Issue fraught with science and emotion (uranium mining)

Canada coming south(America)

Comment:  A great letter, we hear the same comments from the pro uranium group in VA!  No to uranium mining!

February 25, 2010

Supporters of in situ leach uranium mining in Weld County claim that opponents of uranium mining are too emotional and do not know "the science."

Do they mean ...

The "geological" science that the U.S. Geological Survey used to determine "to date, no ISR uranium mine in the U.S. has successfully restored the aquifer to baseline conditions."

The "groundwater" science that geoscientist B. K. Darling used to evaluate restoration of ISL mines in Texas, reporting, "The Texas commission on Environmental Quality routinely grants requests for relaxed restoration standards that allow operators to depart from original groundwater cleanup objectives ... as a result of the inability of the operators to reduce uranium concentration."

The "medical" science that the Larimer County and Colorado medical societies used to decide their opposition to uranium mining, stating, "there are documented increases in rates of testicular and ovarian cancer, leukemia, childhood bone cancer, miscarriages, infant death, congenital defects and genetic abnormalities in populations living near uranium mining sites."

The "meteorological science" that the past president of the American Meteorological Society used saying, "Weld County is windy. Surface soil contaminated by radionuclide and heavy metals has the potential to become airborne and be ingested by surrounding humans and animals for miles."

Opponents too emotional?

Were Fort Collins, Greeley, Nunn, Timnath, Wellington, Ault and New Raymer too emotional when they all wrote resolutions opposing uranium mining, or were they acting on behalf of public health and safety?

Fort Collins was voted best place to live. A uranium mine nearby could negate this area's desirability.

Real estate values could plummet. Local college enrollment could decrease. Businesses could vacate. Reduction in quality of life, job losses and the inability to sell your house are emotional.

The mining company projects using a million gallons of groundwater per month for 20 to 25 years. This could affect availability of fresh groundwater.

Weld County is the eighth-most-productive agricultural county in the United States.

Contaminated or reduced volumes of water could adversely affect this industry. Loss of local business income and at-risk agricultural products are emotional.

Abandoned uranium mine sites historically become superfund sites that use tax dollars to clean up.

With ISL mines, it is the aquifer that needs restoration, and if it can't be restored, what do we use? There are more than 250 wells of record within one mile of the mine site. Contaminated water is emotional.

A Canadian mining company proposes to mine uranium 10 miles from Fort Collins, make a lot of money and take it back to Canada. In return, it says it will create maybe 100 jobs and residual business.

Having a foreign company mine U.S. resources, possibly contaminate our environment and leave us with the bill is emotional.

So, is it an issue of science or emotion? It's a little of both, with many promises and projections from an industry that has historically contaminated the area where it operates.

Do they have new, "safe" science?

Will they protect our environment?

We'll just have to trust them ... or not.

We won’t get fooled again — or will we? (Uranium Mining in VA)

Hills in Pitts. County

Comment:  A great article which is fair and balance!  No to uranium mining and milling! (Ace would write more but he has a cold!)

Sunday, February 14, 2010
Posted by Robert Benson at 10:20 AM

If you only know one thing about Patrick Wales, know this: He’s passionate about geology(just the money it makes for him off the backs of people's lives, ACE).

Wales is a native who came back home to work with Virginia Uranium Inc. Wales has every reason in the world to want to see that 119-million pound ore deposit mined.

Wales sees good local jobs, tax dollars for local governments and a valuable mineral locked in solid granite that can eventually be used as fuel for use in nuclear power plants. Nuclear power is an important part of Dominion Virginia’s total energy output.

Needless to say, Wales takes a particular interest in what this newspaper writes about VUI and uranium mining and milling. He took exception with, “Not now, not ever; why not?” (Feb. 10, page A10), the editorial about the RIFA board not taking action on a resolution to ban uranium mining and milling in the Berry Hill Road industrial mega park.

“The whole purpose of these resolutions was to hijack the pages of your paper so that the anti-uranium folks could have another day in the sun, and as usual your paper obliged with priority coverage of the resolution followed by a silly editorial,” Wales wrote to me. “…the anti-uranium folks are merely using your paper as their soapbox. Hopefully, common sense and journalism can return to the pages of your paper.”

I don’t think it ever left.

Wales is correct that these resolutions are non-binding and don’t have the force of law behind them. But we believe that government resolutions are a way for the people’s elected leaders to express their views about issues, events and problems.

While it’s true that Virginia Uranium Inc. is only interested in Coles Hill, it’s also true that the uranium mining and milling study currently being done by the National Academy of Sciences is looking at uranium mining and milling throughout Virginia, not just at Coles Hill.

That means that if VUI gets the green light to proceed, we could see other mining companies come to Virginia searching for the next Coles Hill.

Since parts of the Berry Hill industrial mega park site include land that may have uranium under it, we believe this resolution makes sense given the substantial public investment in that industrial park.

Did anti-mining folks like our editorial? Probably. Was one of their goals to score some news media attention? Probably. Did they raise a valid public issue? Absolutely.

Wales may not agree with that, and that’s his prerogative.

I don’t expect a geologist working for VUI to agree with everything we’ve written about uranium mining and milling in Pittsylvania County.

 But this proposed project has raised a lot of questions that demand answers — and the time to ask questions is right now.

Read more:
http://www.mygodanriver.com/index.php/benson/comments/we_wont_get_fooled_again_or_will_we/

Supervisor defends mining stance/ Reply to Supervisor from Dixon (uranium mining)

Comment:  Great Letter Mr. Dixon!  No to Uranium Mining and Milling!

January 29, 2010

To The Editor:

I feel I must reply to Mr. Ingram’s letter, published in the Danville Register on Sunday, January 17, as it seems less a defense of his position on uranium mining in Pittsylvania County and more an assault on me personally. Of course, Mr. Ingram is entitled to his opinions, as I am to mine, it is a free country; but, just for the record, let the facts, as they say, be presented to a candid world.

I did not attack Mr. Ingram for working for Babcock and Wilcox. As he rightly states, it is a fine company and does provide many jobs in Central Virginia.

I merely pointed out the logic in his creeping support of uranium mining, as uranium is indeed linked to the nuclear power industry (of which Babcock and Wilcox is a part) and it takes a small degree of common sense to see the connection here.

A wise man once pointed out that it is difficult to convince someone of an obvious truth when his salary depends upon his not being convinced of it. My uncle worked for thirty years for Brown and Williamson, another fine company providing many solid jobs in the tobacco industry. When he died of lung cancer fifteen years ago, my uncle was still convinced that cancer was a disease of the nervous system.

Most of the time, what one thinks is linked to what one does. I did not “attack” Mr. Ingram for his honorable career at Babcock and Wilcox; I simply highlighted an obvious connection.

Mr. Ingram is worried about jobs. He is correct in being concerned about it. I share that worry. In fact, that is the point of my “foolish” letters. Almost thirty years ago, Henry Hurt spoke with a senior English class at Chatham Hall. I sat in on that class; I remember his excellent talk. One point especially has stayed with me all these years.

The major industry of Chatham, he explained, is education. We need to acknowledge that and protect that industry, as that industry (Hargrave and Chatham Hall) provides dozens, if not hundreds, of jobs to people in Chatham and Pittsylvania County. These are jobs which, were these school not here, would also not be available to the people of Pittsylvania County.

The prospect of uranium mining at Coles Hill jeopardizes that well-established and beneficial industry.

The loss of those schools would spell disaster, not only for the hundreds of people who depend on being “fed and clothed” by those schools, to use Mr. Ingram’s words, but for the intellectual and cultural life of the area as well. In 1981, Henry Hurt rightly saw the importance of those schools to our local economy.

In 2010, they are even more important. Chatham Hall has received a thirty-two million dollar gift this year. This money could catapult it to a leading position among girls’ schools, assuredly, and private schools in general, most probably.

A uranium mine six miles away from campus would have severe consequences in recruitment and retention of faculty and student alike. This is precisely the kind of serious economic situation that Mr. Ingram assures us he is concerned about.

Why would Mr. Ingram make fun of me for pointing out what he himself has established is an important issue?

Finally, a few answers for Mr. Ingram’s curious rhetorical questions about me.

Like Mr. Ingram, I am a citizen of Pittsylvania County. I have been here since 1980, and, although I was not born here, as my friend, historian Herman Melton once said, I got here as soon as I could.

I love this county, its people and resources as much as Mr. Ingram.

As a teacher, I have contributed indirectly to our common economic prosperity by sending out hundreds of qualified graduates from the schools where I have taught over a thirty-five year career, twenty-seven of which have been in Virginia.

