Tribes and Environmentalists Press Arizona and Federal Officials to Stop Uranium Mining Near the Grand Canyon
Activists hope to shut down an existing mine within a new national monument and to prevent the transportation of uranium on state and federal roads across Navajo Nation lands.
Inside Climate News, By Noel Lyn Smith, July 17, 2024
PHOENIX—Members of environmental groups stood together in the lobby of the Arizona State Capitol Executive Tower late last month to deliver a petition to Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs, requesting that she stop uranium mining activities near the Grand Canyon National Park.
The Sierra Club, Center for Biological Diversity, National Parks Conservation Association, Wild Arizona, Chispa Arizona and Haul No!, a group formed to fight the mining and transport of uranium, delivered a petition with more than 17,500 signatures to the governor.
They are seeking closure of the Pinyon Plain Mine, located less than 10 miles from the Grand Canyon. It is inside the Baaj Nwaavjo I’tah Kukveni—Ancestral Footprints of the Grand Canyon National Monument, which President Joe Biden established in August 2023. The removal of uranium ore from the mine started in late December.
Although the designation prohibits new mining claims and development, it allows prior claims with valid existing rights like Pinyon Plain to continue their operations. Energy Fuels Resources owns the mine, which is approximately 17 acres, and operates it on land managed by the U.S. Forest Service.
“This mine threatens to pollute the groundwater that feeds the seeps and springs in Grand Canyon, supporting plants, animals and people,” the petition states.
People can develop respiratory disease and toxicity in the kidneys due to uranium exposure, according to the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. There are more than 500 abandoned uranium mines on the Navajo Nation, and the tribe continues to confront the ramifications of mining activities on tribal members and the environment. This includes advocating for federal money to clean up abandoned mines and compensation for former mine workers.
No one from Hobbs’ office met the group or accepted the written requests in person. Instead, the activists left the petition, the groups’ latest action attempting to get the Democratic governor’s attention, with the executive receptionist on the first floor. In January, the groups sent a letter to Hobbs urging her to revisit permits issued for Pinyon Plain Mine and seeking her help closing it. They said she has not responded to the letter.
A spokesperson with the governor’s office confirmed on July 11 that the petition was received…………………………………………………………………………..
Vania Guevara is the advocacy and political director with Chispa Arizona, a program under the League of Conservation Voters that is dedicated to increasing Latinx voices in policies that address climate change and the environment. Guevara said it is urgent for Hobbs to address uranium mining because it threatens the health and safety of Indigenous communities.
A dozen tribes have ancestral, ceremonial and traditional connections to the region, including the Havasupai Tribe, Hopi Tribe, Hualapai Tribe, Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians, Las Vegas Paiute Tribe, Moapa Band of Paiutes, Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah, Navajo Nation, San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe, Yavapai-Apache Nation, Pueblo of Zuni and the Colorado River Indian Tribes…………………………………. https://insideclimatenews.org/news/17072024/arizona-activists-press-officials-to-stop-uranium-mining-near-grand-canyon/
France’s Orano loses operating licence at major uranium mine in Niger.
Niger has removed the mining permit of French nuclear fuel producer Orano
at one of the world’s biggest uranium mines, the company said Thursday,
highlighting tensions between France and the African country’s ruling
junta.
RFI 21st June 2024
Iran’s Nuclear Point Man : We Won’t Bow to Pressure
Friday, 06/14/2024, https://www.iranintl.com/en/202406149313—
Ali Shamkhani, advisor to the Supreme Leader and apparent nuclear negotiator, stated on Friday that Iran “won’t bow to pressure” amidst US warnings regarding its uranium enrichment activities.
“Iran’s nuclear program relies on national will and development strategy,” Shamkhani wrote on X. “The US and some Western countries would dismantle Iran’s nuclear industry if they could.”
The US issued a warning to Iran, stating they will “respond accordingly” if Iran continues to accelerate its nuclear program. This came shortly after the UN nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), highlighted Tehran’s expanding uranium enrichment.
The IAEA’s report revealed Iran’s response to a censure resolution, indicating expanded uranium enrichment at two underground sites. Iran rapidly installed more uranium-enriching centrifuges at its Fordow site and began work on additional ones at its Natanz facility, the report said.
A week ago, The IAEA’s Board passed a resolution urging Iran to cooperate and reverse its decision to bar inspector visits, with the US stressing the need for Iran’s compliance. Britain, France, and Germany tabled the resolution, which the US reportedly opposed but later endorsed. Only Russia and China voted against the measure.
Shamkhani, an old-guard military figure who served as the secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council until last year, had previously warned of a “serious and effective response” if European nations pursued the resolution.
According to an IAEA assessment, Iran is enriching uranium to 60% purity, approaching the 90% threshold typical of weapons-grade material. Additionally, it has accumulated enough material for additional enrichment, potentially resulting in three nuclear warheads.
From the Hiroshima bomb to Israel’s nuclear weapons, the path leads back to Congo’s uranium
Conspiracies in the Congo Linda Pentz Gunter 16 June 24 https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2024/06/16/conspiracies-in-the-congo/
It involved the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC); a Belgian mining company; a fictitious Liberian trading company; a German-named ship — the Scheersberg A; a Spanish crew; a German petrochemical official; an Italian paint company; an Israeli freighter; the Greek island of Crete; a Turkish port; and a confession made in Norway.
If this sounds like the plot for an elaborate work of fiction, it was — it formed the basis of Ken Follett’s 1979 thriller, Triple. But it was also all true. The clandestine operation, which took place in November 1968, smuggled an estimated 200 tonnes of uranium yellowcake out of the DRC, transporting it to Israel. It was orchestrated by Mossad, the Israeli secret intelligence service and came to be known as Operation Plumbat, since the illicit cargo was marked as lead.
The scheme was set in motion when, after the 1967 Arab-Israeli War, France curtailed its weapons supplies to Israel and likely the uranium fuel as well needed for Israel’s Dimona reactor, believed then and still to be at the heart of the country’s nuclear weapons program. The operation concluded with an exchange of ships and cargos on the high seas, the Scheersberg A eventually docking empty in Turkey while the uranium, now aboard an Israeli freighter, made its way to Haifa and eventually to Dimona.
