VT Edition: Tom Zoellner on Uranium

This is from the Vermont Public Radio. On their site, linked below, you can listen to a podcast or an MP3 or stream of the discussion of this book, Uranium: War, Energy, and the Rock That Changed The World by Tom Zoellner. Fascinating!

Monday August 3, 2009
Jane Lindholm

The element uranium is thought to be the most deadly element found in the earth's crust. Throughout history it's been used for many destructive purposes, yet it's also been touted as the future of clean energy. We learn more about the power and uses of uranium, and examine how it's shaped world events with Vermont author Tom Zoellner. He's the author of the new book, Uranium: War, Energy, and the Rock that Reshaped the World.

http://www.vpr.net/news_detail/85491/

Northrop Grumman Administrator: VA has nothing to fear from uranium

From our friends at "Virginia Energy Independence Alliance", the cleverly named group that's actually a play on the new name of the Santoy/VUI merger whose website, http://www.virginiaenergy.org/home/ is the best spin and manipulation money can buy and a good PR firm can dream up, comes this little ditty.

I guess that when you're preparing for the day when you can perpetrate wreck and ruin upon everything within scores of miles, you don't want anyone to realize that while you're waiting. Sooo...what's an agent of death and destruction to do?

Spread lies, of course! On everything and everyone! You make yourself sound like the Messiah and those who oppose you like raving lunatics. You go far and wide to find folks who'll do your lying for you...making stuff up as they go along...as long as the bad guys look like the good guys and the good guys look like the evil-doers. This letter below is a fine example...one of the more outrageous we've seen in its degree of fantasy.

We all need to face the facts...uranium mining and milling are not safe and not advantageous to anyone save a few investors and perhaps a handful of peripheral players like PR agents, lobbyists, and those who will sign modern-day fairy tales to make them appear as sincere letters. It's only going to get more and more ridiculous in the days and months ahead...the "facts" will become the fantasies and the fantasies the facts.

Prepare yourself! It's going to be a bit like Alice as she stepped through the Looking Glass...nothing will be as it appears. It's important to remember, though, who's telling the truth...and can verify their stories through myriad respected sources: those anti-uranium advocates who Virginia Energy will continue to portray as "opponents spreading fear" (aka telling the hard, cold truth) and those pro-uranium advocates who will sing you to sleep with lullabyes of the goodness and wonder of radioactivity, illness, contamination and devastation.

You can continue to get your daily dose of "true truth" (honest facts backed up by science and history) here...I promise.

And now on with the show!

In a letter to the editor of the Virginian-Pilot, Mike Cohen - Virginia Beach resident and contract administrator with Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding - reassures Hampton Roads and Southside residents that they have nothing to fear from uranium mining in Pittsylvania County. Pittsylvania County is home to Coles Hill, the largest untapped uranium deposit in the U.S. Mr. Cohen tells residents that so much of the fear spread by opponents of mining the Coles Hill deposit is based on erroneous myths and complete fallacies that are easily invalidated by science.

Indeed, the premise that our water supply is in danger reflects an ignorance of the water chemistry and material characteristics of uranium and its related products, which make such long-distance transport virtually impossible…

Uranium is a naturally occurring component of soils, building materials and coal. It is already present in every source of our water supply, as well as our homes, office buildings and yards.

Radon, the decay product of uranium most frequently cited as a danger, is steadily emitted from the earth below us and accumulates in our buildings. The simple fact that we construct airtight buildings accounts for more human radon exposure than all of the mines in this country combined…

Finally, we are exposed to far more hazardous contaminants than uranium every day in [Hampton Roads]. Ships, trucks and trains carrying deadly chemicals come in and out of the port every day, many of which have the potential to contaminate our air and water supply in a severe accident. Yet we tolerate that risk because of the benefit to our economy.”

Mr. Cohen believes the development of the Coles Hill deposit will provide enormous economic benefits by creating as many as 1,000 new jobs and breaking our dependence on foreign energy.

So when you read in the coming months about Coles Hill, remember to keep the big picture. While there are potential risks with any large project, we stand to lose much more by leaving our natural resources in the ground.”

http://www.virginiaenergy.org/2009/06/23/northrop-grumman-administrator-va-has-nothing-to-fear-from-uranium/

An Overview of Milling Uranium

Milling uranium is an energy intensive process. Even after the ore has arrived at the mill, massive energy is needed to mill the ore, to turn it into that desirable yellow cake. But don’t cut a slice just yet, and put down those candles.

An overview of the milling process will give you a better idea of what milling uranium entails as well as the quantities of chemicals involved. Calculating a mill’s carbon footprint (which should be mandatory for every new industrial project these days) needs to take a lot into account, including the heat used in milling, the transportation of ore and product to and from the mill, and the transport and manufacture of the chemicals used in the processes.

Throughout all of this, remember that the mill Energy Fuels is eager to build in Paradox Valley aims to process 1,000 tons (2,204,622.62 pounds – or about 143 large, African bull elephants) every day. That’s like grinding up 773 family cars, every day.

First off, though, the milling stages:

Grinding. You have to grind up the rock.

Pre-leaching & thickening. A fancy way of saying you need to treat the ground-up rock with acids, and then thicken the slurry.

Leaching. Add more caustic substances to the mix to dissolve the coveted minerals.

Uranium recovery. Precipitate the minerals with the addition of more chemicals.

Vanadium recovery. Repeat to get your vanadium oxides.

First, to grinding. Ore is dumped on stockpiles, shipped from area mines via truck. Using a front end loader, the rocky ore is lifted and dumped into a feed hopper. It is then fed via a conveyor to the Semi Autogenous Grinding (SAG) mill.

Here, the ore is combined with volumes of water, and tumbled with steel balls.

After tumbling to reduce particle size to around 0.03 inches, the slurry is ‘delivered’ to large, steel storage tanks, located outside the SAG mill. Then, more pumping, from the storage tanks to two rubber-lined steel pre-leach tanks. Now concentrated sulfuric acid (H2SO4) is sprayed in, to reduce the pulp density to 25% solids. (In other words, enough H2SO4 to be three-times the volume of the particles in solution. That’s a lot of acid.)