The school where I teach now has educated the likes of a fine former Secretary of Transportation (Class of ’64) and our present state Senator (Class of ’87), as well as his sister and brother. As a teacher involved in educating students for the future, I see the world in those terms.

Mr. Ingram and I share a concern for the future of Pittsylvania County; it is unfortunate that he did not understand that from my letter.

Sincerely,

Richard Dixon


Supervisor defends mining stance

By Published by The Editorial Board
Published: January 17, 2010

To the editor:

I have no idea who Richard Dixon is or why he has chosen to attack me for expressing an opinion about the role of the Coles Hill uranium project in economic development for our region “Support for uranium is no surprise,” (Dec. 29, page A6).

Mr. Dixon laughingly ridicules me as having once been fed and clothed by the nuclear industry. Fact is, after growing up in Pittsylvania County, serving in the Marine Corps and getting my college education, I was fortunate enough to work for Babcock & Wilcox in Lynchburg. It is a wonderful company that has brought high paying jobs to people throughout Central Virginia.

I am proud to have worked for B&W, as well as to have worked in the nuclear industry. That industry has played a profound role in the defense of our country as well as in providing clean energy for millions of American homes and businesses.

The fuel for this industry happens to be uranium, and we happen to have a world-class deposit of it here in our county. We would be foolish indeed not to take advantage of this God-given natural resource if it can be done safely. And that will be determined by the science-based study being conducted now by the Virginia Legislature.

Whatever he does other than write foolish letters (the one attacking me was babbling about Sherman’s march through Georgia), Mr. Dixon clearly cares nothing about the economic plight of our region. He appears immune to the pressure most of us, particularly as elected officials, feel for finding ways to improve the lot of those who are struggling to find better jobs and greater prosperity for their families. And he claims to have scientific knowledge so superior that he can toss off our study as unnecessary.

I have no idea who feeds and clothes Richard Dixon, but I doubt that either they or Mr. Dixon spend much time working to improve economic conditions in our country and region.

As I told Gov.-elect Bob McDonnell when he was in Danville, if the study shows that mining and milling can be done safely, let’s go for it sooner than later. People are desperate for better jobs and new opportunities.

FRED INGRAM
Supervisor, Gretna-Callands District

http://www2.godanriver.com/gdr/news/opinion/letters_to_the_editor/danville_letters/article/supervisor_defends_mining_stance/17117/

Uranium musings

Comment: Great Letter, don't depend on the NRC or the EPA to take care of you, they work for the nukes and they come on the scene once there is a disaster or a problem. Ban uranium mining and milling now!
By Published by The Editorial Board
Published: January 26, 2010

To the editor:

John Crane of the Register & Bee just wrote about incidents of nuclear contamination, quoting statements from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Environmental Protection Agency about what they will do after your air, water and land become contaminated from radioactive releases.

EPA and NRC stated the violators may face penalties and fines, so the governmental agencies walk away with money and the people of Pittsylvania County and the state would sit here with a destroyed environment from uranium mining and milling. I hope the people of Virginia and Pittsylvania County feel better knowing the EPA and NRC are going to look out for you.

I also hope people understand God gave us two great gifts: life and a clean environment.

It was just published last November that Virginia waterways ranked second dirtiest in the country.

Why are the environmental agencies letting this go on? It is because they are making big money off of fines and penalties? No! These agencies were created to protect us and our environment. Why are they letting this happen?

Just an opinion: Your state and federal governments might let uranium mining and milling operate for big tax revenue; they hope it will generate money to balance their wasteful budgets, thinking let’s allow uranium mining and milling, maybe that will fix Virginia’s $3 billion problem.

Are they trying to make you feel safe? Do you feel safe?

 If you have doubts, call or write your representatives and let them know you want to be protected not only now, but for future generations.

PHILLIP LOVELACE
Gretna, VA

http://www2.godanriver.com/gdr/news/opinion/letters_to_the_editor/danville_letters/article/uranium_musings/17380/

The Virginia Municipal League: Uranium mining

Comment:  Somewhat of a statement for the problems of uranium mining!  Demand our state to ban uranium mining and milling now, it has never, never been mined or milled safely anywhere in the world.  Most studies are done by Pro-Nuclear scientists paid for by the Nuclear industry or donations given by nuclear energy people!

Uranium mining

Uranium mining, milling and waste disposal of generated wastes poses health and environmental problems for
Virginians.

If these uranium mining activities are permitted in Virginia, VML is concerned that radiation and
other pollutants from mill tailings may occur, downstream water supplies may be contaminated, water supplies near uranium mines may disappear or be severely reduced, and the health and safety of uranium miners might be jeopardized.

VML supports the current moratorium on the mining and milling of uranium in Virginia until evidence demonstrates that it is safe for the environment and health of citizens.

Any studies must include, but not be limited to, modeling and simulation studies that show the consequences
of probable maximum precipitation storms on containment cells.

Read more:
http://www.vml.org/VTC/09VTC-PDF/09DecVTC_web.pdf

http://www.vml.org/About%20the%20league.html

Uranium Study Finally Gets a Green Light (Not Really, NAS is not excited about the payment option)

Comment: Well, this paper is owned by the nukes and you can read all the propaganda on their site. However, this blog has a problem with the paper calling people names who are just worried about the safety of our families with uranium mining and describing the good people of Southside "just went off the deep end" because of worries of pollution from modern uranium mining! The so called editorial should just sign the name of "Nukes for Uranium Mining!" Please review the comments; at least the people Lynchburg recognize this paper as bunch of Nukes!

The News & Advance
Published: December 6, 2009

Word came Thursday that Virginia’s uranium mining study has gotten the go-ahead from a top panel of the National Research Council, an arm of the National Academy of Sciences.

At last, science and rational thought seem to be prevailing in this decades-long dispute.

The National Research Council (NRC) is part of nation’s premier scientific organization. .

Since the early 1980s, Virginia has had a moratorium on mining and milling in place, due to concerns as to whether it could be done safely.

Virginia Uranium Inc., the company that is seeking to mine and mill the Coles Hill deposit, successfully lobbied the General Assembly last session to ask for the study, laying the groundwork for the eventual lifting of the moratorium.

Unfortunately, the Assembly didn’t appropriate any money to pay for the study, estimated to cost approximately $1.9 million.

That’s where diehard opponents of mining just went off the deep end in their battle against uranium mining.

Southside Concerned Citizens, chaired by Jack Dunavant of Halifax County, is one of the more rabid groups fighting Virginia Uranium and Coles family. They and their supporters called into question the impartiality of Virginia Tech, the energy research center and the National Academy of Sciences itself for being willing to conduct a study paid for with “tainted” money.

Reader Reactions
Voice your opinion by posting a comment.
Flag Comment Posted by packer2dogs on December 07, 2009 at 10:55 am
Somebody tell me where, anywhere, uranium has been mined safely with no effects to the local community.

Flag Comment Posted by Why the Hat on December 07, 2009 at 10:15 am
White House Is Urged to Help States With Nuclear Plants Stockpile Thyroid Drug: New York TIMES

WASHINGTON — After the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, Congress passed a law instructing the federal government to help states build bigger stocks of a simple, cheap drug to protect people near nuclear power plants in the event of an accident or terrorist attack.
But the 2002 law left a legal loophole allowing the White House to forgo distribution if officials found that there was a better way to prevent cancer than administering the thyroid drug, potassium iodide. And after years of delays, the Bush administration dropped the plan in 2007, saying evacuations would be a better alternative. [read: RUN FOR YOUR LIFE!]
The federal government already helps the 31 states with commercial nuclear plants stock pills for people within 10 miles, and some states have already distributed them in that zone. The provision sought to extend that radius to 20 miles.

Distributing them might also have a “misleading psychological effect,” he said, suggesting that the drug would protect against all health effects, rather than just the effect of radioactivity on the thyroid.

Well, nothing to worry about.

Flag Comment Posted by Martha on December 06, 2009 at 6:26 pm
Or, David, like something you would read on this comments site by some of the folks who post here, huh? Not you!

Flag Comment Posted by David on December 06, 2009 at 6:04 pm
The N&A describes the opposition as having gone off “off the deep end” and calls one of the opponents living in a neighboring county as “rabid”. I don’t know if I am for or against the mining in close-by Pittsylvania Co. yet—there are more things to consider than the N&A’s apparent whole-hearted endorsement. However, I have a feeling that the opponents have some points as well which perhaps the N&A should have considered, discussed and then dismissed if those points deserved. However, the name calling seems undignified in an editorial opinion—more like something you’d hear said on cable television by a talking head.

Flag Comment Posted by Why the Hat on December 06, 2009 at 8:45 am
—“the rabble rousing protestors” In the Middle?