The Plumbat operation was first exposed in April 1977 at a non-proliferation conference in Salzburg, Austria by Paul Leventhal, who went on to found the Nuclear Control Institute in 1981.
Israel officially denies that any of this took place, despite ample documentation and the later confession of one of its Mossad officers after his arrest in Norway. This was yet another bizarre twist in the tale when a Mossad operation in Lillehammer to assassinate one of the 1973 Munich Olympic attackers instead mistakenly took out an innocent Moroccan waiter on his way home from work. One of the agents, in order to prove to Norwegian authorities that he was indeed with Mossad, related the story of Operation Plumbat.
Of course, Israel also officially denies the existence of its nuclear weapons arsenal.
The uranium bound for Israel came from the Shinkolobwe mine in DRC’s Katanga province. The veins of uranium that run through Shinkolobwe bleed everywhere. And so do its victims.
The DRC is the site of the present day genocide that no one talks about. As many as six million people have now died in the ongoing fighting there, mostly over mineral rights. That long and bloody history began in the 1880s when the despotic Belgian king, Leopold II, enslaved and brutalized the country’s population, violence that continued under the subsequent Belgian government that took control in 1908.
The Belgians first began mining uranium at Shinkolobwe in 1921. In 1939, Albert Einstein, by then aware that a nuclear bomb could potentially be built and that Nazi Germany might be pursuing one, alerted President Roosevelt to the need for access to a rich uranium supply. The best such, Einstein said, could be found in what was then known as the Belgian Congo.
Once Nazi Germany had occupied Belgium in 1940, concerns grew that the uranium stockpiled at Shinkolobwe could fall into Hitler’s hands. A plan was quickly developed to ship 1,200 tons of uranium ore to the US where it was first stored on Staten Island and eventually transported to the Manhattan Project’s nuclear bomb factory at Los Alamos in New Mexico.
As recounted in Susan Williams’s non-fiction book, Spies in the Congo, US agents in various guises slipped in and out of the Congo, secretly shepherding the uranium back to the Manhattan Project. A second shipment of 1,000 tons of stockpiled ore soon followed. Wrote Williams, citing Gabrielle Hecht’s book, Being Nuclear, Africans and the Global Uranium Trade: “The miners sorted and packed up the uranium ore by hand and, according to estimates, they could have been exposed to a year’s worth of radiation in about two weeks.”
Seventy percent of the uranium in the Hiroshima atomic bomb came from Shinkolobwe and another ten percent was used in the plutonium bomb dropped on Nagasaki.
However, the colonialist skulduggery didn’t end there. When the DRC gained its independence in June 1960 and Patrice Lumumba became the country’s first democratically elected prime minister, Katanga province abruptly seceded from the country. In an effort to quell the rebellion, Lumumba appealed to the United Nations but was rebuffed. He then turned to the Soviet Union for help, sealing his fate.
The assassination of Lumumba on January 17, 1961 after barely six months in office, appears to have come on direct orders from President Eisenhower, officially out of concerns that Lumumba’s association with the Soviets would create a communist stronghold in the region.
But uranium was also at the heart of the plot and the US may not have acted alone. UK Labour Party peer, David Lea, reported in 2013 that a former MI6 operative, Daphne Park, told him she and MI6 orchestrated the assassination to protect the uranium supply. “Lumumba would have handed over the whole lot to the Russians,” said Park according to Lea.
All of these schemes and intrigues have come about at the price of peace and stability for the Congolese people. Contamination from the radioactive and heavy metals left behind at the mine site continues to poison people and the environment. Other minerals, especially cobalt and copper, have invited further plunder and conflict.
And there could soon be renewed interest in Shinkolobwe’s uranium. “At a time when many nations are engaged in an arms race, stockpiling weapons of mass destruction to prove their ‘strength’, Shinkolobwe mine still risks being seen as an attractive prospect,” wrote young Congolese climate activist, Remy Zahiga in a paper for the Heinrich Böll Stiftung.
Renewed interest may be coming from countries such as France (which inked a deal, thus far unexploited, in 2008) and China, eager to continue and expand their nuclear power programs under the false premise of climate mitigation. China already owns other mines in the DRC. “The existence of hidden entrances and ownership of all surrounding infrastructure would make the Shinkolobwe mine an attractive location should China decide to supplement its current uranium imports,” writes Daniel Allen in his 2024 paper, Uranium Security in the DRC.
And yet, the world looks away.
During an online event hosted by the Peace & Justice Project, an initiative of former UK Labour Party leader, Jeremy Corbyn, and his wife Laura Alvarez, Congo-born London councillor, Michelline Safi-Ngongo, asked with rightful indignation and somewhat rhetorically why the media never talked about the on-going genocide in her country?
The answer was sadly all too obvious, including to her. Black faces. Far away places. Africa, where these things “happen all the time”. Worthy of a shrug, then forgotten. When the West needs uranium or cobalt or copper, workers in the Congo and their families become suddenly expendable.
Linda Pentz Gunter is the international specialist at Beyond Nuclear and writes for and edits Beyond Nuclear International. You can learn more about the Congo’s uranium history in her forthcoming book, Hot Stories. Reflections from a Radioactive World, will be published in autumn 2024. https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2024/06/16/conspiracies-in-the-congo/
Proliferation warnings over enriched nuclear fuel for advanced reactors
BY JULIA ROBINSON, 13 JUNE 2024, https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/proliferation-warnings-over-enriched-nuclear-fuel-for-advanced-reactors/4019621.article—
Governments and others promoting the use of high-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU) for nuclear power have not considered the potential terrorism risk that widespread adoption of this fuel creates, nuclear scientists have warned.
HALEU is a nuclear reactor fuel enriched with uranium-235 to between 5 and 20%. At 20% uranium-235 and above, the mixture is called highly-enriched uranium (HEU) and it is internationally recognised that it can be employed in nuclear weapons.
