Uranium Mining Problems

Environment: Havasupai Tribe and conservation groups win the right to be part of lawsuit over uranium mining near Grand Canyon National Park

Posted on April 24, 2012 by Bob Berwyn

The confluence of Havasu Creek with the Colorado River (river mile 157) is a popular place for boaters to stop and admire the striking blue-green water of Havasu Creek. The turquoise color is caused by water with a high mineral content. At the point where the blue creek meets the turbid colorado river there often appears a definite break. NPS photo by Erin Whittaker..

Prospector seeks to overturn ban on new uranium mines
By Summit Voice
SUMMIT COUNTY — The Native American Havasupai tribe, along with four conservation groups, will be party to a lawsuit regarding uranium mining in the vicinity of the Grand Canyon.
U.S. District Court Judge Frederick Martone last week ruled that the Havasupai and four conservation will be able defend the U.S. Department of the Interior’s January 2012 decision to ban new uranium mining claims for 20 years across 1 million acres of public lands adjacent to the Grand Canyon.
The ban was challenged on behalf of the industry by uranium prospector Gregory Yount.
“Friday’s decision means we’ll have a seat in the courtroom to protect the Grand Canyon region’s life-giving waters and deer, elk, condors and other wildlife, as well as the tremendous cultural resources so important to the Havasupai tribe,” said Ted Zukoski, an attorney at Earthjustice who is representing the coalition.
Proposals for new mining have prompted protests, litigation and proposed legislation. Because dozens of new mines threaten to industrialize iconic and sacred natural areas, destroy wildlife habitat and pollute or deplete aquifers, scientists, tribal and local governments, and businesses have all voiced support for the new protections enacted by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar.
“Secretary Salazar was right to protect Grand Canyon from more uranium mining pollution,” said Taylor McKinnon with the Center for Biological Diversity, one of the groups that won intervention. “That’s a decision we’ll gladly defend in court.”
“The defense and protection of Grand Canyon and its watershed is a top priority for the Sierra Club,” said Sandy Bahr, director for Sierra Club’s Grand Canyon Chapter, another intervener. “Uranium mining and this landscape are not compatible, as has been recognized by conservationists, Native American tribes, and now the government. We need to defend this important decision.”
http://summitcountyvoice.com/2012/04/24/environment-havasupai-tribe-and-conservation-groups-win-the-right-to-be-part-of-lawsuit-over-uranium-mining-near-grand-canyon-national-park/
A copy of the court order is available at
http://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/Grand.Canyon.Uranium.decision..pdf

Medical Effects of Uranium Mining on Population & Native Peoples (Dr. Caldicott & Prof. Brugge



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAIeDlbqEkM

Lack of funding to slow cleanup of uranium tailings

By Geoff Liesik

MOAB — Environmental crews have removed more than 5 million tons of radioactive tailings from the banks of the Colorado River in less than three years.
They still have about 11 million tons to go, but the pace of the cleanup is about to slow down.
But unlike EnergySolutions, Portage will be operating without the benefit of $108 million in federal stimulus funding awarded to the UMTRA project in 2009.

"We had that over a two-year period and that really helped us get ahead of schedule and really make a lot of progress," said Moab federal project director Donald Metzler.

Before the stimulus money ran out in July 2011, EnergySolutions was shipping an average of 12,000 tons of the uranium mining waste each week to a disposal site 30 miles away, at Crescent Junction, via 88 railroad cars.

Graham is worried that the reduced funding for the project — the primary factor in Portage's switch to a nine-month work schedule — will have an impact not only on the area's economy but on the environment.

http://www.ksl.com/?sid=19974549&nid=148

Issue #24.17 :: 04/24/2012 - 04/30/2012

Debate the controversy over uranium mining in Virginia To mine or not to mine?

BY LAURA INGLES Center attorney Cale Jaffe joined Virginia Uranium Inc. project manager Patrick Wales as part of the Batten School’s Energy Policy Forum. For two hours on Friday, Jaffe and Wales tackled the thorny issue of mining uranium in southern Virginia, and fielded questions from students, faculty, and members of the community. But the SELC is concerned about the safety of the process, regardless of any regulatory standards or industry best practices—consider, Jaffe said, that the BP oil spill happened two years ago this month, despite stringent regulations on Gulf drilling. Jaffe said the controversy over uranium is about waste management. In addition to the actual mining, he said, the process would also require milling, with the disposal of 58 billion pounds of toxic, radioactive tailings each year. According to Jaffe, these tailings retain 85 percent of their radioactive activity, and global studies have shown that those living and working near uranium mines are at risk for cancer, birth defects, weakened immune systems, and kidney and liver damage. “We need to take these warning signs very seriously before we move forward,” he said. Despite these statistics, Jaffe said the SELC fears that, right now, the risks are just too great to move the project forward. Because Virginia has not yet been mined for uranium, Jaffe said, there is no way of knowing how the area’s climate, rainfall and natural disasters will factor into the equation. Uranium is traditionally mined in dryer areas like the western states, and Jaffe fears that, even with “gold standard” regulations, mining in Virginia will present unexpected complications unseen in other uranium deposits. “Risk is inherent and will always be there,” Jaffe said. http://www.c-ville.com/Article/News_Extra/Experts_debate_the_controversy_over_uranium_mining_in_Virginia/?z_Issue_ID=11802304123611880