First, it is disingenuous to equate nuclear power plants with uranium mining? Second, stop pretending that this mining operation will employ Southside Virginia. Third, if you are right with regard to the safety issue you should have no trouble “insuring” it through some reputable insurance company. (good luck!)

Flag Comment Posted by Why the Hat on December 06, 2009 at 6:02 am
The question of “can” something be done safely is easily answered. Certainly it can.

The question of “will” it be done safely is unanswerable. There in lies the problem.

Historically, uranium mining has been devastating to local communities. Increased cancer death and polluted and poisonous groundwater have resulted and then been abandoned by the corporate entities that caused the damage. The profits leave town and the federal government is left to clean up the mess with taxpayers money. The taxpayers are broke. The clean up never takes place. The localities wither and die as limited liability corporations move on to new locations. It starts all over again.

Read more at:
http://www2.newsadvance.com/lna/news/opinion/editorials/article/uranium_study_finally_gets_a_green_light/22019/

Uranium mining bad for environment

Comment:  Great Letter!

By Published by The Editorial Board
Published: November 30, 2009
Updated: December 1, 2009

To the editor:

I’m trying to figure out what an environmentally-friendly uranium mine tailings management operation and the environment have in common. Let me guess … how about nothing!

The National Academy of Sciences is considering whether to conduct a study to determine if uranium mining and milling can be done safely, but the scope of this study is still being worked on. I hope this recent little “rainfall” will be considered in their study, along with the damage from hurricanes we’ve had in the past.

I would also like to know where the facilities designed for severe weather are, let alone their distance to populated areas. I’m still trying to find one safe mining operation that hasn’t caused damage in that area. Also, consider how deep the pits will have to be to hold thousands of tons of ore and be covered with water to keep down the dust.

Here we go again — as far as regulations go — comparing farmers’ primitive ponds to a uranium mining operation. The government has more important things to do than be concerned about your fish pond. VUI has stated the amount of rainfall would not increase the amount of radiation already in rock. Well, I’ll be — I guess we’ll all be safe.

But if you take an egg and crack it open, it don’t look like it once did. Do you feel lucky? There also a few years from having a specific finalized design for this mining operation. Nothing like telling people it will be fine and not to worry, not knowing how they’re going to start. I myself don’t care to be a guinea pig in this science project. As the old saying goes, you can put sugar on a pile of manure and it might look sweet, but it’s still a pile of manure.

TIMOTHY F. STUART
Chatham, VA

http://www2.godanriver.com/gdr/news/opinion/letters_to_the_editor/danville_letters/article/uranium_mining_bad_for_environment/15976/

Deeds: Do study on uranium (Virginia)

Letter: Sen. Creigh Deeds

Deeds: Do study on uranium
Sunday, November 1, 2009

As a candidate for governor, I’ve laid out a comprehensive plan to meet our future energy needs and reduce Virginia’s dependence on foreign oil. This means pursuing a range of alternative and renewable energy options, ranging from wind power to clean coal technology to nuclear power. Investments in alternative and renewable energy will create jobs, attract the best and brightest minds to Virginia, and lead to a brighter future for the Commonwealth.

Right now we have a moratorium in Virginia on mining uranium, the fuel used in nuclear power plants. While I believe nuclear power should be part of a comprehensive approach to energy here in the commonwealth, I also strongly believe that the moratorium on uranium mining should remain in place until scientists determine that uranium mining does not pose a risk to the health and safety of any Virginian.

The climate of Southside Virginia poses particular challenges to the safe mining of uranium. Because it often rains, there is a risk that radioactive material produced by uranium mining and processing could leach into groundwater. If such leaching occurred, it could contaminate water supplies and endanger Virginians all over Southside, from Danville to Virginia Beach. I will not let this happen on my watch as governor.

Before considering uranium mining and processing here in Virginia, we should await the results of a nonpartisan, scientific study on its potential risks. As important as alternative energy sources are to our future, protecting the health and safety of all Virginians must remain our paramount concern.

As your governor, I will ensure that our energy future is not only plentiful and clean, but also safe for all Virginians.

Sen. Creigh Deeds
Bath County

http://www.martinsvillebulletin.com/article.cfm?ID=21163

Coal mines will kill Appalachia

Comment:  Yes, demand this country to stop blowing up our Mountains and never consider blowing up our hills for uranium!!
Sharon Baiocco
Albemarle County
Published: November 1, 2009

People from 158 countries united in demand for action to address the global crisis of climate change on the International Day for Climate Action Oct. 24. In Charlottesville an interfaith vigil was held to launch a local movement to end mountaintop removal and decrease U.S. reliance on coal power.

James Hansen, NASA’s top climate scientist, writes in a February op-ed to the Guardian and Observer newspapers (Feb. 15): “Coal is the single greatest threat to civilization and all life on our planet.” Coal accounts for 39 percent of the world’s carbon dioxide emissions, the major cause of global warming, according to the U.S. Dept. of Energy.

We live on the edge of Appalachia, where nearly 500 of the oldest mountains in the world that shelter one of the most biodiverse ecosystems on earth have been literally decapitated by coal mining. Together, these mountaintop removal sites comprise an area the size of Delaware.

MTR coal mining replaces forests and peaks with wastelands and sludge ponds, pollutes thousands of miles of streams and brings massive environmental damage to mountain communities. Pollution from coal plants produces dirty air, acid rain, contaminated land and water, childhood asthma, birth defects and respiratory diseases that take nearly 25,000 lives each year, according to “Dirty Air, Dirty Power,” a study for the group Clean the Air.

Charlottesville’s electricity comes from five mountaintop removal sites in West Virginia and Kentucky. We Virginians sit at the epicenter of the greatest source of U.S. pollution — coal and coal-fired power plants. The Southeastern states emit twice the pollution from power production as the Northeast, equal to the CO2 emissions of the third largest polluter in the world, Russia and its former satellites, according to treepower.org.

Yet MTR-mined coal provides less than 7 percent of our nation’s electricity, according to calculations from Appalachian Voices, presented Oct. 17 at “A New Energy Future” conference. We could conserve this amount nearly overnight through behavior change, education, responsible legislation and investment in renewable energy.

Urge Congress to enact Senate Bill 696, the Appalachia Restoration Act!

Urge Congrees to enact  House Bill 1310, the Clean Water Protection Act.

Press the Environmental Protection Agency to withhold permits for the 79 mountaintop removal sites now under review. Mountaintop removal is a deep, personal assault on those who love the Blue Ridge. It is ruthless desecration, and it must stop.

http://www2.dailyprogress.com/cdp/news/opinion/letters_to_the_editor/article/coal_mines_will_kill_appalachia/48259/

Uranium Mining and the Governors Race (in Virginia)

Votes and half-truths
The News & Record / October 22, 2009
Dear Viewpoint:

The Richmond Times-Dispatch published a letter last month entitled “Mined Uranium Is Harmless Mineral” written by William Schmidt, a long-time power company employee. We at SCC have found that Schmidt’s half truths and distortions are typical of many paid nuclear power proponents. Schmidt spoke about weeks of exposure, a U.N. study showing no increased risk of lung cancer in uranium miners, and alpha radiation being harmless. Here is what he didn’t tell us:

Alpha radiation lasts forever (millions of years) and it accumulates in the body.

“Uranium in groundwater leads to health hazards.”

“Normal functioning of kidney, brain, liver, heart and other systems can be affected by uranium exposure, because, in addition to being weakly radioactive, uranium is a toxic metal. Uranium is also a reproductive toxicant.”

“...absorbed uranium tends to bioaccumulate and stay for many years in bone tissue...”

“Alpha radiation is not dangerous to life unless it is inhaled or ingested - it is the most destructive form of ionizing radiation - and can cause any or all of the symptoms of radiation poisoning.”

“It is estimated that chromosome damage from alpha particles is 100 times greater than that caused by equivalent amounts of other radiation.”

“Not only do alphas themselves cause damage, but approximately equal ionization is caused by the recoiling nucleus after alpha emission, and this energy may in turn be especially damaging to genetic material.”

“Miners who worked in uranium filled mines have a very high incidence of cancer relative to the rest of the United States population. Through the Navajo workers and families noticed this in the 1950s, bureaucrats dragged their feet and companies ignored their warnings.”

SO MUCH FOR MINED URANIUM BEING A HARMLESS MINERAL!

(Quotes are from Wickipedia’s research of available worldwide information. Also note that our govt. won’t release much health information related to uranium for liability reasons.)

Let me repeat the above revelation concerning alpha radiation: Alpha radiation is dangerous to life when it is inhaled or ingested!