Historically, HALEU use has been limited to research reactors, where it is used in small quantities, while commercial reactors typically use fuels with low enrichments, in the range of 3 to 5% uranium-235, which cannot sustain an explosive chain reaction.
However, new advanced reactors are being designed to run on HALEU – most favouring 19.75% uranium-235 HALEU – in the hope that these reactors will be smaller, more flexible and less expensive.
In the US, the Department of Energy (DOE) and US Department of Defense are providing funds for more than 10 reactor concepts, while the UK’s Civil Nuclear Roadmap, announced on 11 January, promised up to £300 million of investment specifically to develop HALEU fuel production.
However, in a policy forum in Science, experts in nuclear science and global security highlight that in many of the designs, the amount of HALEU needed is ‘hundreds to thousands of kilograms’, which may mean that a single reactor contains enough HALEU to make a nuclear weapon.
The authors said that estimates indicate that quantities ranging from several hundred kilograms to about a tonne of 19.75% HALEU could produce explosive yields similar to or greater than that of the Little Boy bomb dropped on Hiroshima.
If this is the case, they said, commercialising HALEU fuels without ensuring that the material is ‘appropriately protected against diversion by national governments or theft by terrorists would pose a serious threat to security’.
‘The time has come to review policies governing the use of this material,’ the authors write. ‘We recommend that the US Congress direct the DOE’s National Nuclear Security Administration to commission a fresh review of HALEU proliferation and security risks by US weapons laboratory experts.’
They also suggested that, according to the information available, a reasonable balance of the risks and benefits could be struck if enrichment of uranium-235 was restricted to 12% or less.
Gates-backed nuclear plant breaks ground without guarantee it’ll have fuel
TerraPower’s atomic facility needs lots of low-enriched uranium and who mainly makes it … ah, jeez
The Register Brandon Vigliarolo, Tue 11 Jun 2024
Unwilling to let a little thing like reality stand in its way, Bill Gates’ TerraPower has broken ground on its Wyoming nuclear power plant without any guarantee it’ll have the fuel needed to run the thing once it’s finished.
The Microsoft tycoon made no mention of that supply issue in a memo he published on Monday announcing the ground breaking in the former coal town of Kemmerer in western Wyoming.
Instead of dwelling on the fact that the world’s large-scale producers of high-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU) – needed for the plant’s liquid-sodium-cooled reactor – are right now located in Russia and China and that difficulties in getting that fuel into the United States have already delayed his project, Gates chose instead to wax philosophical about the future of nuclear energy.
“As I looked at the plans for this new reactor [before the founding of TerraPower in 2006], I saw how rethinking nuclear power could overcome the barriers that had hindered it — and revolutionize how we generate power in the US and around the world,” Gates, who co-founded TerraPower, wrote.
“That technology was just an idea in a lab and on a computer screen until today.”
We note that the reactor which so captivated the Windows billionaire prior to TerraPower’s founding is still just an idea in a lab, however. The original plan was for TerraPower to develop a traveling-wave reactor (TWR) that slowly burns columns of depleted uranium as a safe power source.
TerraPower planned to have an experimental TWR online in 2022, which never happened. Instead, the biz turned its focus away from TWR to the HALEU-fueled “Natrium” sodium fast reactor now under early construction in Wyoming, trading a development impediment for a fuel one.
Two years ago, there was only a single concern in the US able to produce the needed HALEU fuel. Not much has improved on the nuclear fuel front since then, as President Biden signed a total ban on Russian uranium imports just last month, meaning US companies won’t be able to go to Russia, at least, for their HALEU ingredients.
We can’t imagine procuring HALEU from China will be particularly fun for American entities, either, assuming the Middle Kingdom can produce the goods at all at scale.
The one business we’re aware of in the US producing HALEU fuel – American Centrifuge Operating (ACO) – only shifted its first HALEU in November 2023 – and a mere 20 kilograms of it at that. ACO parent Centrus reported it produced an additional 135kg in the first quarter of 2024, but that’s still not enough.
The US Dept of Energy reckons America needs more than 40 metric tons of the stuff by the end of the decade to “deploy a new fleet of advanced reactors,” and that amount is just for starters: Additional fuel will be needed each year. If ACO continued to produce 135kg of fuel each quarter for the rest of the decade, we’d still only be at around three metric tons by 2030.
Luckily, Centrus tells us it’s ready to start scaling up production as soon as it gets necessary funding from the federal government.
“There’s a request for proposal out right now for the DoE’s HALEU availability program,” Centrus VP of corporate communications Dan Leistikow told The Register. Proposals were due back in March, Leistikow said, and he expects to hear something back within the next few months.
“We can be at a commercial scale within four years of receiving funding,” Leistikow said.
There’s also a British HALEU plant on the cards, scheduled to go online in the early 2030s, which might be able to supply the likes of TerraPower in America……………………………………………………………..
That’s still one tight timeline
When TerraPower announced in late 2022 that its now-HALEU-based Wyoming plant had been delayed due to being able to secure uranium fuel supplies, the biz also said it was going to at least break ground in the state in 2023 – and it couldn’t even get that started on time.
Gates’s sodium-cooled HALEU reactor doesn’t have the same challenging form-factor as a small modular reactor (SMR) – the other new hotness in nuclear power – but its delays remind us of difficulties encountered by operators of SMRs and larger-scale plants.
A study by the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA) found that nuclear plants – regardless of their form factor – pretty much never meet expected budgets or timelines.
Of the four SMRs online or under construction, the IEEFA noted none were supposed to take longer than four years to build, yet none took less than 12 years to complete. Looking to older generations of nuclear power, similar issues arose when building Vogtle Unit 3, the first nuclear power reactor to come online in the US this century. That reactor was more than half a decade late and nearly bankrupted US nuclear giant Westinghouse.
In other words, as much as we’re fans of harnessing the atom, nuclear power goalposts have a history of being rather mobile, and so far TerraPower is readily embracing that. https://www.theregister.com/2024/06/11/terrapower_nuclear_plant/#:~:text=Unwilling%20to%20let%20a%20little,the%20thing%20once%20it’s%20finished.