The slurry is then pumped to a 60 foot diameter, rubber-lined, steel thickener tank where the overflow is clarified, filtered, and sent to the feed tank for uranium recovery. The partially dewatered underflow is pumped into the leaching circuit to be re-concentrated.

Back in the SAG mill the slurry moves through eight tanks with agitators. Here the pulp is heated to 185º F using steam. More H2SO4 is pumped in to leach out the uranium and vanadium minerals. Sodium chlorate is added as an oxidant, as needed. Wherever there is heat, there must also be pressure, so some emissions are necessary – or else the SAG mill would explode.

Now it’s time to separate the liquids and the solids, and purify the solution. The pulp is pumped to a series of 40 foot diameter ‘counter current decantation’ (CDD) thickeners. The ‘pregnant’ solution is separated from the solids, and pumped to the recovery feed tank. The solids, the tailings, are pumped into the tailings cells.

Then, in the Solvent Extraction Building (SX), extraction is performed to concentrate and recover the uranium. The solution is filtered, and the uranium is separated using a kerosene-based (as in oil and jet-fuel) solvent. This is then ‘washed’ with more H2SO4 and more water to remove impurities. Finally, the uranium is stripped from the kerosene-based solvent with sodium carbonate solution.

Now we move to the drying and packaging building, where the uranium is continuously precipitated from the stripping fluid by adding hydrogen peroxide. The yellow cake (triuranium octaoxide, (U3O8), uranium dioxide (UO2) and uranium trioxide (UO3), collectively known as ‘urania’) is partially dewatered, washed, filtered and dried in a steam dryer. Lots more heat. Lots more energy. Lots more byproducts.

Once dried, the yellow cake is packed and weighed in 55 gallon steel drums for shipment via the highway. Presently, each barrel (weighing around 900 pounds) is worth $44,100.00 to Energy Fuels. That’s not enough to be economically feasible. At current prices (of about $49/pound) the mill would generate daily revenues of $215,600.00. That’s still not enough. (Energy Fuels has spent more than $20 million in just researching the mill already.)

Finally, the drums of yellow cake are shipped to a conversion plant, to be made into uranium hexafluoride (enriched) and sent to market. There is only one conversion plant currently operating in the US, the ConverDyn facility in Metropolis, Illinois. There’s another in Ontario, and product can be shipped to Texas for processing overseas. But that’s still an enormous amount of gas used in transport. One estimate is 45 metric tons of CO2 per year just in transporting the milled ore to conversion. This doesn’t include shipping in the ore or the chemicals necessary for its processing.

But lets look at the tailings, too. Energy Fuels likes to point out that the tailings are not dangerous – after all, the majority of the uranium has been removed. If this was true, why are tailings so notoriously deadly around water wells? Isn’t kerosene bad to drink? Is it safe to bathe in concentrated sulfuric acid? You mean they’ve extracted 100% of the uranium they were concentrating? That’s amazing!

Anyway, the tailings piles will be state of the art, Energy Fuels is keen to observe. They will be lined with two 1.5 mm polyethylene (plastic) geomembranes. Not one, but two. (This is a vast improvement, apparently. In the old days they just dumped the waste into holes in the ground.) There is some leak detection system used that Energy Fuels has never been able to elaborate on, when asked. (It’s odd that they can’t answer that question on the spot, you’d think it would be a good one to know.)

Once full the tailings are covered with compacted soil and then an ‘erosion cap’ is placed on top. This is basically a kind of concrete. Then, they re-vegetate, hoping life will take hold (but not too tight, they don’t want root systems breaking up that erosion cap). The tailings only need to be engineered to provide 1,000 years of coverage, but leaks through the two plastic liners have occurred in the past. Just look at Canon City.

http://www.wise-uranium.org/umopcc.html

Basically there’s a lot more to this process than the presentations given by Energy Fuels elucidate. They’re fond of platitudes and overarching statements. One of my favorites is: “There have been a lot of changes in the milling industry. It’s like cars. A car today is much more advanced than a car of the 1940s.” Aside from mixing metaphors and admitting the previous incarnation of uranium mills were, sorry, terrible, this does little to present the data. It’s like walking into a bank and asking for a loan with “Give me a million dollars, I will repay it in time.”

Just as a banker wants to see a budget, any population that will be living beside a uranium mill deserves to be presented scientific, actual data. Not pie-in-the-sky rhetoric and patronizing reassurances. You would think these uranium pros would be over-brimming with technical data to share – heck, it’s their lives! If you talk to my friend Red about welding, watch out, you’ll get a tour of his truck! He can rattle off quantities of gases and materials that boggle the mind. But these guys come off as skirting the issue, repeating platitudinous metaphors as irrelevant as they are misleading.

I want to give these folks a chance to explain these “new technologies” that have “changed the industry” like never before. In fact, in Norwood last year, I cornered Energy Fuels President, George Glazier, and asked him for an example of this “new technology”. He revealed to me that one such example is the alarm on the storage tanks. When they get full, a light will go on which will show they’re full, so the slurry can be redirected. Wow, I thought. We’ve been doing that for years in the pipeline business. How can uranium – the futuristic, save-the-world science set to quash climate change – be so far behind? When pressed further he mentioned the leak detection in the tailings, but stopped short of explaining how it worked or what it was.

The way this works is the scientists who come to present the material don’t actually have the answers. They’re kinda’ like salesmen. So they give you a name for another scientist. But he (or she) can’t help because he (or she) doesn’t return calls.

In the end you get the impression no one really knows, or cares, because they’re too busy crunching future revenues, and juicy profits, to worry about the little things – like minimizing exposure to milling effluents. It’s odd, really. You’d think they’d jump at the chance to prove all this tech. Instead, it’s like hunting for a silhouette of truth in a room full of shadows.

Even if the uranium milling industry has improved immeasurably in the last 40 years, it’s hardly grounds for proving this mill. It’s like pointing to a cave from your tent and saying, “look how far we’ve come.”