Well, Duh! Guess what Uranium mining does? It blasts and crushes solid bedrock into a fine powdery state, which creates the following problems:

1. How can the dust be confined to the site during the 40 year mining period?

2. How can a mountain of toxic, radioactive, powdery waste 200 ft. by 400 ft. wide and 14.2 miles long be kept out of our streams?

3. How can millions of cubic feet of deadly radon gas be confined to the site?

The answer to each of these questions is the same: it cannot be done.

It is also important to remember that aside from being radio-active in all its configurations, uranium is a toxic heavy metal which has proven to poison and genetically alter humans and animals.

Imagine the devastation to the farming community. Who would buy crops from tainted fields? Who would buy meat products raised on tainted fields or tainted waters? Imagine the blow to tourism.

Now guess who would be the first candidate for a high level (and low) uranium waste repository (dump)?

ABOUT THE ELECTION

Our Governor has the power to veto any legislation passed by the General Assembly; and that makes this year’s election so very important. Creigh Deeds is a past member of SCC who has studied the uranium mining issue in depth and has vowed to oppose any uranium mining legislation that threatens the health, safety and welfare of the people.

Sincerely,
Jack Dunavant, P.E., Chairman
Southside Concerned Citizens, Inc.


Read whole letter click below:
http://www.thenewsrecord.com/index.php/opinion/article/votes_and_half-truths

What would Hurt bring to the race?

Comment: Go Perriello!

By Published by The Editorial Board
Published: October 18, 2009

Republicans in the Fifth District are going to have plenty of choices when they pick a candidate for the 2010 race against Rep. Tom Perriello.

Virginia General Assembly drew the Fifth District for a Republican, and the GOP has wanted the seat back ever since the State Board of Elections confirmed that Perriello had squeaked out a 727-vote win over Virgil Goode last fall.

The conventional wisdom is that Perriello’s win was a fluke, but John McCain and Sarah Palin won more votes in the Fifth District than Goode did. For that matter, Goode didn’t do as well as the Virginia marriage amendment in 2006.

So, Goode may have been slipping and no one noticed.

To Perriello’s credit, he has voted against president’s first budget, come out against a new assault weapons ban, worked hard on veterans care issues and publicly declared that he would not vote for public funding of abortion in a health care reform bill — all stances that show is he far from the Nancy Pelosi lapdog that his harshest critics claim he is.

The Republicans who want to beat Perriello know he is a tough campaigner and that the political landscape may be completely different next year. No one can say how strong the economy will be or if Americans will like the final health care reform bill that emerges from Congress.

Robert Hurt, of Chatham, has jumped into this tumultuous political environment, recently announcing his intention to run for the Fifth District seat. For most of us, the 2010 election is a long way off. For the GOP, it’s right around the corner.

Hurt has solid conservative credentials and has sponsored common sense legislation in the General Assembly dealing with criminal justice issues. He is a smart, personable candidate and will no doubt work hard if he gets the nomination.

But Hurt has never had to run against anyone like Perriello. When Hurt speaks, he sometimes sounds more like a lawyer instead of a man who happens to practice law.

His father Henry’s involvement with Virginia Uranium Inc. could backfire on him, as could his handling of his dog biting someone in Chatham.

That may sound trivial, but in politics, everything is fair game.

Just as Republicans are motivated to unseat Perriello, Democrats want to hold onto the Fifth District seat, so no matter who the GOP picks next year, expect a lot of out-of-town money and national attention on this race.

We don’t know what kind of candidate the GOP is looking for, so there is no way to know what chance Hurt has to win the nomination. If we thought the Republicans wanted a candidate from the Dan River Region, Hurt would probably be a shoe-in. But all we know for sure is both sides want to win, no matter what.

Share This:
http://www2.godanriver.com/gdr/news/opinion/editorials/danville_editorials/article/what_would_hurt_bring_to_the_race/14711/

Coles Hill neighbors matter, too (Uranium Mining)

Comment: Kilgore does people matter to you or is it just money rules your world! Are you so prideful that when you made the comment: "its way out away from anything" that you did not see the houses, the children, the cows, the schools and the farms! No to uranium mining and milling! This is a great letter, Deborah!

Coles Hill neighbors matter, too

Wednesday, September 16, 2009 9:33 AM EDT

On Thursday, Sept. 3, as I sat down to read my local paper, there was an article: "Virginia Uranium to fund state study."

In the article Mr. Kilgore, head of the Coal and Energy Commission, told of his fly-over the Coles Hill site.

He stated, "It's way out away from anything."

Well, how can he state that when I live just over a mile from the site?

He might not consider us anything, but we are.

We have our homes, jobs, family here.

My husband and I are at retirement age and don't want to pick up and start over.

I would like him to give me an answer to my 7-year-old grandson's question of how we will move his tree house that his papa bear built, which is cemented in the ground?

I personally would love to know how to answer his question.

He also has many more questions about uranium.

Consider the lives of everyone at stake.

Who wants to live in a ghost town.

We've been to a West Virginia mining town; we know what it looks like.

We've already had high lead and zinc levels in our water. We couldn't use our water for over six months.

I didn't even want my dogs and cats to drink the water. That is so sad.

I guess money talks.

Please don't say we aren't anything. There are a lot of families here just like mine.

Deborah N. Gross
Sheva, VA

http://www.wpcva.com/articles/2009/09/16/chatham/opinion/opinion01.txt

U.S. Uranium and Nuclear Power Outlook (Call To Action:editorial)

Comment: The editorial by Gregg Vickrey was inspired by the following article:
U.S. Uranium and Nuclear Power Outlook: 2008 - 2030, Presented to:National Research Council of the National Academies, Presented by:Tom Pool, Chairman, International Nuclear, November 18, 2008. The NAS will be given a chance to study the technical side of Uranium Mining in Virginia because VUI or Santory will pay for the study requested by Terry Kilgore:Del. Terry Kilgore said he has written a letter asking the National Academy of Sciences to proceed with a study on whether the 119 million pounds of uranium on 3,000 acres in PittsylvaniaCounty can be mined safely:>http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/ap/57285647.html : Va. firm seeking to mine uranium to pay for study)

A CALL TO ACTION!

An Editorial by Gregg Vickrey, Chairman, The Alliance
September 6, 2009, concerning the:

U.S. Uranium and Nuclear Power Outlook: 2008 - 2030
Presented to: National Research Council of the National Academies
Presented by:Tom Pool Chairman, International Nuclear
November 18, 2008

Although I could point out all of the obvious errors in this completely bias report BY THE NUCLEAR INDUSTRY TO THE NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL of the NATIONAL ACADEMIES (NAS?), I will only address the section entitled: "Opposition"

This one section of the report serves to prove that the pro nuke, uranium mining & milling bunch, are frightened of, no, TERRORIZED by, the rational people that oppose their for profit slaughter of human beings (including children), animals and fish, and the environment all over the world. This section is a deliberate attempt to subliminally effect the emotions of the reader.

It attempts to make anybody opposed to nuke power, uranium mining and milling, seem like a group of paranoid fanatics. It is meant to gain pro-nuke, pro-uranium mining & milling followers by deliberately creating the mind set: "if I oppose this, I will be labeled and vilified. Worse, I will be considered stupid (remember the old story: "The Emperor's new clothes"?).

It is marketing and public relations at it's best. In professional terms, it's called "branding". Although typical branding is done to create positive "top of mind awareness" in the mind of the consumer - in this case, the NRC of the NA (NAS?) - this marketing, PR drive is determined to create a negative impression of anyone that dares oppose the for profit corporations as represented by Tom Pool, Chairman, International Nuclear.

So, without further ado, please let me address the picture that he paints of the "opposition":

In Tom's own words: "Most opposition can be Characterized as":

– Lack of Understanding (Fear of the Unknown): This is true. Based on the problematic history of nuclear power, uranium mining and milling world wide, the current problems and issues (more are discovered every day), the lack of any new technology that significantly improves the probability of successful nuclear power generation, uranium mining and milling, and the fact that uranium mining and milling has never been done any where in the world with the climate and population density of Virginia, creating a HUGE UNKNOWN that can NEVER be addressed, except as theory - making Virginia the biggest potential experiment in nuke energy fuel production EVER in the history of the United States - we , the people that rationally oppose this boondoggle, proudly lay claim to NOT UNDERSTANDING WHY OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS, IN OFFICE TO LOOK AFTER OUR WELL BEING, NOT THE PROFITS OF CORPORATIONS HELL BENT TO TAKE OVER OUR LANDS AND TRAMPLE ON OUR INALIENABLE RIGHTS, PUSH THE AGENDA OF FOR PROFIT CORPORATIONS (even foreign corporations) INSTEAD OF LOOKING OUT FOR THE PEOPLE THEY WERE ELECTED TO, AND ARE PAID TO, REPRESENT.