The weapons potential of high-assay low-enriched uranium
Recent promotion of new reactor technologies appears to disregard decades-old concerns about nuclear proliferation
R. SCOTT KEMP , EDWIN S. LYMAN, MARK R. DEINERT, RICHARD L. GARWIN, AND FRANK N. VON HIPPEL, https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.ado8693 6 June 24
Preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons has been a major thrust of international policymaking for more than 70 years. Now, an explosion of interest in a nuclear reactor fuel called high-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU), spurred by billions of dollars in US government funding, threatens to undermine that system of control.
HALEU contains between 10 and 20% of the isotope uranium-235. At 20% 235U and above, the isotopic mixture is called highly enriched uranium (HEU) and is internationally recognized as being directly usable in nuclear weapons. However, the practical limit for weapons lies below the 20% HALEU-HEU threshold. Governments and others promoting the use of HALEU have not carefully considered the potential proliferation and terrorism risks that the wide adoption of this fuel creates.
Iran’s Near Bomb-Grade Uranium Stock Grows Ahead of Election
International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors verified on Monday that
Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium rose 17% over the last three
months, according to a nine-page, restricted report circulated among
diplomats and seen by Bloomberg. That’s enough uranium to fuel several
warheads, should Iran make a political decision to pursue weapons.
Bloomberg 27th May 2024
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/iran-near-bomb-grade-uranium-154724858.html
Russian uranium ban reopens threat of uranium mining escalation in US
Executives from Uranium Energy, Terrapower, Centrus and Energy Fuels couldn’t contain their excitement. Nor can they wait to begin mining, milling, and enriching uranium again in the US, to the detriment most especially of Native American tribes living on the land already permanently scarred and poisoned by previous such operations and who are still waiting for adequate or any cleanup and reparations.
The Navajo Nation, who have banned uranium mining on their territory, was home to more than 500 uranium mines at peak operations, all of which are now abandoned but not cleaned up. (There are more than 4,000 abandoned uranium mine sites across the US.) Tribal members understand all too well what uranium mining can do to the health and wellbeing of a community.
Beyond Nuclear, By Linda Pentz Gunter, 24 May 24
When Russia first invaded Ukraine on February 24, 2022, no one knew how long the fighting would continue and what the outcome might be. Kyiv was expected to fall immediately. It didn’t. More than two years on, the war continues and the rumblings from Russia about nuclear weapons use grow frighteningly louder.
The rush by the United States and its NATO allies at the time of the invasion to help defend — and to some extent arm — Ukraine included a quick decision to sanction Russian fossil fuel imports. On March 8, 2022, just 12 days after the invasion, US president, Joe Biden, signed an Executive Order banning the import of Russian oil, liquefied natural gas, and coal to the United States. Russian uranium was not included.
At the time of the 2022 ban on Russian fossil fuels, many of us in the anti-nuclear movement were agitating for a Russian uranium ban as well. At least 12% of US uranium imports comes from Russia to fuel domestic US reactors. That number rises to close to 50% if you also factor in uranium sourced from Russian satellites Kazakhstan (25%) and Uzbekistan (11%). (Canada is the other major single-source supplier of uranium to the US at 27%.)
On May 13, 2024, President Biden finally signed into law a bipartisan bill — the Prohibiting Russian Uranium Imports Act — banning imports of Russian low-enriched uranium. According to the bill, the ban affects: “Unirradiated low-enriched uranium that is produced in the Russian Federation or by a Russian entity” (read Rosatom operating outside Russia).
When we were pushing for a Russian uranium boycott at the start of the war, it was in the context of highlighting the detriment of nuclear power and fed into our agenda to permanently end the use of this dangerous and discriminatory technology. We asked then why the nuclear sector was getting a pass. Now we have the answer. The bill is a poisoned pill, almost literally.
The bill’s enactment “releases $2.72 billion in appropriated funds to the Department of Energy to invest in domestic uranium enrichment further advancing a secure and resilient global nuclear energy fuel supply consistent with our international obligations,” said the US State Department.
This is all part of the absurd agenda to triple global nuclear capacity by 2050 (too late) and, said the State Department, “to establish a secure nuclear fuel supply chain, independent of adversarial influence, for decades to come.” It will do nothing of the kind.
While the new law may claim to end US dependency on Russian uranium, it does not end American addiction to a fatal energy source that victimizes the communities least resourced to fight back. Furthermore, it will make America’s path to a renewable energy economy all the harder, redirecting funds and precious time toward the most expensive and slowest way to address the climate crisis (nuclear) instead of faster, cheaper renewables.
There are no prizes for guessing who was cheering the loudest as Biden wielded his pen last week.
Executives from Uranium Energy, Terrapower, Centrus and Energy Fuels couldn’t contain their excitement. Nor can they wait to begin mining, milling, and enriching uranium again in the US, to the detriment most especially of Native American tribes living on the land already permanently scarred and poisoned by previous such operations and who are still waiting for adequate or any cleanup and reparations.
One of those places, the Grand Canyon, is already under threat from the Pinyon Plain uranium mine, a project of Canadian-owned Energy Fuels and which started operations in January 2024, against the strong opposition of the Havasupai tribe who live there.
“We have been against uranium mining for decades because of the known risks to land and air, water and people,” said Carletta Tilousi, a leader of the Havasupai tribe who is fighting to cancel the uranium operations at Pinyon Plain, which is located near Red Butte, a sacred site to the Havsupai people.
“Uranium mining in the southwest has scarred and left a horrifying legacy of death in our communities. Thousands of abandoned uranium mines on federal and tribal lands have not been cleaned up,” she said.
“Uranium will continue to poison the Grand Canyon including the aquifers that feed into the Colorado River,” added Tilousi. “Contaminants from the uranium mine are likely to make their way to the deep aquifers that feed Havasu Springs. The mine closure is the only way to avoid this risk.”
