecord.com/index.php?/opinion/article/rush_to_judgement/