Good luck weathering the storm!

http://www.examiner.com/x-12119-San-Miguel-County-Environmental-Policy-Examiner~y2009m6d7-An-overview-of-milling-uranium

Keeping Agriculture Alive in the Shadow of a Uranium Mine: Potential Effects and Regulatory Solutions for Virginia

ELPR {William & Mary: Environmental Law & Policy Review}

By admin | May 20, 2009

This is a preview of one of the upcoming Volume 34 notes

by Maggy J. Lewis

This Note deals with the emerging regulatory controversy over the potential mining of a uranium deposit located in rural Southern Virginia. The “Coles Hill” deposit is thought to be the largest deposit of uranium in the United States, but has been largely ignored since the Virginia General Assembly instituted a moratorium on uranium mining in the early 1980’s. The increase in the price of uranium in recent years has revived the debate on uranium mining. There is potential for the moratorium to be lifted in the near future and for uranium mining to be introduced to Virginia for the first time.

[...]

This Note addresses the potential implications for agricultural production if uranium mining becomes a reality for Virginia by looking at scientific and sociological data at other mine sites, as well as public perception of food safety threats. There are gaps to be filled in both regulation and enforcement mechanisms as they apply to uranium mining’s effects on agricultural crops and livestock. This Note provides suggestions for means of regulating the output of agricultural products from the potentially affected regions of Virginia under the current statutory framework for developing state and site-specific protocols to ensure safety and preserve the public confidence in the food supply. By taking the proactive regulatory approach proposed by this Note, agriculture can continue to be a successful economic base of the Southern Virginia both during the uranium mining process and after it has come to an end.

Read the complete abstract here: http://elpr.org/2009/05/20/keeping-agriculture-alive-in-the-shadow-of-a-uranium-mine-potential-effects-and-regulatory-solutions-for-virginia/

Read more about the full Volume34 Note at the same site. It promises to be excellent.

No Petition at Mining Seminar [Tonight]

By John Crane

Published: April 22, 2009

Groups presenting an anti-mining seminar at Averett University tonight will not circulate a petition as planned to ban uranium mining in Pittsylvania County and remove the Board of Supervisors if it doesn’t adopt a new county constitution outlawing the practice.

Averett officials requested that the petition not be included in an anti-uranium presentation Tuesday.

“We respectfully asked the Alliance to refrain from introducing the petition at this educational forum, and they are cooperating with our request,” Susan Huckstep, Averett spokeswoman, said via e-mail Tuesday.

The Alliance and the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund are presenting the seminar. Gregg Vickrey, a founder and chairman of the Alliance, said he had no problem with the school’s request, and the event will take place as scheduled at 7 p.m. today at Averett’s student center.

“They’re trying to offer educational forums, and I respect that,” Vickrey said. He said the Alliance hopes to debut the petition at a later event at a different location.

Shireen Parsons, Virginia community organizer with the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund, will also speak at the seminar about how a community can practice self-governance.

Virginia Uranium Inc. seeks to mine and mill a 119 - million pound uranium ore deposit at Coles Hill, about six miles northeast of Chatham. Virginia currently has a moratorium on the practice.

Opponents have drafted the petition, which demands that supervisors ban uranium mining within three months of receiving it. The petition also calls for an election of 11 people to draft a new constitution for the county, which would ban uranium mining and would recognize the right to self-government. The county’s chapter of Southside Concerned Citizens would oversee the election.

The petition calls for residents to vote on ratification of the constitution and to declare that the supervisors be given the choice to adopt it. If the board doesn’t, the constitution would still become law and a special election would be held to elect new supervisors. Vickrey said he hopes everyone attends the presentation to see what the groups have to say and make informed decisions.

http://www.godanriver.com/gdr/news/local/danville_news/article/no_petition_at_mining_seminar/10547/

Uranium Ban a Wasted Effort

Wednesday, March 25, 2009 9:27 AM EDT

Chatham Star-Tribune

Opinion

The Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors is being urged by many people to adopt ordinances to prevent uranium mining in Pittsylvania County.

I do not believe there is any citizen of Pittsylvania County more opposed to uranium mining in our county and state than I am.

I am also opposed to the Board of Supervisors taking such actions as it will most surely cause Pittsylvania County to be brought into court to answer for ordinances which have been passed.

I wonder if the Board of Supervisors would consider sponsoring an educational meeting for the public on the differences between the powers of local governments in Dillon Rule states and home rule states? This might prevent a great deal of misunderstanding in the future.

For speaker, I would suggest Professor Jesse J. Richardson Jr., an attorney and faculty member in Urban Affairs and Planning at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University supplemented by any other persons the board would care to have participate.

I think our local efforts should be devoted to the realm of the possible, and changing Virginia from a Dillon rule state to a home rule state is not in such a set of actions at this time.

We need all of our efforts to bring pressure on the members of the General Assembly.

I personally do not care if the much touted "study" says mining uranium here will be as safe as eating an ice cream cone.

I still want this ore kept in the ground, just as it is now, forever even if Walter Coles and his descendents become paupers.

Hildred C. Shelton

Danville

http://www.wpcva.com/articles/2009/03/25/chatham/opinion/opinion01.txt

Map of Former Uranium Mining Leases Pittsylvania County, Virginia

http://www.pecva.org/anx/ass/library/19/miningleases_pitts1.pdf

Click on the link above to see a fairly detailed map of all the Pittsylvania Co. properties leased by Marline in the 1980's. We can only assume that many, if not all, of these properties will be as attractive to VUI as they were to Marline. However, we have not verified that they are currently under lease to VUI.

This is a large file...2.65 MB...so if you're on dial-up, it will take a little bit to download. Broad-band users will have no trouble seeing it quickly. It's a .PDF file and needs an Adobe Reader. You can adjust the size of the picture by clicking on the - or + buttons on the Reader.

The map was prepared by the Piedmont Environmental Council and the same disclaimers apply to it as to the water systems map below.

