Thursday, December 22, 2011
Virginia needs time to assess all of the reports before it takes the next steps.
The debate over proposed uranium mining in Pittsylvania County became immensely more complicated this week.
The National Academy of Sciences released its long-awaited, third-party study of the proposed mine. The General Assembly cannot lift the moratorium next year and give this and other studies the attention they deserve.
The 302-page report is nuanced and complex. It was neither the optimistic report mine backers wanted nor the slam-dunk condemnations opponents would have liked. It raises sufficient doubts, though, to demand Virginia proceed with caution.
Virginia must decide if it even wants to start down this road. If it does, the implications go beyond near-term job creation into waste containment that must succeed for thousands of years.
This is not a decision to make lightly. Lawmakers and the public need time to digest the report's findings, to hold public discussions with ample citizen involvement and to determine what is acceptable risk. No uranium mine and waste storage is risk-free.
Virginia must also determine where the money to pay for writing regulations will come from.
"There is only limited experience with modern underground and open pit uranium mining and processing in the United States, and no such experience in Virginia," the NAS report found. Virginia might look to other nations for guidance, but because uranium has for so long been a low national priority, there is a lot of ground and expertise to make up. That will not be cheap.
Virginia does not even have enough money to pay for core services, as the governor's budget proposal demonstrates. Lawmakers could kick the job to DEQ, but it should not do so at the expense of other work the department does. It would need new funding to pay for new work.
The embryonic uranium industry cannot and should not pay for it lest the process appear self-serving. Lawmakers could seek other new revenue, perhaps eliminating wasteful coal mining credits, but that will be a tough sell among Republicans who hold a majority in the House of Delegates and the tie-breaker in the evenly split Senate.
This situation was, perhaps, inevitable. With the report arriving so close to the legislative session, it all but guaranteed there would be insufficient time for a rational decision. Virginia should spend the next year talking and thinking. If uranium mining still looks good then, a conversation can occur about regulations.
State leaders must first determine whether they can ensure a reasonable level of safety. The answer to that question lies not just one, but multiple years in the future.
http://m.roanoke.com/mapp/story.aspx?arcid=302667
Virginia needs time to assess all of the reports before it takes the next steps.
The debate over proposed uranium mining in Pittsylvania County became immensely more complicated this week.
The National Academy of Sciences released its long-awaited, third-party study of the proposed mine. The General Assembly cannot lift the moratorium next year and give this and other studies the attention they deserve.
The 302-page report is nuanced and complex. It was neither the optimistic report mine backers wanted nor the slam-dunk condemnations opponents would have liked. It raises sufficient doubts, though, to demand Virginia proceed with caution.
Virginia must decide if it even wants to start down this road. If it does, the implications go beyond near-term job creation into waste containment that must succeed for thousands of years.
This is not a decision to make lightly. Lawmakers and the public need time to digest the report's findings, to hold public discussions with ample citizen involvement and to determine what is acceptable risk. No uranium mine and waste storage is risk-free.
Virginia must also determine where the money to pay for writing regulations will come from.
"There is only limited experience with modern underground and open pit uranium mining and processing in the United States, and no such experience in Virginia," the NAS report found. Virginia might look to other nations for guidance, but because uranium has for so long been a low national priority, there is a lot of ground and expertise to make up. That will not be cheap.
Virginia does not even have enough money to pay for core services, as the governor's budget proposal demonstrates. Lawmakers could kick the job to DEQ, but it should not do so at the expense of other work the department does. It would need new funding to pay for new work.
The embryonic uranium industry cannot and should not pay for it lest the process appear self-serving. Lawmakers could seek other new revenue, perhaps eliminating wasteful coal mining credits, but that will be a tough sell among Republicans who hold a majority in the House of Delegates and the tie-breaker in the evenly split Senate.
This situation was, perhaps, inevitable. With the report arriving so close to the legislative session, it all but guaranteed there would be insufficient time for a rational decision. Virginia should spend the next year talking and thinking. If uranium mining still looks good then, a conversation can occur about regulations.
State leaders must first determine whether they can ensure a reasonable level of safety. The answer to that question lies not just one, but multiple years in the future.
http://m.roanoke.com/mapp/story.aspx?arcid=302667
