Environmentalist: Edgemont uranium mine not financially feasible

By Steve Miller, Journal staff

The proposed Powertech uranium mining project northwest of Edgemont isn't financially feasible and won't provide enough protection against groundwater contamination, says Paul Robinson, an environmental critic of the project.

A local company spokesman disputed Robinson's arguments.

Robinson, billed as an environmental scientist with the Western Mining Action Network, spoke at the group's biennial conference in Rapid City on Friday.

In a news conference before his appearance, Robinson, research director of the Southwest Research and Information Center in Albuquerque, N.M., said there isn't enough demand for uranium worldwide and that the current spot price of $43 a pound isn't enough to cover the cost of production for the uranium mine proposed in the Dewey-Burdock area, 13 miles northwest of Edgemont.

"My chief concern is that the company is marketing its program to produce uranium when there is no demand for new uranium mines or their products," Robinson told reporters. "Therefore, it is building interest around a project that has very little likelihood of producing because the market won't support new uranium mines."

Robinson said there aren't enough nuclear reactors being built to even replace the ones that are aging.

In any case, Hollenbeck said, the project won't proceed unless it is financially viable. Meanwhile, he said, project plans are moving forward.

Robinson also said state and federal reclamation rules are too lax for in situ uranium mines.

Like such mines in Nebraska, Wyoming and Texas, Powertech USA, a subsidiary of Canadian company Powertech Uranium Corp., plans to inject chemically treated water into wells to dissolve the uranium, then pump out the solution and collect the uranium for processing.

Opponents argue the process could damage the environment, contaminate water and threaten the health of area residents. The company says the process is safe.

"The NRC does a very bad job of protecting groundwater," he said. Robinson said disturbing the uranium and the accompanying heavy metals underground could cause release of contaminants into groundwater.

In Wyoming, Texas and Nebraska, regulators have allowed the in situ uranium mines to leave contamination at higher levels than existed before the mining, Robinson said.

Hollenbeck said the groundwater at Dewey/Burdock is already highly contaminated and unfit for drinking. "The radionuclides are through the roof on this groundwater. It does not meet any kind of drinking water standard whatsoever," he said. "If there weren't all these radionuclides in there, we wouldn't be going after it."

Hollenbeck acknowledged that the water after mining won't be exactly the same as before.

"It'll be the same kind of water when we started, but it won't be the exact same water," he said. "It is nowhere close to being drinking water today."

Robinson also said there is a danger of a plume of underground contaminants spreading out from the mine area and between monitoring wells that are spaced too far apart. Such an event is called an "excursion."

"These kinds of excursions have occurred beyond the well field at the Nebraska, Wyoming and Texas operations," he said.

Hollenbeck said that in addition to monitoring wells encircling the mine area, the NRC requires all in situ uranium mines to have buffer zones outside the monitoring wells.

"If, as these people claim, one of these excursions get out from the monitoring well ring, you have to go out and drill more wells and make sure it is controlled," he said.

Hollenbeck said that no excursion of contaminants has ever gotten outside the buffer zone of any of the NRC-regulated uranium mines.

Hollenbeck, the former mayor of Edgemont, said he and other area residents are going to make sure the environment where they live is protected.

He grazes some of his cattle on land he leases on the Dewey/Burdock mine site.

"I have a certified organic ranch," he said. "I raise grass-fed organic beef and lamb. So I have the highest standards of environmentalism for my ranch. That's why I'm involved in this project. I believe it's the safest environmental way of extracting minerals that we've come up with."

The Western Mining Action Network continues its conference through Sunday at Hotel Alex Johnson. The nonprofit organization says its mission is to foster a strong network to protect the environment by reforming mining practices.

About 160 people are attending the conference, organizers said.

Contact Steve Miller at 394-8415 or steve.miller@rapidcityjournal.com
http://www.rapidcityjournal.com/articles/2009/10/02/news/top/doc4ac6ae41b1afb588768105.txt

More Delays at Finnish Nuclear Plant

Comment: The UN supports Nuke Power as being CO2 free, REALLY, they are wrong! Just say NO to France's Nuke Power and all nuke power! Nuke power is not CO2 free, building the Nuke Plant is full of CO2 (trucks, the power contractors are using), uranium mining and milling, trucking the yellowcake to a uranium processing plant, ETC, not CO2 free. In addition, uranium mining has never been done safely anywhere in the world! Just say no to France nuke power, wake up Virginia and Maryland, we do not want nuke power! Oh, yea, I listed some good comments from the article (names not included)!

Henna Aaltonen for The International Herald Tribune
The Olkiluoto nuclear power plant in Finland is facing more delays.

September 2, 2009, 8:04 am
By James Kanter

Areva, a French nuclear construction company, said this week that its project to build the world’s most powerful reactor remained mired in delays and was over-budget by 2.3 billion euros, or about $3.3 billion.

The price tag of the plant in Olkiluoto, Finland — the first of a fleet of so-called evolutionary power reactors that Areva foresees building in coming years — was about $4.3 billion in 2003 and costs have steadily increased.

The reactor was meant to have gone online early this summer but Areva no longer is committing to any dates for its completion. Patrice Lambert de Diesbach, an energy analyst with CM-CIC Securities in Paris, said the latest developments were “bad news” for Areva and “should be sanctioned by the market.”

The problems faced by Areva are important a time when the nuclear power industry is promising to build safer and more reliable reactors than during the last building boom in the 1960s and early 1970s. Interest in the sector is high again as governments seek sources of electricity that, like nuclear fission, emit little or no carbon dioxide and that cut down on reliance on fossil fuels like coal.

Areva has blamed the Finnish utility company, Teollisuuden Voima, which ordered the reactor, for the delays.

But the Finnish safety authority has said that Areva outsourced a number of aspects of the construction to unqualified subcontractors, making it responsible for a number of the problems.

Whatever the reasons, a key question raised by the project is whether the industry can build enough power plants on time – and on budget – to make a significant contribution to lowering greenhouse gases within the time periods that have been recommended by United Nations scientists and agreed by governments.

So far there are few signs of a breakthrough in Finland.

Areva said this week that it would not begin work on the final stages of the reactor until the Finnish utility agreed to a new set of proposals and modifications.

Comments:

Link

2. September 2, 2009, 9:55 am

Link
When all the dust settles and we aren’t arguing about environmental issues, nuclear energy is still a big messy business even after all these years and with France’s supposed “experience”.

The bottom line is, nukes are a really hard way to make energy.

— Mark

3. September 2, 2009
10:01 am

Link
I think the NRC would be completely irresponsible if it gave any further consideration to the application for a new reactor at Calvert Cliffs in Maryland if the current contractors are involved. There appear to be serious safety issues involved in this fiasco.

— Chris

http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/02/more-delays-at-finnish-nuclear-plant/