Map of Water Systems Endangered by Mining Coles Hill

http://www.pecva.org/anx/ass/library/19/coleshill_water1.pdf

This map is a real eye-opener. It shows the properties near Coles Hill formerly leased by Marline (which are possibly/presumably under current lease by VUI). And it shows, quite clearly, the water's path from Coles Hill to the Atlantic Ocean...through the Bannister River, the Dan River, Kerr Lake/Resevoir, Lake Gaston...all the water systems. Please do take a look!

The map will open through an Adobe Reader. If it opens smaller than you'd like, you can adjust the size on the Reader up past 500%. Just click on the + button until you get the size you want.

The map was created by Piedmont Environmental Council for presentation purposes only. Data source: Pittsylvania County. Although efforts have been made to verify data, accuracy is not guaranteed.

Opponents of Uranium Mine Find Allies at the Beach

The Virginian-Pilot
© March 15, 2009

Deborah and Phillip Lovelace felt like they were going up against an army as they organized opposition to a proposed uranium mine five miles from their cattle farm near Gretna, a Southside town of 1,300.

Then the Virginia Beach City Council passed a resolution opposing the mine without guarantees that the operation wouldn't contaminate Lake Gaston, its primary drinking water supply.

Suddenly, the Lovelaces had their own army: a city of 425,000 people. "I could have almost turned cartwheels," Phillip said.

"People now realize, 'Hey, maybe it's not just little Gretna, Va.,' " Deborah added. "It's going to affect a lot more people."

The Lovelaces are among 10 Gretna residents traveling to Hampton Roads Wednesday for a 7:30 p.m. meeting at Emmanuel Episcopal Church on Princess Anne Road. Officials from the Beach and Norfolk have been invited, and the event is open to the public.

The Lovelaces say they hope to get moral support and meet people with environmental expertise to aid their cause.

While the event is likely to attract mostly passionate opponents of mining, it's being organized by the Virginia Interfaith Center and Tidewater Sowers of Justice, two faith-based groups that aren't exactly in the rabble-rousing business.

The professorial Del. Joe Bouchard will lead the discussion, and he admits his audience may not like everything he says. The Democrat supports a controversial state study on the impact of uranium mining in Virginia as long as it's done by the respected National Academy of Sciences and is not influenced by mining companies.

"If you do it right, it's going to shed light on what the dangers really are," he said.

While a county zoning board might be swayed by crowds of angry people, state regulatory boards will base their decisions on scientific analysis, Bouchard said.

A former Montanan, Bouchard is familiar with the health and environmental destruction uranium mining can cause. New technologies have been developed to minimize mining impacts in arid climates, but he's unsure whether they will work in Virginia with its heavy rains and interconnected groundwater systems.

Bouchard hopes the meeting will help constituents and city leaders start thinking strategically about energy issues. Virginia Beach finds itself on the front lines of the debates. Many of the options could benefit the city, but they also carry risks.

A proposed coal-fired power plant in Surry County would release greenhouses gases and add pollutants to the Chesapeake Bay. Offshore drilling and wind farms raise questions about impacts on the environment and military operations. Nuclear energy is the quickest way to reduce greenhouses gases, but it requires uranium for fuel.

"If Virginia Beach degenerates into a situation where they just say no to everything, people will stop listening to them," Bouchard said. "There's a rational way to approach this and, that's what I'll be advocating."

Christina Nuckols is an editorial writer for The Virginian-Pilot. E-mail her at christina.nuckols@pilotonline.com.

http://hamptonroads.com/2009/03/opponents-uranium-mine-find-allies-beach

More from Mark Krueger re: U Mining and Water

Below are the questions Mr. Krueger posted as a comment to the article in the Victoria Advocate in response to the article announcing the 24-hour uranium answers hotline. They're essentially the same questions that Southside has been asking...or should be asking...about Coles Hill.

Fri Mar 13, 2009 03:28:01 CDT

The obvious thing to do for someone without any knowledge is to call this hotline, then call URAC and UIAG to compare notes but the key is to have enough knowledge to ask the right questions:

1) "ISL Uranium mining is safe for surrounding property owners". Where is the scientific data to back this statement? How many ISL uranium mine closures in Texas have had long-term studies performed? Who performed the studies? Were studies performed outside the mining zone as well? What were the results and where can I find them? If no studies have been performed, then why not when they easily could have been over the last 30 years?

2) "Not a single documented case of a private well being contaminated exists (in Texas)". How many nondocumented cases exist? How many people have expressed concern but didn't have the knowledge or opportunity to test their water beforehand? Do any documented cases exist outside of Texas? Does the mining company make a concerted effort to inform the community before they explore? If so, will they provide up-front water testing to all the surrounding neighbors before they explore? Will the mining company absorb the expense of periodic water testing for the neighbors while they're mining? What about after mining?

3) "The fabric of the soil in the sand layers is homogeneous (all the same) so water flows evenly and can be controlled". If so, then why do water well drillers sometimes drill a well and by doing so affect another well, while in other cases no affect is seen at all? Why do water well drillers sometimes lose circulation? Are there gravel beds, faults, fractures and other fabric of less resistance which allow the water to flow more readily under pressure? How many times during exploration has a driller lost circulation? How would losing circulation in several boreholes affect the aquifer and what would this indicate?

4) "The oxidized isotopes (liqufied heavy metals) will reprecipitate (turn solid) within 20 feet of the mining zone". If it took hundreds of thousands of years to precipitate under very specific conditions the first time, how is it known that the mere presence of hydrogen sulfide will immediately reduce the uranium, arsenic, selenium, radium, radon and other constituents after they're mobilized? If this is the case, then why are monitor wells required to detect excursions? Why does Nuclear Regulatory Commission Study CR-6870 show that levels of oxidized heavy metals were shown to increase after hydrogen sulfide injection and restoration? Why does this study suggest that stabilization after restoration may take as long as five years, and long-term monitoring (13 years) may be necessary to quantify accurate results?