Yes, we are fearful that our elected officials are so beholding to for profit (even foreign) corporations that they will NEVER listen to the will of the people. They (the politicians) claim that this is "business" as usual (taking money from corporations to pay for their election campaigns). I say IT'S TIME TO CHANGE THE WAY WE DO BUSINESS!

We, the opposition, do not need to look very hard to find all of the reasons that nuke power, uranium mining and milling, should not be done! OUR POLITICIANS NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT IT IS NOT UP TO THEM TO DECIDE IF NUKE POWER, URANIUM MINING & MILLING SHOULD BE DONE. This decision is up to the people. Their ONLY job is to implement the will of the people. If they cannot handle this simple task, it is time for us - THE PEOPLE - to vote them out of office! We need politicians that KNOW they do not work for corporations, domestic and/or foreign! They need to understand, they work for us! Just because WE elected them to office, WE did not give them Carte' blanch to do whatever they want to do. WE also did not agree to serve THEM.

THE CORPORATIONS and THEIR PUPPETS, our elected officials, HAVE GONE OUT OF THEIR WAY TO STIFLE THOSE WHO DISAGREE WITH THEM. They call us names, they emotionally and defensively challenge our facts without providing any new or better information. Our politicians hide behind questionable "studies" so that they can justify serving their corporate masters. They make stop overs and declare that a proposed, potentially lethal to millions uranium mine & mill is "far away from everything"! They (the politicians) expect you to accept this declaration as an item of fact. Never mind that a look at any map will give truth to their lies! They refuse to take a stand on the most important issue that Virginia has ever faced. There has not been an assault like this on the people's rights since the war of Northern Aggression! Our politicians have become the "bully" on the beach.

• Connection With Nuclear Weapons: DUH! Uranium is processed into weapons grade material to create nuclear bombs! Depleted uranium (the spent, or used up uranium power rods from domestic nuclear power plants) is used to coat bombs and the ordinance used in conventional weapons (riffles, hand guns, etc.). These depleted uranium bunker busters, and gun ordinance that our soldiers carry, have been reported to have been, and continue to be, used extensively in the USA's middle east wars - Iraq & Afghanistan. Our military is coming home with the effects of this low level radiation poisoning as we speak. That is, if they're lucky enough to come home at all. If we should be fighting these wars or not is a subject for another discussion. As for a "connection with nuclear weapons", there can be no doubt.

Our Federal, State, and Local Governments (our elected servants) would like for us to believe that there is no danger from the nuke industry at any phase of it. Do the minimum of research and you will find that this is absolutely not true, A LIE! They (the politicians that work for the foreign and domestic corporations) would like for us to believe that we need nuclear energy to solve our domestic energy problems in terms of production of energy, and cost for that energy. They tout nuke energy as renewable, clean and affordable. This is THE BIGGEST LIE! Our existing nuclear energy production facilities (nuke plants) are at, and/or, reaching the end of their safe operating life cycles. There are new nuke plants on the table, but none of them are in, or anywhere close, to the beginning of construction. Why? (1) Private banks will not finance them because of the risks (financially, environmentally, and long term return on investment) without 100% loan guarantees from OUR federal government. That would be TRILLIONS of DOLLARS, our (the tax payers) dollars, invested in a non-renewable, 20 year max resource. (2) Although the industry has tried, there is no "cookie cutter" physical plant plan to mass produce nuclear power generation plants. ALL nuke plants must be individually engineered (meaning no economy of scale = MORE DOLLARS TO BUILD, including the inevitable cost over-runs) per location. Of the 30 or so plans currently under consideration, none of the future nuke plant blueprints have been approved. They simply do not meet the requirements of the authorizing governmental agencies.

So, if our existing nuke plants will all be shut down in a very few number of years, and new nuke plants, even if authorized to be built starting today, cannot come on line for at least 10 - 30 years, providing that they can get financing (which they can't - that's why some power companies in the USA are increasing their prices for electricity - they need to build a fund), why do we need uranium mining and milling at Cole's Hill or any other place in America? Why is the USA selling off excess uranium? We know why the USA imports uranium! It's to keep the bad guys from getting it. This is why Russia has such a lucrative deal with the USA to provide us with around 20% of our uranium needs. We need to corral their uranium stock piles to keep them from going to unfriendlies (to the United States) that will use the uranium to develop nuke and depleted uranium weapon capabilities. This is our (our government, not necessarily representing the people) nuke power problem with countries like Iran. They claim to want a domestic source of nuke energy, but do they? We (our government) claims to want a domestic nuke energy program, but do we (them, the corporation's paid for politicians)? In light of all of the other, truly sustainable, truly "green" Tree Hugger options for domestic energy - including the idea of pouring the nuke trillions of dollars into decentralizing our power supplies by investing in property by property energy independence through solar, wind, etc., that could then provide excess power into our centralized grid - why would we (the people) put up with the archaic, so yesterday, anti people and environment methods of power production that will give us they same old, same old? Sounds like a recipe for functional obsolescence. The same functional obsolescence that killed our auto industry. Something is NOT right. But, I'm sure that, as Tom promotes, we are too stupid to figure it out. After all, a bunch of ignorant rubes should not have anything to do with running the country. Leave that to the governmental experts!

• Chernobyl & Three Mile Island More "Lack of Understanding" and "Fear of the Unknown"? You bet! The ignorant masses, otherwise known worldwide as the "Opposition", do not understand how Chernobyl & Three Mile Island could have happened in light of governmental and corporate assurance that all was well, that melt downs could not possibly happen! In the case of Three Mile Island, the corporate lackeys (otherwise known as our elected government officials) led us to believe that there couldn't possibly be any danger because Three Mile Island was/is extremely well regulated and controlled. Inspections would/will surely find any potential problem(s) and make sure that it never causes any serious situations. Less serious problems, based on what is allowed to be a problem by regulations, will (and do) happen, but these problems will only effect a small number of people, lands, and water ways. If these people are scared, they can move - nobody is stopping them. Nobody is forcing them to live in the proximity of a major life threatening catastrophe waiting to happen. The people living in the area knew the risks - there was plenty of debate with the stupid opposition - why did they stay? I'm sure (as Walter Coles Jr. said to me in one of VUI's private presentations) that there was a boom in the real estate prices when uranium, I mean, nuke industry people moved in to fill well paying jobs. Why didn't they sell then? Idiots! I guess they just didn't understand! Guess they're not afraid enough of what "they don't know" to do the smart thing and leave. Because information about Three Mile Island, and every other nuke power plant and uranium mining and milling operation all over the world is readily available to anyone that really wants to know the truth. The pro nukers, miners & millers are not responsible for the ignorance of the masses! Their ignorance is proof as to why corporations, through their elected governing officials, should rule.

– Prejudice: BRAVO! What a GREAT MARKETING, PUBLIC RELATIONS WORD to label the "Opposition" with! The word "prejudice" brings to mind ignorant people that are racist and more. Think "Neo-Nazis, Rednecks, Hicks, Stupid, Country Bumpkins, Politically Incorrect (OH NO! NOT POLITICALLY INCORRECT!), etc.

The pro nuke, uranium mining and milling people will try to convince you that anyone opposed to them, you know, the prejudice people that do not want nuke power, and by extension uranium mining and milling, and because, for some reason we are opposed to progress, are just, well, prejudice. Wish I would have thought of this for our opposition campaign! But then, I don't have a Million Dollar Plus (provided by foreign corporations) PR and Marketing budget. If I had thought of this label, I would have said that the pro folks are prejudice against truly sustainable, healthy electric power generation. Oh well! They thought of it first. Guess I'll just try to convince folks to be "discerning" when looking at the issues.

Mystified: I am indeed mystified! I think it's "magic" the way the pro-nuclear, pro-uranium mining and milling folks twist and ignore the facts. I find it fascinating that they always come up with the money to get their way. I must suspend my disbelief when watching the slight of hand that happens when their lobbyists lobby (that's what they do. A lobbyist's job is to get an elected public servant to do a corporations will) OUR elected officials. Perhaps the corporations have hired an untold number of hypnotists? I can see it now... the room is dark, all eyes are on the lobbyist/hypnotist... the smell of money is wafting through the room (you know, for ambiance), and the lobbyist/hypnotist says: " You are all very greedy..., you all love money and power (rumor has it that you can't hypnotize someone to do anything that they are not already inclined to do)... you will all vote for a "study"..., you will all vote for uranium mining and milling in Virginia... When you awake at the count of three, you will not experience any remorse... You will not worry or think about your lack of personal fact finding... despite the fact that you have many personal aides that could do this for you... at tax payer expense..., Tax payers are only there to provide money for your wants and needs ..., You will be relaxed, happy, and rich... 1.., 2..., 3.....