The Navajo Nation, who have banned uranium mining on their territory, was home to more than 500 uranium mines at peak operations, all of which are now abandoned but not cleaned up. (There are more than 4,000 abandoned uranium mine sites across the US.) Tribal members understand all too well what uranium mining can do to the health and wellbeing of a community.
“This decision by Biden is terrible news,” said former uranium mine worker, Larry King of the Navajo Nation, a member of Eastern Navajo Diné Against Uranium Mining that has advocated mine cleanup for decades. Added King: “They’ve never returned an aquifer to pre-mining stages,” after extracting uranium through in-situ leach mining, the predominant technique currently used. “The companies got what they want out of Navajo and moved on.”
Despite the ban, the Navajo Nation had already been under a renewed threat of resumed uranium mining when Uranium Resources tried to open a new in situ leach mine at Church Rock, a plan that was defeated by tribal opposition. But Toronto-based Laramide Resources has since bought out Uranium Resources and wants to mine uranium there because the land is surrounded by — but not within — the boundaries of the Navajo reservation.
King’s home lies within view of Laramide’s plans. “The environmental impact statement says there are certain dwellings within the diameter of the project and those people will have to move,” King said. “I’m not moving. This is where I’m from. I’m not moving a foot.”
After Biden signed the Prohibiting Russian Uranium Imports Act, the Washington Post ran a disgracefully slanted article, in which not a single Native American voice was heard. Reporter Maxine Joselow quoted executives from four nuclear corporations and two politicians, all of whom favored the legislation. She made only a glancing reference to mine opponents as “others” and “still others” after prefacing their anonymous mention with “Though some environmentalists support nuclear power…”
But she was more than happy to repeat the utter nonsense spewed by Energy Fuels senior vice president, Curtis Moore, who said the company’s Grand Canyon mine would have “zero” risk to water supplies there and that “Uranium is absolutely essential to the fight against climate change.”
Americans, and especially Native Americans, will pay the price for this bill which, instead of banning uranium imports and transitioning away from nuclear power, seeks instead to stimulate exponential domestic growth of this dirty industry………………………………………………….. more https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2024/05/19/terrible-news/
Russian uranium ban reopens threat of uranium mining escalation in US
Executives from Uranium Energy, Terrapower, Centrus and Energy Fuels couldn’t contain their excitement. Nor can they wait to begin mining, milling, and enriching uranium again in the US, to the detriment most especially of Native American tribes living on the land already permanently scarred and poisoned by previous such operations and who are still waiting for adequate or any cleanup and reparations.
Beyond Nuclear, By Linda Pentz Gunter, 19 May 24
When Russia first invaded Ukraine on February 24, 2022, no one knew how long the fighting would continue and what the outcome might be. Kyiv was expected to fall immediately. It didn’t. More than two years on, the war continues and the rumblings from Russia about nuclear weapons use grow frighteningly louder.
The rush by the United States and its NATO allies at the time of the invasion to help defend — and to some extent arm — Ukraine included a quick decision to sanction Russian fossil fuel imports. On March 8, 2022, just 12 days after the invasion, US president, Joe Biden, signed an Executive Order banning the import of Russian oil, liquefied natural gas, and coal to the United States. Russian uranium was not included.
At the time of the 2022 ban on Russian fossil fuels, many of us in the anti-nuclear movement were agitating for a Russian uranium ban as well. At least 12% of US uranium imports comes from Russia to fuel domestic US reactors. That number rises to close to 50% if you also factor in uranium sourced from Russian satellites Kazakhstan (25%) and Uzbekistan (11%). (Canada is the other major single-source supplier of uranium to the US at 27%.)
On May 13, 2024, President Biden finally signed into law a bipartisan bill — the Prohibiting Russian Uranium Imports Act — banning imports of Russian low-enriched uranium. According to the bill, the ban affects: “Unirradiated low-enriched uranium that is produced in the Russian Federation or by a Russian entity” (read Rosatom operating outside Russia).
When we were pushing for a Russian uranium boycott at the start of the war, it was in the context of highlighting the detriment of nuclear power and fed into our agenda to permanently end the use of this dangerous and discriminatory technology. We asked then why the nuclear sector was getting a pass. Now we have the answer. The bill is a poisoned pill, almost literally.
The bill’s enactment “releases $2.72 billion in appropriated funds to the Department of Energy to invest in domestic uranium enrichment further advancing a secure and resilient global nuclear energy fuel supply consistent with our international obligations,” said the US State Department.
This is all part of the absurd agenda to triple global nuclear capacity by 2050 (too late) and, said the State Department, “to establish a secure nuclear fuel supply chain, independent of adversarial influence, for decades to come.” It will do nothing of the kind.
While the new law may claim to end US dependency on Russian uranium, it does not end American addiction to a fatal energy source that victimizes the communities least resourced to fight back. Furthermore, it will make America’s path to a renewable energy economy all the harder, redirecting funds and precious time toward the most expensive and slowest way to address the climate crisis (nuclear) instead of faster, cheaper renewables.
There are no prizes for guessing who was cheering the loudest as Biden wielded his pen last week.
Executives from Uranium Energy, Terrapower, Centrus and Energy Fuels couldn’t contain their excitement. Nor can they wait to begin mining, milling, and enriching uranium again in the US, to the detriment most especially of Native American tribes living on the land already permanently scarred and poisoned by previous such operations and who are still waiting for adequate or any cleanup and reparations.
One of those places, the Grand Canyon, is already under threat from the Pinyon Plain uranium mine, a project of Canadian-owned Energy Fuels and which started operations in January 2024, against the strong opposition of the Havasupai tribe who live there.
“We have been against uranium mining for decades because of the known risks to land and air, water and people,” said Carletta Tilousi, a leader of the Havasupai tribe who is fighting to cancel the uranium operations at Pinyon Plain, which is located near Red Butte, a sacred site to the Havsupai people.
“Uranium mining in the southwest has scarred and left a horrifying legacy of death in our communities. Thousands of abandoned uranium mines on federal and tribal lands have not been cleaned up,” she said.