5) "Spending taxpayers money on lawsuits is a waste". Why has Kleberg County spent over a million so far? Is it because the State relaxed restoration standards for the company and the citizens aren't going to accept that? Is it because of leaks and spills of thousands of gallons of radioactive water and this causes concern by the citizens? Why has Kleberg County spent that much money?

Other questions:

If I lease and something happens to a neighbor's well, will the mining company take care of any and all expenses (lawsuits)? If so, for how long after mining is complete?

PVC is used in much of the operation. If the PVC cracks or a joint comes loose, a radioactive spill will occur. How quickly will the spill be detected? How is the spill cleaned up? How many gallons are lost in a typical spill?

Much of the toxic wastewater produced will go to an evaporation pond. How much radon gas will evaporate from the pond? If the pond leaks, can the leakage enter the aquifer? How is a pond leak resolved if it occurs? How are the radioactive salts from the evaporation pond disposed of?

What if an injection or extraction (production) pump fails? What happens next?

How much water is consumed in a typical restoration? (It's millions of gallons, just how many?)

When uranium bottomed at $7 per pound, most ISL uranium mining companies filed bankruptcy and abandoned the mining sites without restoring the water first. What if that were to happen today?

UEC has an extremely well done presentation put together which portrays ISL mining as perfect and without flaw in perfect conditons. However, we live in an imperfect world and nature will not allow perfection. Flaws will exist, risks will be taken and mistakes will be made.

Even after all that, common sense will tell you not to pee in your water well and then put pressure on it. Injecting into a drinking water aquifer to liberate these radioactive metals is doing just that as far as I'm concerned. If it needs to be done, then it needs to be done far away from people's drinking water until it is perfected.

Victoria District Attorney Steve Tyler once asked me, "Wouldn't you agree that the best way to predict one's future is to look into their past?" I agree. UEC doesn't have much of a past, but what is there isn't very shiny. Leaving boreholes open for the torrential rains of 2007 to wash down them (oxidizing the ore in the lower sands) and being cited by TRRC doesn't look too good, not to mention the radioactive tailings they left on top of the ground. Honest mistake or oversight maybe? It doesn't matter. It happened, indicating that other things will probably "happen" regardless of the reason.

I didn't see the Hotline phone number on the website, but I did see this...

"The Uranium Committee has recently hired a contract public relations consultant to assist them with media and public perception in the communities where they are working."

This tells me that public awareness is growing, the public wants answers and this appears to be an attempt on behalf of the mining industry to resolve this issue. I hope the Hotline is genuine and not geared as a sales pitch but history and logic tell me that it is.

http://community.victoriaadvocate.com/home/ViewPost/33524

Local NAACP Chapter to Host Forum on Uranium Mining

By John Crane

Published: March 4, 2009

The Pittsylvania County branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People will meet with members of the Board of Supervisors next week to discuss uranium mining.

The meeting is open to the public and will take place at 6 p.m. March 12 at the Senior Center at 508 N. Main St. in Chatham.

“I’d like to find out the positions of the supervisors,” NAACP President Willie T. Fitzgerald said Tuesday.

NAACP members have invited Board of Supervisors Chairman Coy Harville, who represents the Westover District, and Banister Supervisor William Pritchett to answer questions about the political issues involved in uranium mining. The membership, which numbers about 400 in the county, is interested in learning more about uranium mining and related matters, NAACP Secretary Elizabeth Jones said.

Virginia Uranium Inc. wants to mine and mill a 119-million-pound uranium ore deposit at Coles Hill, about six miles northeast of Chatham. The state has imposed a moratorium on uranium mining since the early 1980s. The Virginia Coal and Energy Commission approved a study in November.

The Board of Supervisors passed a resolution last month calling for a thorough, unbiased study that would ensure no harm to the environment, residents, businesses or other institutions in the county from uranium mining before it is deemed safe.

Pritchett, a member of the county NAACP, said he doesn’t know enough about uranium mining to form an opinion on the topic. Pritchett said he is taking a wait-and-see approach until the two-year study is complete. The Coal and Energy Commission’s Uranium Mining Subcommittee hopes the study will be conducted by the National Academy of Sciences.

Pritchett said there is hysteria surrounding uranium mining and that most of the constituents in his district are against the idea.

Henry Hurt, a Virginia Uranium investor, said he is pleased that the NAACP is holding a meeting on uranium mining. Hurt said he or another VUI representative will attend the event.

“It will be interesting to hear what they have to say,” Hurt said.

Virginia Uranium conducted a presentation for the NAACP’s Pittsylvania County branch in September, he said, and has given tours of the site for the group’s members.

http://www.godanriver.com/gdr/news/local/danville_news/article/local_naacp_chapter_to_host_forum_on_uranium_mining/9498/

'Grateful' Legislators Can Be Voted Out of Office

Wednesday, March 4, 2009 8:45 AM EST
Chatham Star-Tribune

To the Editor:

How utterly delightful that our elected representatives, Virginia State Senator Robert Hurt and House Delegates Danny Marshall and Don Merricks, have chosen to send a very public thank-you note to Terry Kilgore, chairman of the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission.

They even headed up the letter with "Put it on the Web!"

Personally, I'm so thankful that they represent us! Come voting time, I will remember their support of a group of officials that does not include any representation from Pittsylvania County, Virginia's largest land mass county - the ground zero test site for overturning the state's moratorium on the mining and milling of uranium.

I will especially remember that Senator Robert Hurt's father is an investor in Virginia Uranium Inc.

I will remember that Senator Hurt has not recused himself from voting in the past for an "unbiased study" by the state to determine if uranium mining and milling would be harmful to our area and the rest of Virginia.

Sure, the Senate's Rules Committee okayed his not recusing himself from voting for the study last year.

After all, he and his investor father do not live under the same roof and are not dependent upon each other financially.

Big "but" coming: Doesn't an appearance of a conflict of interest apply here?

I'm also dismayed over former Congressman Virgil Goode taking $73,650 from the coal industry, an industry overseen by elected officials such as the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission.

Knowing this industry's use of mountaintop removal/surface blast mining for coal removal is responsible for the destruction of 470+ mountains along the Appalachian Mountain chain (formerly intact communities and homes of fellow Americans), I decided not to vote for Goode and cast my vote for Tom Perriello.