– Political Positioning: You are smart people, despite what Tom thinks! Need I say anything more on this topic? If your answer is yes, I still think that you're smart, but a glutton for punishment.

– Over Reaction: I know that many people wrestle with this. What is the "proper" amount of reaction? How should it be expressed? When is it "under reaction"? How can we possibly know in this age of "blip" communication, where we might be misunderstood? What is the "proper" means to react? Who will give us the answers to these profound questions? Are the pro-nuke, uranium mining & milling folks causing us to "react"? If not, who is? Why have I never thought about these issues until VUI/Santoy/Virginia Energy Resources, INC. (whatever they call themselves this week) expressed the desire to make Billions of Dollars by mining and milling uranium in Pittsylvania County? Do the pro-uranium mining & milling folks have the answers? Didn't Walter Cole's say that HE would decide if uranium is mined and milled in Pittsylvania County (and the rest of VA by extension) publicly when he was quoted in many newspapers throughout Virginia as saying "if it can't be done safely, it won't be done"? Did I get short changed on information regarding Walter's qualifications to make this decision for the rest of us? Henry Hurt is quoted as saying: "If we can put a man on the moon, surely we can figure out how to safely mine (and mill) uranium (in the Commonwealth)". I know Henry is smart, but isn't this two different things? Isn't Tom's presentation to the NRC to the NA (NAS?) full of opinion and hyperbole, designed to discredit anyone with questions, never mined opposed to, nuke power, uranium mining & milling? Somebody! Please help me to react appropriately to this demeaning, paid for by the nuke industry, presentation! I'm at a loss... of knowledge as to the correct amount of reaction I should have to this insulting presentation, and the lack of indignation from MY elected officials, and... money to present real facts by people that are rightfully opposed to nuke energy, uranium mining and milling (STRONG PRESENTATIONS WITHOUT APOLOGY!).

I don't have a Million Dollar Plus marketing & Public Relations budget. I only have this one little blog and the goodwill (if I become a "story") of the media. Perhaps Tom will help me to react appropriately...

– Media Sensationalism: MY EXPERIENCE IS THAT THE "MEDIA" TYPICALLY DOES NOT "SENSATIONALIZE"!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Except for editorial opinion pieces that can make, or break a movement that "they" don't approve of (let the "media" - Danville Register & Bee - figure out what I mean by this). Typically, the "media" reports. That's their job. You will always have young, cub reporters (think John Crane) that, if there is nothing newsworthy that's sensational, will create sensation in how he chooses to report. This "killing of the Golden Goose" is how these young reporters, to their chagrin, think that they can create a "story" worth printing. Anyone that has undergone "how to deal with the media 101" in corporate training knows to watch out for this. Even so, sometimes you get blind-sided by an overzealous, trying-to-be-up-and-comer reporter.

It's up to the "warring factions" to make news, and "sensationalize" a subject. The media coverage of dissenting voices is Tom's topic in this presentation to the NRC of the NA (NAS?). My opinion is that Tom is warning the "media". He's telling them to print only the pro-nuke, pro-uranium mining and milling perspectives or risk the wrath of the "powers that be".

Unless, of course, they are favorably reporting the pro side of things! Some "media" might be happy with that. Unfortunately, the era of true investigative reporting has gone the way of the dinosaur. It's much more cost effective to "stir the pot" than to truly dig in and uncover the facts! If this is not true, let the "media" prove me wrong. Let the "media" not make decisions about content based on advertising dollars. Let the "media" prove that "news" and "investigative journalism" is based on issues independent of ratings, readership, advertising (real or potential) dollars, and political influence. Let the "media" win back the respect that it once had. This is the ONLY way that the "media" can counter the charge of "media sensationalism" leveled by the pro-nuke, pro-uranium mining & milling industry.

– Mistrust of Government Regulators: Let's see... where to begin... No matter which side of the aisle you are on, all of us can list a multitude of sins (some listed in this editorial) that cause us, as individuals and groups of people, to not trust "The Government". Why is that? Why is it that the only constituency that does trust "The Government" has names that end in INC. and LLC? Could it be that these "people" know something that we don't?

Look, there are plenty (a majority) of companies and corporations, both for-profit and not-for-profit, that are "good corporate citizens". Indeed, non-profits (such as The Alliance, CELDF, SCC, United Way, Kids & Kritters to name a few) could not exist without the American corporate structure. There would also be many (vastly many) jobs that would not exist without small, for-profit enterprises. But, let's be realistic! None of these not-for-profit and small for-profit corporations can dictate "government regulations" like national & international corporations can.
Surprise! Our elected and appointed government officials DO NOT dictate "government regulations" So, who does dictate "government regulations"?

Big corporations. Not local Mom & Pops. Really HUGE corporations. The kind of corporations that put local (including regional and some state wide) businesses out of business! These conglomerates, often financed from foreign (not American) resources, such as VUI/Santoy/Virginia Energy Resources - a wholly owned CANADIAN corporation - have the financial resources to buy anything they want! Including our government. How do they do this? They have a multi-prong approach (just go to the Canadian stock exchange to see what Walter & company is up to). They promote their cause publicly through the media and charitable donations. In fact, they put millions of dollars (don't believe for one minute the "small company" poverty plea of VUI, "America") into "Public Education, Public Relations, Advertising, and Marketing campaigns".

They hire the best, high powered lobbyists that they can afford (trust me, they have the best). These lobbyists write the proposed legislation. Remember, it was Whitt Clement, Brother-In-Law to Walter Coles, (the man that has taken it upon himself to decide if uranium mining & milling is "safe" on his property - he owns the biggest share of the ore that, when mined & milled, will pay him, at minimum, Millions. The ore is estimated to be worth Billions as long as there is a domestic world wide nuke energy market for it. No wonder VUI's private presentations focus on the nuclear industry instead of the local issue of uranium mining & milling. In fact, you really can't get them - VUI - to talk much about the local issue of uranium mining and milling) and a renowned Richmond lobbyist that convinced VA Senator Frank Wagner to include uranium mining and milling in his 2006 energy bill, later adopted by the Governor of Virginia. We (the people) have been under the threat of this scourge on humanity ever since. We, the people, NEVER asked for this controversy. Walter Coles and his investors forced this controversy on us, against our will. They have manipulated the General Assembly, the Coal & Energy Commission (not an elected panel, but an appointed panel responsible to, and reporting to no one. So, what's in this for them?), and the media to achieve their goals. The nuke industry, in full support of uranium mining and milling, manipulates through presentations like Tom's to the national government, and appointed governmental bodies such as the NRC of the NA (NAS?), and the media. The nuke industry also forces it's propaganda on unwitting citizens through paid advertising and the intimidation... I mean manipulation... of the "media".

Have I mentioned that industries such as nuke energy and mining of every kind - including uranium mining and milling - are the ones that write the regulations? Sad, but true. Our government (the elected people that supposedly represent you and me) consider the industry people the experts in the field. Therefore, our elected officials abdicate their responsibilities to protect us poor dumb citizens to the very people that are in the business to make money. This is where the idea of "cost benefit analysis" comes from. Big corporations analyze their potential financial exposure concerning breaking their own "regulations". The regulations that they had their elected officials put in place. If their analysis determines that it is more profitable to "break the regulations", also known as committing an illegal act, they will do so. After all, they know the rules (that they made) and repercussions much better than anyone else. It's their business to know!

This finally brings us to the idea that people have a "mistrust" of government regulators. Duh! Why should we trust government regulators when they work for the very corporations that they are supposed to regulate. At best, they will find wrong doing and impose the sanctions that the regulated industry has approved, creating a profitable (but not healthy) situation for all (of them) concerned. Even if a regulatory agency wanted to do its job for the people, they DO NOT have the money. Want proof? Take a look at how many inspectors there are, per state, and how many bridges per state they are required to "regulate", inspect, keep safe for the citizens. It makes me cringe every time I cross one. It's not the inspector's fault, it's the government's fault. It's not the government's fault, it's the people's fault. In this case, the "people" does not include corporations.

Corporations are only "people" when it comes to "their" (whoever "they" are) rights. Funny how corporation rights always trump people's rights. Its like corporations have the same number of votes that every counted-in-the-census human being has, times two! Now we're back to mysticism. I think this has something to do with the smell of money in the room whenever big corporations influence... I mean talk to their... I mean our, elected government officials.