“Uranium will continue to poison the Grand Canyon including the aquifers that feed into the Colorado River,” added Tilousi. “Contaminants from the uranium mine are likely to make their way to the deep aquifers that feed Havasu Springs. The mine closure is the only way to avoid this risk.”
The Navajo Nation, who have banned uranium mining on their territory, was home to more than 500 uranium mines at peak operations, all of which are now abandoned but not cleaned up. (There are more than 4,000 abandoned uranium mine sites across the US.) Tribal members understand all too well what uranium mining can do to the health and wellbeing of a community.
“This decision by Biden is terrible news,” said former uranium mine worker, Larry King of the Navajo Nation, a member of Eastern Navajo Diné Against Uranium Mining that has advocated mine cleanup for decades. Added King: “They’ve never returned an aquifer to pre-mining stages,” after extracting uranium through in-situ leach mining, the predominant technique currently used. “The companies got what they want out of Navajo and moved on.”
Despite the ban, the Navajo Nation had already been under a renewed threat of resumed uranium mining when Uranium Resources tried to open a new in situ leach mine at Church Rock, a plan that was defeated by tribal opposition. But Toronto-based Laramide Resources has since bought out Uranium Resources and wants to mine uranium there because the land is surrounded by — but not within — the boundaries of the Navajo reservation.
King’s home lies within view of Laramide’s plans. “The environmental impact statement says there are certain dwellings within the diameter of the project and those people will have to move,” King said. “I’m not moving. This is where I’m from. I’m not moving a foot.”
After Biden signed the Prohibiting Russian Uranium Imports Act, the Washington Post ran a disgracefully slanted article, in which not a single Native American voice was heard. Reporter Maxine Joselow quoted executives from four nuclear corporations and two politicians, all of whom favored the legislation. She made only a glancing reference to mine opponents as “others” and “still others” after prefacing their anonymous mention with “Though some environmentalists support nuclear power…”
But she was more than happy to repeat the utter nonsense spewed by Energy Fuels senior vice president, Curtis Moore, who said the company’s Grand Canyon mine would have “zero” risk to water supplies there and that “Uranium is absolutely essential to the fight against climate change.”
Americans, and especially Native Americans, will pay the price for this bill which, instead of banning uranium imports and transitioning away from nuclear power, seeks instead to stimulate exponential domestic growth of this dirty industry………………………………………………………..
it’s unclear how deeply the boycott will actually harm Russia and when. As bne IntelliNews clarified in a January 19, 2024 article: “even though Kazakhstan is the world’s biggest player in uranium supply, much of its milled uranium travels through Russian conversion plants before it is exported to global markets.” Russia has “control of over 26% of Kazakh uranium deposits and holds rights to an additional 22% of annual production.”
However, the Russia uranium ban doesn’t specifically include Uzbekistan or Kazakhstan and the “Russian entity” wording in the bill leaves the situation vague.
Kazakhstan seems to have no doubt about the opportunity presented by the Russia ban and is eager to fill the void. “This bill represents a significant opportunity for Kazakhstan, the world’s largest producer of uranium, which could potentially step into the breach and provide the mineral necessary to meet the U.S.’ nuclear energy needs,” reported The Times of Central Asia in January after the bill had passed the US House last December.
Furthermore, there is a pretty big waiver included in the bill which could keep the door wide open to Russian uranium. It states that imports can continue if “no alternative viable source of low-enriched uranium is available to sustain the continued operation of a nuclear reactor or a United States nuclear energy company; or importation of low-enriched uranium described in paragraph (1) is in the national interest.”
This is in place to insure against a resulting shortage of uranium fuel supplies that could cause US reactors to shut down prematurely or permanently. The waiver extends until January 2028. So a win-win for Rosatom, Kazatomprom, North American uranium corporations, the US Congress and the Biden Administration, and another tragic betrayal of Native American people.
Linda Pentz Gunter is the international specialist at Beyond Nuclear and writes for and edits Beyond Nuclear International. https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2024/05/19/terrible-news/
Congress must stop Biden from fueling a Saudi nuclear bomb
The Hill BY ANDREA STRICKER AND HENRY SOKOLSKI, – 05/18/24
National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan is heading to Saudi Arabia and Israel this weekend in hopes of delivering an elusive Biden foreign policy triumph — a U.S.-Saudi-Israel “mega deal” that would upgrade the U.S.-Saudi alliance while normalizing relations between Riyadh and Jerusalem.
Proponents see this as a win-win proposition, yet at the deal’s heart lies a dangerous American concession: Saudi Arabia is demanding Washington upend decades of U.S. nonproliferation policy and give Riyadh the means to enrich uranium — a process essential to producing fuel for either nuclear reactors or atomic weapons. Congress must act now and stop the administration from setting off a nuclear arms-race in the Middle East.
Never before has the Saudi motivation been so high to join the Western-led security order: The recent salvo of drones and missiles Iran launched at Israel were almost entirely eliminated by the missile defenses of the U.S., Israel and partners. This is the kind of protection Russia, China and Iran, with their venal and revisionist ambitions, are unlikely to provide.
President Biden has a narrowing window to secure the mega-deal, after spending his first years in office taking Riyadh to task on human rights and downplaying the Abraham Accords, through which his predecessor helped three Arab states normalize relations with Israel.
Beyond the non-trivial matters of the ongoing Israeli military operation in Rafah and a future Palestinian state, on which Saudi Arabia’s foreign minister says the two sides are close to an agreement in principle, there remains one big problem:
Riyadh wants America to open the door to a domestic program for uranium enrichment.
Since the start of the atomic age, however, American policy has discouraged the further spread of these crown jewels of nuclear weapon-making technology. The United States has joined with other nuclear suppliers to oppose such transfers.
Underscoring the risk, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman has openly said that Riyadh will obtain nuclear weapons if Iran does, meaning he might eventually pilfer or misappropriate U.S. technology for nuclear weapons. The crown prince refuses to foreswear enrichment, something the United Arab Emirates (UAE) did in 2009 when it committed to what became known as the “gold standard” of nonproliferation. Bin Salman also refuses to sign an enhanced inspection agreement, known as the Additional Protocol, with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
And why would he?