Silly of me to jump party lines and cast my vote for this reason? Seems I wasn't the only voter dissatisfied with Goode because he lost his congressional seat.

I've met and spoken to his successor, Tom Perriello, and asked that he represent and protect the rights of the citizenry of this state - not those of profit-driven corporations.

Whatever the outcome of this "unbiased, scientific study" on uranium mining and milling for the state of Virginia, I truly feel Southside Virginia is well on its way to being mined and polluted by an industry that has done so, recklessly, for decades.

Virginia Uranium Inc.'s promise of "new and safe mining technology" runs contrary to the multitude of articles and headlines noting the past and ongoing pollution in many midwestern and western U.S. states: Arizona, California, Nebraska, Utah, Colorado, North & South Dakota, Oregon, New Mexico, Wyoming, Washington state, Texas. And that's just in the USA.

Doesn't the fact that these states seek millions in federal funding to clean up and remediate the environmental damage done to land and water sources by uranium mining and milling corporations speak volumes?

Will the promise of jobs and the posting of bond money by Virginia Uranium to remediate any future harm to the environment allay our fears that our rights won't be protected?

As Virginia citizens, shouldn't our right to live, work and rear families in a safe environment be a given?

Does remediate really mean restore, as in pre-mining conditions?

Or, does it mean living with radiation progeny and heavy metals contamination of the land, water and air, during and post-mining?

Will we have to move away from this area as many around Coles Hill have stated they will do in order to protect our families?

Once the moratorium is lifted, other parts of this uranium-rich county will be open to other mining companies like Virginia Uranium and its Canadian partner/owner, Santoy.

Seems to me, if we voted our elected officials in to protect our rights and interests as citizens, we can surely vote them out when we feel they've put the interests of corporations before ours.

Perhaps a hand-written note of thanks would have been the better choice for this grateful group of elected officials.

Anne Cockrell
Alliance member

Danville

http://www.wpcva.com/articles/2009/03/04/chatham/opinion/opinion07.txt

Uranium Mining in Virginia: A Community Discussion with Del. Joe Bouchard

The Virginia Interfaith Center for Public Policy and the Tidewater Sowers of Justice will host a discussion for concerned citizens about Uranium mining in Virginia, with remarks by Delegate Joe Bouchard and members of the Virginia Beach City Council. It appears from this announcement that the current study is not to determine the feasibility of mining Coles Hill without contaminating every living thing for the next gazillion years but rather to assess the risks of lifting the moratorium preventing uranium mining! Those goals are related but they are in no way identical! What is the true purpose of the study? This may be the place to find out!

Please join the Virginia Interfaith Center, Tidewater Sowers of Justice, and Del. Joe Bouchard on March 18th for a discussion on Uranium Mining in Virginia.

Del. Bouchard will share his insight into the current study commision tasked with assessing the risks of lifting the moratorium on Uranium Mining in Virginia.

Members of the Virigina Beach City Council (who have passed a resolution on Uranium Mining), Norfolk City Council and residents of Gretna and Chatham (site of the proposed mining) have been invited to join us for this discussion as well.

We hope to see on Wednesday, March 18th from 7:30-9:00pm.

RSVP Here:

http://www.delegatebouchard.com/event?key=971

3/18/2009 from 7:30 pm - 9:00 pm (Eastern Time)

Virginia Interfaith Center and Sowers of Justice Ryan Rinn- ryan@virginainterfaithcenter.org (804)643-2474

March 17, 2009 at 5:00 pm (Eastern Time) Location: Emmanuel Episcopal Church 5181 Princess Anne Rd Virginia Beach, VA 23462 http://ga4.org/interfaithcenter/events/uraniumVB/details.tcl

U209 uranium Symposium to Address Issues on Mining and Processing

By International Mining, February 23rd, 2009

The U209 conference will touch on all the challenges, developments and phases related to uranium mining and processing. It will bring together professionals in the fields of mining, processing, exploration, permitting, and health and safety along with business leaders, experts in the world uranium market, and government officials involved in regulation and permitting.

The symposium will be held on the 9-13 May 2009 at the Keystone resort, located in the scenic Rocky Mountains, a two-hour drive from Denver International airport. The technical program will encompass many industry topics and case studies. It will include three workshops, aimed at improving the participants’ technical expertise and there is also an opportunity to sign up for a field trip.

Topics that the symposium will cover include:

• The business side of uranium
• Exploration techniques
• Geophysics & geochemistry
• Mining and processing
• Project case studies & updates
• Restoration, reclamation & hydrology
• Environmental health & safety
• Permitting and regulatory affairs
• Socio-economic impacts - sustainability planning
• Human resources efforts to attract new professionals.

For more information and to sign up to the event go to www.u2009.org

http://www.im-mining.com/2009/02/23/u209-uranium-symposium-to-address-issues-on-mining-and-processing/#more-1415

You're Invited! Uranium Mining Educational Meeting in Riceville, February 21

The Public is Invited!

Uranium Mining Educational Forum

Saturday, February 21

9:00 AM

Riceville Missionary Baptist Church Family Life Center

1644 Riceville Road

(behind the 640 Rescue Squad Bldg)

For more information, call 434-432-8682 or 434-324-8797

How Does Mining Affect the People?

More from GreatMining.com

Monday, October 20th, 2008

Mining is destructive to the environment as trees and vegetation are cleared and burned for mining. Natural minerals and metals are stripped from the soil. In fact mining is one of the causes for deforestation. When environment is drastically affected, naturally the people will be affected.

The mining pits dug during land dredging mining remain as stagnant water pools serving as breeding ground for mosquitoes and other water-born insects.People living near such water pool areas have high possibility of getting water-born diseases such as malaria. The gravel, mud, and rocks displaced during river dredging mining disrupt the natural flow of the river. As a result, fish and other aquatic living organisms often die and fishermen find it very difficult to navigate in the obstructed rivers. Sand and gravel mining may sometimes pave way for contaminating the groundwater.