Trust the regulators? I think not! We, THE PEOPLE, have plenty of reason to not trust them.

So, the call to action? I challenge every person (not corporations, but including their elected officials) to do the following:

• Ask yourself what YOU are doing to learn the facts?
• Ask yourself what YOU are doing to make a difference in the debate?
• Ask yourself how much respect you have for someone that deliberately remains ignorant of the issues in today's world of information technology, yet espouses their opinion as if it's fact?
• Ask yourself how much respect you have for an industry (the entire nuke industry from uranium mining and milling to power plants and depleted uranium ordinance production) that spends Millions of Dollars to control your government, your media, and the very thoughts that you think? An industry that would allow, indeed sponsor, Tom Pool, Chairman, International Nuclear, to speak on its behalf? An industry that demeans and ridicules, demonizes and criminalizes, any PERSON that disagrees with them. Ask yourself, are they looking out for your best interest, or theirs?
• Ask yourself how you really feel about the corporate owned politicians that sanction this abuse of you and your family? Ask yourself if you want a country ruled by BULLIES?
• Ask yourself what are YOU doing to educate the, according to Tom Pool, Chairman, International Nuclear, ignorant masses (my words, his by inference)?
• Ask yourself, are YOU willing to do anything at all, one way or the other? If not, don't think that you have any right to rejoice or complain no matter what happens. You deserve to get what your sowing reaps. If so, and I'm referring to REAL human beings, NOT corporations, THEN DO IT. Thinking about it doesn’t count. DO SOMETHING! Doing something DOES NOT include living in the past, using this crisis to remind all concerned of past glories. When you do this, you make yourself look foolish and irrelevant. It causes people that may be on your side to distance themselves from you. It hurts your cause. It doesn’t matter what you've done in the past, or how long your family has lived in the South. What matters is your RELEVANT contribution to the issues at hand. Doing something DOES NOT mean seeking media attention and glory for yourself. This is not productive to your cause. The issues are important, not the people that deliver the message.
• If you do something, understand that YOU are doing it. Take pride in that! Do not rely on groups (such as The Alliance or SCC), or any one individual, to take action for you. Take personal responsibility for the outcome of this and any other issue that you feel is important.
• Participate in YOUR government. The surest way to take back our inherent, and rightful, governing authority is to participate in the process. Attend your Town & City council meetings. Attend your County Board of Supervisors meetings. Attend your School Board meetings. Attend your Zoning Commission meetings. LET YOUR VOICE BE HEARD! There is a saying that "all politics is local". If you do not regain control of the polotics at the local level, you will never stand a chance of demanding your constitutional rights at the state and federal level. The pro-nuke, pro-uranium mining and milling corporations may have a LOT of dollars to vote with, but THE PEOPLE still go to the ballot box. Ultimately it is We, The People, that allow these travesties, these corruptions of our way of life to happen. It is up to each of us to take a stand, to participate, to own our futures. To say loud and clear, I claim MY right to live free of the corruption that has become prevalent in MY country, the United States of America.
• Recognize that our government has become corrupted by mega national and international corporations. Recognize that YOU have a right to live in this country free of the abuse and corruption in YOUR government that is being caused by these corporations.

Are YOU listening? Are you THINKING?

Will you heed this call to action?

http://dels.nas.edu/besr/docs/Pool.pdf
U.S. Uranium and Nuclear Power Outlook: 2008 - 2030
Presented to:National Research Council of the National Academies
Presented by:Tom Pool
Chairman, International Nuclear
November 18, 2008

Don’t learn about mining from industry

By Published by The Editorial Board
Published: August 25, 2009

To the editor:

The column, “Educate yourself about radiation,” (Aug. 16, page A11), convinced me to take that step and I checked the Internet site of the Central Virginia Community College in Lynchburg to see if I could enroll in the course which the author had taken.

After searching for a half-hour, I telephoned the college and asked for information on that specific course, giving the name from the article. The person with whom I spoke asked to let her do some checking and call me back.

The person called back and said all they could find was that in 2006 there was a weekend workshop for teachers at the college conducted by Areva that included that subject. I had to assume that was the course referred to in the column.

Areva has one of its plants located in Lynchburg, and the corporate Web site proclaims: “World leader in the design and construction of nuclear power plants, and the supply of fuel, maintenance and modernization services.” Also stated is the fact that Areva has almost a 40 percent market share in the manufacture of fuel for PWR and BWR reactors.

Since we are to educate ourselves, apparently from industry sources such as Areva, on the dangers of uranium mining, may I recommend, from the World Nuclear Association Symposium Proceedings, a technical paper entitled, “Waste Management in Uranium Mining Industry” by Stan Frost, who was, at the time of presentation, a vice president of Cameco Corp., Canada. Cameco is major producer of, among other products, nuclear power plant fuel.

Another such educational source is the copy of the Cameco corporate newspaper, “The Community Forum,” for October 2007. This discusses the discovery of uranium and arsenic subsurface ground contamination at the Port Hope, Ontario, Canada, uranium hexafluoride conversion plant. It was proposed the groundwater would be pumped to the surface and decontaminated and some contaminated soil would be removed. Uranium mining does not ruin air and water “in a modern, properly managed uranium mining and milling operation”?

After reading these educational sources which bear dates in the last 10 years and which certainly did not take place in, to quote the column, “unregulated mining activities that occurred 30 to 50 years ago,” I find that education by uranium mining sources does not at all reassure me about uranium mining and milling taking place in Pittsylvania County.

HILDRED SHELTON
Danville

http://www2.godanriver.com/gdr/news/opinion/letters_to_the_editor/danville_letters/article/dont_learn_about_mining_from_industry/13433/

Lead levels OK in water near uranium deposit

Comment: Question, why did it take the Virginia Department of Health so long to test the water? They tested the water 6-7 months later and now the lead is gone. Water moves and the lead were washed down the stream. The leads level was up after the drilling of bore holes. According to local uranium company, they have plugged the holes. Now the Gross's water is okay which is good but this happen 7 months ago and it took the Virginia Department of Health, 7 months to check the water! Why, will it take the state of Virginia that long to test the rivers after a hurricane dumps 21 inches of rain on a uranium-tailing pond? Will it take the state of Virginia, 7 months to check on the open pit mining and the radon releases? Does this make us feel safe in Virginia for future uranium mining? NO! Demand the local leaders to ban uranium mining now!

By TIM DAVIS/Star-Tribune EditorWednesday, July 8, 2009 9:41 AM EDT

Allen Gross can drink his water again, but still wonders if exploratory drilling for uranium caused the lead that tainted his well.

After repeated pleas, the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors voted in April to ask the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Virginia Department of Health to investigate high lead levels around the Coles Hill uranium deposit.

According to Gross, the health department took samples from his well on June 24. He received the results July 1.

The first test showed lead at 0.08 parts per billion. In the second, lead was "undetectable."

The maximum lead allowed for drinking water is 15 parts per billion.

Concerns about well testing around the uranium deposit, about six miles northeast of Chatham, were first raised in March.

Virginia Uranium Inc. was required to collect and test water samples at four ponds and four residential wells as part of an exploratory drilling permit from the Virginia Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy in 2007.

It also was required to monitor 15 locations in surrounding creeks and tributaries for heavy metals.

Although not required by the permit, the company sought permission to test wells at homes within about a mile of the site to determine the general water quality in the vicinity of Coles Hill.

More than 80 wells were voluntarily tested.

Gross, who lives on Motley Road, about a mile from Coles Hill, said when the first test was done in 2007 the lead in his well water was 2.8 ppb.

When the last test was done late last year, it had risen to 17.9.

Gross has been drinking bottled water since January.

Virginia Uranium said it is not responsible for high lead levels.

The company released the following statement:

"In response to media reports of concerns over lead levels in some residential wells in the general vicinity of the Coles Hill uranium deposit, we have reviewed the data and can state categorically that our permitted drilling activities have nothing to do with these lead levels."

"Wells with reported lead levels in the water are all in geologically and hydrologically isolated areas that are unaffected by activities conducted by our company.

"While none of the residential wells are located in a watershed that could be affected by our activities, the simple laws of gravity and hydrology preclude water running uphill - whether in the ground or on the surface - as it would have to do to reach these sites."

Virginia Uranium pointed out high lead levels may be caused by any number of possibilities, including household plumbing.

Gross is convinced Virginia Uranium's exploratory drilling contaminated his well and endangered his family's health.

"It is strange my water was safe to drink before they started drilling, unsafe during the drilling, and safe again now that they've stopped and sealed the holes," he told supervisors Monday night.