The United States granted Iran domestic uranium enrichment under the 2015 nuclear deal known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), torpedoing prior UN resolutions demanding Tehran cease that practice. UN Iran sanctions remain lifted under UN Resolution 2231, even though no party continues to observe the nuclear deal and Tehran is moving deliberately toward production of weapons-grade uranium.
Now, some nonproliferation experts are suggesting how Washington might “responsibly” give enrichment technology to the Saudis, even though doing so would likely trigger similar demands or independent efforts by Turkey, Egypt, the UAE and South Korea — suddenly putting multiple countries on the brink of nuclear weapons. One proposal is even stunningly similar to the JCPOA: Restrain Saudi enrichment for 10 years before lifting all restrictions. ……………………………………………………………….. more https://thehill.com/opinion/4668719-congress-must-stop-biden-from-fueling-a-saudi-nuclear-bomb/
—
US nuclear industry clamors for waiver process details as Russian uranium ban looms
companies with enriched uranium contracts with Russia can seek to continue to receive their material .
Questions were raised during the meeting about whether the names of those receiving waivers would be made public
https://www.spglobal.com/commodityinsights/en/market-insights/latest-news/electric-power/051024-us-nuclear-industry-clamors-for-waiver-process-details-as-russian-uranium-ban-looms Author, Andrea Jennetta William Freebairn 10 May 24
HIGHLIGHTS
DOE plans to issue notice on process shortly after bill enactment
Utilities worried about criteria for showing inability to obtain fuel
Waiver process important to entire industry, Centrus CEO says.
US nuclear operators and nuclear fuel market participants have asked a series of questions to the US Department of Energy in a meeting last week, eager to learn details of a system of waivers being developed in connection with the passage of a ban on Russian enriched uranium late last month. DOE officials, while guarded, told the industry it would be ready for speedy and reasoned adjudication of waiver claims, according to attendees.
The Senate unanimously approved the measure April 30, following passage of a similar bill in the House of Representatives in December. The ban takes effect 90 days after President Joe Biden signs the bill into law.
Under an as-yet disclosed waiver system, companies with enriched uranium contracts with Russia can seek to continue to receive their material by demonstrating they do not have viable alternate sources of fuel or that continued deliveries are in the national interest.
Two people who attended an April 30 meeting with DOE officials said the department indicated it will be ready to publish a Federal Register notice within 30 days of enactment of the legislation outlining the process for seeking waivers.
The legislation is designed to reduce US reliance on Russian uranium for nuclear fuel following Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine. Russia supplies about 20% of US reactor operators’ enrichment needs, although most utilities have sought to reduce their dependence on Russian state nuclear company Rosatom in recent months.
However, a utility fuel buyer said there was skepticism among some participants that the department would be ready, as there are myriad complexities around the process and timetables.
“They still don’t have a lot of answers,” the fuel buyer said.
Biden has not signed the legislation, which was sent by Congress to the White House May 8, according to one meeting participant. The bill becomes law if the president does not veto it within 10 days of formal receipt from Congress, whether he signs it or not, several meeting participants said.
Questions were raised during the meeting about whether the names of those receiving waivers would be made public, whether uranium coming into the country for fabrication into fuel and export out of the US would require or receive waivers and what criteria would be used to permit utilities to receive Russian fuel, the people said. All those who spoke about the meeting did so on condition of anonymity to discuss the private meeting and avoid hurting their relationship with the DOE.
The rapid timeframes involved raise questions as well, the fuel buyer said. “How are they going to do this on a 90-day schedule, when there are ships literally on the water” containing enriched uranium, the person said.
A uranium producer in attendance said DOE officials indicated they would seek to act as rapidly as possible for requests on material in transit or requiring a decision regarding short-term deliveries.
An industry official who attended the meeting said DOE indicated it would take a “relaxed approach, particularly over the next couple of years,” in approving end-user waivers. Still, the department was noncommittal in its plans, the person said.
DOE plans to request detailed information on why a delivery should be allowed, with information on the impact on the national interest as well as the potential challenges in securing replacement material, the attendees said. Utilities would need to show that inventories are not sufficient to replace the imported material, one of the people said. DOE would adjudicate those claims, this person said.
The uranium producer said the passage of the legislation offered miners a better option than the potential for executive action which the White House had indicated could take place should Congress fail to act. He said DOE in its meeting seemed unaware that the legislation was about to be passed by the Senate later that day, and so some of the department’s comments were guarded because officials did not know whether an executive order barring the imports or the language of the House legislation would prevail.
Centrus preparing for waiver submittal
The applicant for the waivers must be the importer of record, one person who attended the meeting said. This would mean that in the case of re-sellers of Russian enrichment services, such as Centrus, the re-seller would apply on behalf of customers, this person said.
Centrus and its predecessor companies have for several years purchased from Russia’s state-owned Tenex an annual quantity of Russian enriched uranium under a quota set by the Russian suspension agreement, then sold the LEU to utility customers.
“We obviously have all the intentions to apply for a waiver at the first opportunity,” said Centrus President, CEO and Director Amir Vexler in a first quarter earnings call May 8. “Yes, we’ve been preparing. We’re going to make use of this process, and it is extremely important, not only to Centrus, but to the industry here in the US.”
The company could find itself in a precarious financial position without access to enriched uranium to deliver to customers……………………………….
International impact
US utilities are not the only ones affected by the ban, several people said. Any foreign utility that has Russian enriched uranium delivered to a US fuel fabricator for re-export as fuel would also need a waiver, they noted.
DOE mentioned that utilities should be aware of at least one such pending case, which two people said is likely a reference to Mexico’s Comision Federal de Electricidad, which operates two GE-supplied boiling water reactors that get fuel from the US.
DOE officials reminded participants in the meeting that any process and all waivers will still have to comply with US sanctions requirements, one attendee said, and that waiver requests will have to take into account the availability of the American Assured Fuel Reserve, a stockpile of government-owned enriched uranium designed to protect nuclear operators from a disruption of nuclear fuel availability.