Chemicals used during mining process causes pollution to the environment, animals, and people.The chemicals such as cyanide, mercury, or methyl mercury used to amalgamate the metals and minerals extracted by mining are discharged into rivers, streams, bays, and oceans, thus contaminating the water bodies and the aquatic organisms such as fish living within the water bodies. People who consume such contaminated aquatic organisms are prone to serious health hazards. The contaminated water cannot be used for bathing, drinking, cooking, or washing clothes, thus creating water scarcity problem for people living nearby.

The toxic waste from mine tailings flow into either an abandoned mining pit or adjacent forest in the case of land dredging and pollute the river in the case of river dredging. The people who are exposed to the toxic waste from the tailings suffer health problems. They may suffer from skin rashes, headaches, vomiting, diarrhea, etc. Some mining involves the unintentional dispersal of heavy metals, such as lead, into the atmosphere. This can have serious health effects such as mental retardation in children. Asbestos dispersed into the environment during asbestos mining is life threatening for local residents and workers.

People living near mining areas or mining villages are very much disturbed and affected by the impact of mining. Theft, drugs/alcohol, prostitution, rape, cultural degradation and sexual abuse are unfortunately some of the worst problems of people living in mining areas. The poor people who face the health problems of mining cannot afford for a medical treatment, or the people who live in a remote village where a doctor is not accessible remain untreated for their illness.

The mining operators and their families may also face problems. The miners also have life risks when they are working in the mine. The family of small scale miners may suffer from financial and protection problems as the miners leave their family in search of work.

The effect of each proposed mining process on the environmental should be analyzed before granting permission to proceed mining. For example, the mining and use of asbestos are banned in most parts of the world life as asbestos dispersed into the environment is life threatening for people for several years.

Thus deforestation, mineral/metal depletion and chemical pollution due to mining can have unfavorable impact on the environment, aquatic habitats, people, animals, and of course the mining operators . Mining operators must be aware of the impacts of their mining operations, adopt self safety measures and ensure minimum risk to the environment and people.

This entry was posted on Monday, October 20th, 2008 at 9:12 am and is filed under Mining. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

http://www.greatmining.com/articles/how-does-mining-affect-the-people/

Problems of Uranium Mining

This is an interesting new (at least to me) site: http://www.greatmining.com/ At least some of their folks 'get it'.

December 11th, 2008

Tailings squander

Even the utmost grade deposits have less than 1% uranium. So vast amounts of ore have to be processed to obtain useful quantities of the uranium. The leftover ‘waste’ rock is known tailings. In the course of processing it is crushed to a well powder, which is nearly as radioactive as the uranium itself. It is perilous for more than 250,000 years, which might as well be eternally. These tailings need to be secluded from the environment to avoid a cancer epidemic, and there are previously more than 50 million tonnes of uranium tailings on Australian soil.

Radon Gas

As uranium emanates radiation; it transforms itself into a novel element, which in turn emanates radiation and decays, and so on through 14 steps until it ultimately - after hundreds of thousands of years - becomes a stable type of non-radioactive lead. One of the elements along the way is radon, a radioactive gas which can travel for hundreds of kilometres prior to decaying. Mine workers and others who breathe in this gas risk mounting lung cancer and other kinds of lung disease

Environmental Pollution

Uranium mining pollutes the air, water and earth with radioactive chemicals and heavy metals which can never be well cleaned up. In addition to the radiation hazard, mining is also related with poisonous process chemicals, heavy metals and the use of vast quantities of water. In the short term, uranium mine sites ruin the ecology of the local region; in the long term, they pose a risk to a much wider area.

Health risks

The health risks of uranium mining are by now fairly well known, although still belligerently disputed by the mining industry. Collectively, uranium miners suffer the maximum radiation doses of all workers in the nuclear fuel chain. The major problems are inhalation of dust and radon gas, which leave alpha radiation emitters lodged in the body where they can do the majority harm. As the pollution from the mines spread away from the minesite, local people are also out in the open to contamination. While uranium mining is most usually allied with cancer, low level radiation is also mixed up in birth fault, high infant mortality and chronic lung, eye, skin and reproductive illnesses.

Nuclear Waste

There is a vast amount of high level nuclear waste still being spewed out by reactors round the world and there is nowhere safe to put it. Pangea Resources actually has a plan to bring many of this waste into Australia. Nuclear power stations create this waste as fraction of normal operations; but there are also risks of reactor accidents; the explosion at Chernobyl in 1986 killed a lot of people, spread nuclear pollution right around the planet and forced the enduring evacuation of the surrounding area.

Nuclear Weapons

While the mining companies do not like to confess it, nuclear power is a military technology designed to make plutonium for nuclear weapons. Thousands of these weapons are still on hairtrigger alert ten further than ten years after the Cold War, and they are spreading gradually to new countries.

About the site:
Bryan Peter is a Copywriter of Mining Industry. We provide latest updates in the mining industry, the rich information in this site gives valuable inputs with regards to types of metals, minerals & precious stones and their properties. For more information visit: Uranium Mining.

http://www.free-articles-zone.com/article/224585/Problems%20of%20Uranium%20Mining

Uranium Seminar in Gretna Tues, Feb. 3, 2009 7pm

Uranium Seminar

Tuesday, February 3, 2009

7 p.m.

Mt. Olive Baptist Church

10465 Rockford School Rd.

Gretna, VA

Uranium in Pittsylvania County -- Star-Tribune

From the Chatham Star-Tribune...letters and articles from their papers during the past several months...just click on the link:

Click here for PDF of reports

Why not study uranium?
In the last week of the General Assembly, the House Rules Committee rejected a Senate-passed bill that would have required a study of uranium mining.

House committee kills uranium study bill
A study on the benefits and risks of uranium mining in Virginia may have to wait at least another year after the House of Delegates' Rules Committee tabled the bill Monday afternoon.

Virginia Uranium vice president sets record straight
It would be good to set the record straight on a couple of issues raised by Jesse Andrews in his letter last week.