"Maybe the good Lord is trying to show us all what will happen if we allow uranium mining and milling to come to our county," he said.

Gross urged supervisors to ban uranium.

"You can do it if you want to," he said.

Phillip Lovelace of Gretna agreed, calling the decision a "no-brainer."

"The guy's water was fine before the test drilling, and it got worse when they were drilling. How hard is that to see?" he said.

Lovelace urged supervisors to continue testing for heavy metals in water around the uranium deposit.


"Let's go to the bottom of it," he said. "Let's see where it came from."

tim.davis@chathamstartribune.com
434-432-2791

http://www.wpcva.com/articles/2009/07/08/chatham/news/news50.txt

Nuclear energy neither clean nor safe

Comment: People in Canada do not want uranium mining or nuclear power! Is that the reason for Canada to come south to take America's uranium? Canada, we are not welcoming your uranium mining, we do not want uranium mining in Virginia or anywhere else in America!

July 03, 2009

Re:Nuclear delay called risky,

July 1

Several assumptions need to be corrected. Canada's energy mix is 59.8 per cent hydro, 16.1 per cent coal, 11.6 per cent nuclear, 6.7 per cent oil, 4.9 per cent natural gas and 0.9 per cent renewables.

Hydro will continue to produce the same amount of electricity every year; however its proportion of the energy mix will decline due to net increases in demand. Wind generates power 30 per cent of the time, solar 20 per cent and other renewables 30 to 50 per cent.

Replacing all nuclear and fossil fuel energy sources with renewables by 2040 would result in this mix: 47.2 per cent hydro; 13.8 per cent wind; 7.2 per cent solar; 5.5 per cent tidal/wave; 23.1 per cent geothermal; 3.2 per cent other renewables, such as biomass and waste water.

This is a manageable expectation, especially in Ontario where we have made a commitment through the Green Energy Act. The GTA has made significant progress in both renewable sources of energy and energy conservation.

Renewable energy is clean, safe and cost effective. The same cannot be said about nuclear.

Uranium mining is not clean; the transport of radioactive materials is hazardous; waste management solutions do not ensure safety; and nuclear weapons proliferation is a serious threat.

Amy Collard, Natural Resources Critic, Green Party of Canada

http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/660100

Visitors didn't get entire uranium story

Comment: A great letter and I do not think any money in the world that I could destroy my home, my neighbors home for the greed of uranium money!

Wednesday, July 1, 2009 10:21 AM EDT

This is in response to Glenn Giles' recent letter, "Area residents visit uranium site." I, along with others, did as Mr. Giles did and contacted Virginia Uranium Inc. (VUI) for their "briefing" as they like to call it. I also have done little else but study this matter since it was brought to my attention some 18 months ago. I believe it is only sensible to listen to all sides (there are normally more than two sides to any issue) and draw your own intelligent conclusions.

What, exactly, did Mr. Giles expect to hear during his visit to VUI's offices and the Coles Hill site, except the absolute best-case scenario about uranium mining and milling when there is so much money for them to make at stake?

Did he expect to hear the truth about the illness, destruction and devastation that has been left in the wake of uranium mining and milling throughout the western United States?

Did he think any of VUI's "friendly and professional hosts" would even mention, let alone discuss, the thousands of abandoned uranium mine sites in this country, the ones that have leached radioactive waste into the soil and water for years and wait for the federal government to come clean them up at taxpayer expense?

Did he expect anyone to mention that many of the towns associated with mining and milling in other parts of the U.S. have become ghost towns after the mines were exhausted and mills done with processing because of the widespread radioactive contamination can't be remediated? Of course not!

VUI is going to give its visitors the nicest, most pleasant and reassuring fairy tale of uranium mining and milling its public relations firms can dream up. It has to. If it spoke the truth on any aspect of uranium mining and/or milling as it's been done in this country or around the world, for that matter, its visitors would flee so quickly the lovely hosts would see only a blur of flailing limbs. That's certainly not the reaction VUI needs for its visitors to experience. VUI needs its visitors to leave believing that the planned uranium mine and mill will be the biggest, safest boon to Southside in decades, not that it will be the biggest gamble in the history of Southside, which will use the Giles family's lives and yours and mine as the ante. And VUI surely doesn't want the Giles family or yours or mine to know that so far, everywhere in the world where this gamble has been taken, the winners were only a handful of stakeholders and investors. The rest of the folks, those whose lives were the ante, lost big. Very big.

No one who has spent any time at all researching the realities of uranium mining and milling could sit still and listen to what sounds like the biggest bunch of self-serving malarkey being served up anywhere in Southside these days. But VUI depends on its visitors to be ignorant of the truth about what it plans to do, not just to Coles Hill, but also to Southside. It needs local citizens to be brainwashed by its PR magic and old southern hospitality so that they won't want to believe the truth, if they even try to seek the truth. Sometimes fantasy presentations, also known as propaganda, are so cleverly crafted that the truth appears too ugly to be believed, especially when those who speak the truth can offer no wonderful promises except for a healthy environment for us and our children with clean air to breathe and clean water to drink.

I encourage Mr. Giles and those who accompanied him to the VUI "briefing" and visit to the Coles Hill site to realize that what they heard and saw while being entertained by VUI was just that, entertainment. And I encourage them to spend as much time as they did with VUI in pursuit of the other side of the story, the side that tells the harsh, unvarnished truth about the widespread illness, destruction and contamination of all living things that will ensue should VUI proceed with its plan to mine Coles Hill. Perhaps, after hearing and/or reading the rest of the story, Mr. Giles will understand that the long and interesting history of Pittsylvania County, of which he has been a dedicated steward, will, for all intents and purposes, end when the first rock is blasted loose in Coles Hill as those living in the shadow and contamination pathways of Coles Hill will be required to leave in order to preserve their health and lives.

Mr. Giles and his family and guests deserved the truth about uranium mining and milling. They didn't get it, but they got a pleasant outing. I hope, that for their own sakes and for the sakes of their grandchildren and their grandchildren, he and his guests will realize that what they heard from VUI is only one tiny theoretical piece of the story and a piece that, as of right now, has not yet been a part of the reality of any town in America in which uranium has been mined or milled. And I hope they'll wonder why and make every effort to find out.

VUI did not show me any sort of plan to mine or mill uranium, even though they want to do what is an illegal activity now in the state of Virginia. Every business owner knows that you must have a plan to implement it to its best and most profitable use. Any question that I asked was answered by, "That is why we need a study." I believe the company must have a plan, otherwise, how on earth do they know even a simple thing as how many people they have reported numerous times hiring? Did they pull those figures out of their magical hat or make them up? Why won't VUI disclose its plans? Why are they keeping everyone in the dark? Maybe they know that we would not believe the magic if they did not skirt the issue and were forthcoming in all aspects.

I keep remembering the last week of school when we were under a tornado watch and the county schools wisely kept our children at school where they would be safe, and my child did not get home until almost 5 p.m. That night at my home, we received over seven inches of rain, which overflowed everything including my swimming pool and goldfish pond. How could that be contained in a holding pond? Would we have the same disaster as they did in Tennessee with the coal sludge pond dam breaking? I am only talking about one incident. What about 30 years worth of uncontrollable situations? How many times have we been under a flood watch just this year?

Deborah Lovelace
Gretna

http://www.wpcva.com/articles/2009/07/01/altavista/opinion/opinion01.txt

County’s uranium question ignored

Comment: Ban uranium mining and milling now!

By Published by The Editorial Board

Published: July 1, 2009

To the editor:

On Feb. 17, I went before the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors to ask that they update the zoning ordinance and explore the possibility of banning uranium mining in Pittsylvania County.

On May 28, Pittsylvania County Administrator Dan Sleeper asked state Sen. Robert Hurt, R-Chatham, to request an “opinion” from the Attorney General. It read specifically, “On behalf of the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors, I am requesting an Attorney General’s opinion on whether or nor the County of Pittsylvania can pass an ordinance that would ban mining of uranium in its local jurisdiction.”

Sen. Hurt’s letter of June 3 responds to Sleeper stating that he had contacted the AG’s office regarding “the question of whether the County of Pittsylvania can adopt an ordinance that would ban uranium mining in its local jurisdiction.”

The attorney general’s office returned an opinion that had been rendered earlier regarding the adoption of a “chemical trespass ordinance,” an ordinance that had been adopted by the Halifax Town Council in Halifax County.

This is not the question for which an answer is sought. Our supervisors either missed the mark or aimed 180 degrees from the target regarding the question that should have been asked.

We have an existing local zoning ordinance. Can this ordinance be amended to better protect us regarding the mining and milling of uranium?

KAREN B. MAUTE
Mount Cross