DOE did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Congress Restricts Russian Uranium Imports, Unlocks $2.7 Billion for Domestic Fuel
Rifka Handelman, MAY 08, 2024, https://ww2.aip.org/fyi/congress-restricts-russian-uranium-imports-unlocks-2-7-billion-for-domestic-fuel
The bill allows the energy secretary to issue waivers but aims to wean the U.S. off Russian nuclear fuel.
Legislation that restricts imports of unirradiated low-enriched uranium (LEU) from Russia is now headed to the president’s desk after the Senate passed it by unanimous consent last week.
The restriction will take effect 90 days after the president signs the legislation, which is expected to occur.
The act allows the secretary of energy to issue waivers for imports up to certain limits if there is no other viable source of LEU available. As of 2022, U.S. civilian nuclear power plants collectively sourced about 12% of their uranium from Russia.
Once the restriction is in place, the Department of Energy is permitted to spend up to $2.72 billion to support domestic production of LEU and high-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU), which is a more concentrated fuel intended for use in prospective advanced reactors.
Congress allocated these funds through the final appropriations legislation for fiscal year 2024 but made them contingent on the U.S. restricting imports of Russian uranium.
The funds will specifically go toward implementing the Nuclear Fuel Security Act, which aims to expand U.S. capacity to make HALEU fuel and ensure there is a reserve of uranium that can sustain U.S. reactors in the event of supply chain disruption.
US cutoff of Russian uranium imports viable but costly to replace
The Sun, 3 May 24
WASHINGTON: The United States’ move toward banning imports of Russian uranium will be viable but replacing that supply will be costly to fund the necessary investment needed to meet the growing demand, a leading US uranium firm and expert told Sputnik.
The US Senate on Tuesday passed the Prohibiting Russian Uranium Imports Act, sending it to President Joe Biden’s desk to be signed into law. The legislation bans US imports of unirradiated low-enriched uranium produced in Russia or by a Russian entity and measures to close loopholes.
However, the legislation allows waivers should the US determine that no alternative viable source of low-enriched uranium is available to sustain the continued operation of a US nuclear reactor or nuclear energy company, or if it also determines the importation of uranium is in the national interest. Any waiver issued by the US Energy Department must terminate by January 1, 2028, while the ban expires on December 31, 2040.
Scott Melbye, executive vice president of Uranium Energy Corporation and president of Uranium Producers of America, told Sputnik that the ban will mean the US will boost uranium production in the coming years, but also noted that significant new investment will be needed for that to happen.
“The US and its close allies have sufficient mineral resources, technologies, and companies to regain this level of leadership, however, significant capital needs to be deployed to make that a reality,“ Melbye said…………………………………………………………………….
The industry executive noted that the US, Canada, Japan, and the United States plan to mobilise US$4.2 billion to promote a reliable global nuclear energy supply chain, which presents strong export opportunities for American uranium.
The EIA notes that during 2022, 3 per cent of the uranium loaded into US civilian nuclear power reactors was US-origin uranium and 97 per cent was foreign-origin uranium. The United States purchased a total of 32.1 million pounds of uranium concentrate from abroad in 2022.
In 2022, Russia supplied almost a quarter of the enriched uranium used to fuel America’s fleet of more than 90 commercial reactors.
Princeton University Professor Frank Von Hippel, who has served as the US Assistant Director for National Security in the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, also believes the plan is possible, but will require Western nuclear utilities to spend more.
“It would require the Western nuclear utilities to buy more uranium and to pay more for enrichment work,“ Von Hippel told Sputnik. “The US utilities, at least, are notoriously sensitive to even small cost increases. That is why it has taken two years for Congress to get to this point. And… they are allowing escape clauses if any utility really gets desperate.”
The legislation is meant to cut off a source of revenue to Russia amid its special military operation in Ukraine, but Von Hippel said he does not expect it to make much of a difference considering Russia gets most of its foreign exchange from selling oil and gas.
Russian nuclear company Rosatom could be expected to lose some reactor sales and some fuel sales in some other countries because of the ban, but other countries that have already signed contracts for new reactors, and have them under construction, are locked in, Von Hippel added.
Sarah Fields, programme director for environmental group Uranium Watch, said that although her group supports cutting off revenue to Russia, they also urge the United States to end its reliance on nuclear power.
“The United States should end its reliance on nuclear power, which is not a viable solution to climate change,“ Fields told Sputnik. “Uranium Watch does not support the expansion of uranium fuel production in the United States. With no national repository for long-term care and disposal of spent nuclear fuel, it is irresponsible and foolish to continue to extend the lives of existing nuclear reactors and support the development of new reactors.”
Fields further said that uranium mining is the least regulated part of the nuclear fuel chain and continues to pollute land, air, and water as well as expose rural and Indigenous communities to radiological emissions and contamination……………………………. https://thesun.my/world/us-cutoff-of-russian-uranium-imports-viable-but-costly-to-replace-DG12413527
Production of Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) threatens our environment, health, and safety.
The nuclear industry is pushing for mass production of HALEU, which poses
significant risks to our environment, health, and safety. This form of
enriched uranium for new types of nuclear power reactors could perpetuate
the cycle of nuclear proliferation here in the US and worldwide.
Here’s the problem: HALEU requires producing uranium that is close enough to
weapons-grade that it could be used as cover to develop nuclear weapons.
Making it produces more radioactive pollution, and using it would generate
waste that is more hazardous and difficult to manage. And if the U.S.
starts making HALEU for nuclear power plants, other countries will believe
they should have the right to do so–opening the floodgates to weapons
proliferation and forever compromising the U.S. in standing against that.
We must voice our opposition to this reckless endeavor and demand
accountability from decision-makers. Your comment can make a difference in
shaping policy and preventing the acquisition of HALEU.
NIRS 13th April 2024
https://nirs.salsalabs.org/HALEUCommentsApril2024/index.html
-
Archives
- May 2026 (62)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 