Comment: No to uranium mining, the NAS studies are paid for by Virginia Uranium Inc., so when someone tells us to wait for the NAS study, it means they are for uranium mining, the nukes always push the NAS study because NAS are nuke friendly! The NAS town hall meetings are mostly about uranium mining and milling regulations! However, the article by the Nuke is best described as the following: "Ganthner states, "It is right and proper for members of this community to express their concerns about protecting our environment and our health. But it is not right to say that we know better than the experts at the NAS about whether uranium mining can be done safely in Virginia." He knows that the NAS study is not designed to determine whether uranium mining can be done safely in Virginia." Ganthner often seems to speaks in favor of uranium mining.So, does Ganthner mean, "It is right and proper for members of this community to express their concerns about protecting our environment and our health. But it is not right to say that we know better than the experts at the NAS about whether uranium mining can be done safely in Virginia unless we are pro-mining."???by KM
VUI is on more radar screens
By The Editorial Board
Published: May 22, 2011
It’s been a tough 10 days for Virginia Uranium, the company that wants to mine and mill a massive uranium ore deposit in Pittsylvania County.
On May 12, a group called the Keep the Ban Coalition announced that 41 localities and organizations have joined in opposition to Virginia Uranium’s proposed project.
"Mining proponents think this issue will be won behind closed doors in Richmond, but the people of Virginia are demanding it be debated in town halls and on front porches," said Mary Rafferty, grassroots organizing manager for the Virginia Chapter of the Sierra Club.
Just a few days later, on May 17, the national water conservation group American Rivers placed the Roanoke (Staunton) River on its annual list of "America’s Most Endangered Rivers" because of the possibility that the Coles Hill site could mined.
The Keep the Ban Coalition, the American Rivers designation and the possibility of a North Carolina study all point to the same thing — growing opposition to Virginia Uranium’s plans from outside the Dan River Region.
The growing number of voices that are concerned about uranium mining and milling at Coles Hill will make it tougher for the company to advance its agenda.
More opponents mean more obstacles for Virginia Uranium. The landscape is starting to change, and the company now faces what looks more and more like an uphill fight.
Let's wait on study before deciding
By Ray Ganthner (Nuke Pusher)
Published: May 29, 2011
The Register & Bee’s recent editorial, "VUI is on more radar screens" (May 22, 2011), regrettably presents a one-sided view that ignores the fact that there are many people in this community and across the state who would like to see the results of the National Academy of Science (NAS) study before taking a position on the Coles Hill uranium mining project.
I serve as chairman of the Virginia Energy Independence Alliance.
It is right and proper for members of this community to express their concerns about protecting our environment and our health. But it is not right to say that we know better than the experts at the NAS about whether uranium mining can be done safely in Virginia.
I take particular exception to the recent curious assertion by Mary Rafferty of the Sierra Club that uranium mining policy is being made "behind closed doors in Richmond."
Ganthner, of Lynchburg, is chairman of Virginia Energy Independence Alliance (www.VirginiaEnergy.org). Corporate sponsors of the organization are Alpha Natural Resources, Areva, Astrum Solar, Old Dominion Electric Cooperative, Atlantic Wind Energy and Virginia Uranium.
