nuclear-news

When asked during the hearing if any of the panel members present were concerned about contamination to the environment, specifically the air and water, or the threat to the health and safety of people, the answer was a resounding and unanimous “no.”

Read that again. Uranium, a known radioactive element, is being presented by the panel as harmless so long as it is not processed.

Uranium mining in Arizona Strip: What would Brigham Young say?, St George Utah.com by Dallas Hyland  September 12, 2011 This past week, a public hearing was held in St. George to discuss uranium mining on the Arizona Strip, as reported in St. George News story, Uranium Mining on Arizona Strip Threatened by Federal Government. A panel from the Arizona-Utah Local Economic Coalition and concerned citizens from Arizona and Utah met to discuss and put comments on the record about the Secretary of the Interior’s moratorium on mineral extraction in the region.

The main thrust of the argument against the ban on mining permits from the perspective of the panel was its dramatic impact on local economies dependent on jobs and revenue from mining.

When asked during the hearing if any of the panel members present were concerned about contamination to the environment, specifically the air and water, or the threat to the health and safety of people, the answer was a resounding and unanimous “no.”

Read that again. Uranium, a known radioactive element, is being presented by the panel as harmless so long as it is not processed.

If that does not give you cause for concern, perhaps this will:

Washington County Commissioner Alan Gardner is so sure of the safety of uranium mining that he said, “We could put one year’s worth of uranium mined ore in its unprocessed state into the Colorado River at one time, and there would be no danger at all.”

I wonder what people downriver would think about the sheer hubris of that statement……

When relevant concerns of the long-term effects of our dependence on depletable and contaminating resources are presented, however, it seems the only viable answer is draconian in nature. It is implied that we have no choice. Our economy must take precedence over everything at seemingly all costs; even at the cost of the health and well-being of air, water, and people in the not-too-distant future.

Olene S. Walker, former governor of Utah, was a keynote speaker at the Clean Air Summit in St. George last week.

The former governor spoke candidly of her lung cancer and made a poignant observation.

“What is more important: jobs or quality of air?” she asked. “You can argue that it does not matter but science tells us different[ly].”

What is more important? Jobs? Or clean air and clean water?

The advocates for mining of uranium use science when it supports their aspirations but seem eager to willfully ignore any science that contradicts them. Might this make them culpable if harmful effects emerge from their decisions in the future?.

David Kreamer, Ph.d., is a hydrogeologist and professor at University of Nevada at Las Vegas. His expertise is in hydrogeology and contaminant transport by ground water. He has been studying water contamination from mining in the Grand Canyon for 25 years. He was not consulted by the panel…..

When asked about the one year’s worth of dumping of uranium in the Colorado River being harmless, as implied by Gardner, Kreamer said there was some truth to that at least in the very short term; because it would be placed in a large body of moving water, its concentrations would be diluted. But they will eventually re-concentrate downriver and in places along the way. They will accumulate in indigenous species that will in turn spread the concentration. They will accumulate in the river bottoms and creeks. This is how they got to the place they are now being mined from and, in effect, the reverse would be taking place if uranium is placed in the river. The process would just be sped up and intensified by mining….

One could argue that our dependence on depletable and poisonous energy sources weakens us as a species and does not secure any future for us at all, but merely prolongs the inevitable whereby we fight over the very things that are killing us in the name of economic stability-lifestyle.

In response to Gardner’s assertion, Kreamer said, ”I believe that an assumption that uranium mining will have minimal impact on springs, people, and ecosystems in the Grand Canyon is unreasonable and not supported by past experience, research and data.”…

http://www.stgeorgeutah.com/news/archive/2011/09/12/uranium-mining-in-arizona-strip-what-would-brigham-young-say/