Letter 'unfounded emotional attack'
There are so many inaccuracies in Jesse Andrews' letter. I am shocked that your paper would even publish it.

Uranium mining a 'plus' for few investors
We must kill the study of uranium mining in Pittsylvania County and all of Virginia.

Corporate greed fuels 'go nuclear' push
"Nothing to Regulate" was the title of the Sunday, March 2, 2008, opinion page commentary in the Danville Register & Bee newspaper. It stated, "Since January, we've supported a state study of uranium mining."

Community deserves facts uranium study would provide
Without uranium or radiation, our planet would be nothing short of a ball of ice. Radiation simply means energy radiated outwards.

Uranium mining motivated by greed, pure and simple
I am writing in reply to Mr. Mastilovic's letter in the Feb. 20 issue of the Star-Tribune.

Facts in short supply on uranium issue
Life is funny. Albert Einstein's career is significantly affecting Pittsylvania County.

Website question reflects ignorance
What an ignorant poll question you have on your website!

Uranium mining would be devastating
Your readers and people who would live close to uranium mining might want to take a close look at the enclosed photo of a uranium mine.

Open Mines
Richmond Times-Dispatch

Suspicion clouds mining-ban study
The Virginian-Pilot

Senate Bill 525
AMENDMENT IN THE NATURE OF A SUBSTITUTE

Coles Hill uranium deposit
James L. Jerden Jr.: Research

What is uranium?
Source: New Fuel Now

Canada doesn't paint rosy picture of uranium mining
Virginia Uranium Inc., ran an ad in the Jan. 30, 2008, issue of the Star-Tribune with a section titled "A Few Words About Land Values" which painted a glowing picture of the economic blessings which uranium mining will bestow on Pittsylvania County.

If uranium comes, we only have ourselves to blame
The Virginia Senate on Tuesday voted 36-4 to approve a bill to study the benefits and risks of uranium mining.

Test your water and appraise homes now
I urge you, whether for or against the proposed mining and milling of uranium in Pittsylvania County, to have your water tested now so that you will have this as a reference in the event that your water is contaminated down the road.

'Toxic nightmares,' scare tactics cloud uranium debate
The issue of studying a potential large deposit of uranium is something that is very important to me.

Uranium study is just 'results for hire'
This is in response to Bill Hedge's letter on Feb. 13 and to the recent full-page ad by Mr. Coles. Here's why we should oppose the study of uranium mining.

Uranium study bill needs work
Senate Bill 525, establishing a Virginia Uranium Mining Commission, has left the Senate and is in the House. Pittsylvania County remains the main focus of this legislation.

County, town put area on 'fast track' to uranium mining
At their meeting on Feb. 11, Chatham Town Council voted unanimously to support uranium mining in Pittsylvania County.

Senate Oks uranium study bill
The Virginia Senate on Tuesday voted 36-4 to approve a bill to study the benefits and risks of uranium mining.

County forum focuses on uranium
DRY FORK - About 200 people attended a public forum on uranium mining Saturday evening at White Oak Grove Outreach Center in Dry Fork.

Chatham Town Council supports study of uranium
After taking a month to weigh the issue, Chatham Town Council voted 5-0 Monday night to adopt a resolution supporting an "unbiased, neutral, and comprehensive" study on uranium mining.

Halifax 1st in Virginia to adopt 'chemical trespass' defense
HALIFAX - To applause Thursday night, Halifax Town Council unanimously approved a Corporate Mining and Chemical and Radioactive Bodily Trespass ordinance.

Why are supervisors 'neutral' on uranium mining?
As a citizen and taxpayer of Pittsylvania County, I have talked with some of the members of the Board of Supervisors on the issue of the uranium study.

Hurt reminded of words
In 2005, Chatham's Henry Hurt wrote a letter to the editor regarding the sale of Danville's "not for profit" hospital to the "for profit" Life Point corporation. His letter can be viewed in the archived material of the Star-Tribune.

Uranium forum raises more questions than it answers
I attended the uranium forum in Pittsylvania County last evening and after hearing Virginia Uranium Inc.'s presentation, I am even more disturbed about the prospect of uranium mining and milling at Coles Hill.

County leaders should stand against uranium
It disturbs me greatly to wonder what motivation it takes for our community leaders in Pittsylvania County to hazard their constituents' health and welfare by not taking an absolute stand against uranium mining.

Uranium study will provide facts, not opinions
Several hundred years ago, Christopher Columbus said he believed the world was round.

Senate subcommittee to review amended uranium study bill
A bill in the General Assembly to study the benefits and risks of uranium mining was amended Monday to include public hearings and members from Pittsylvania and Halifax counties on the study commission.

Residents urged to take action against uranium mining
SOUTH BOSTON - A call to an American Revolutionary ideal - consent of the governed - is the key in citizens' battle to protect Southside's environment, Ben Price, project director with the non-profit Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund, told a crowd at a forum on uranium mining Thursday night.

Public forum scheduled on uranium mining
A public forum for citizens and elected officials on uranium mining will be held Thursday, Jan. 24, at 7 p.m. at Halifax County High School in South Boston.

Halifax Town Council to hold hearing on uranium concerns
HALIFAX - Halifax Town Council has agreed to take a "chemical trespass" ordinance billed as a tool for citizens' protection to public hearing.

Proposed Virginia Uranium Mining Commission would study risks, benefits
The proposed Virginia Uranium Mining Commission would conduct a study on:

Zoning board Oks permit for Virginia Uranium
Star-Tribune Editor

Zoning hearing focuses attention on uranium mining
The Pittsylvania County Planning Commission will hold a public hearing Thursday on Virginia Uranium Inc.'s request for a special-use permit for a temporary office trailer and storage facility for new core samples from its exploratory drilling northeast of Chatham.

County adopts resolution for uranium study
The Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously Tuesday night to adopt a resolution asking the Commonwealth of Virginia to develop a "neutral, comprehensive legislative study" on uranium mining.

Virginia Uranium begins test drilling
SHEVA - Virginia Uranium Inc. is drilling exploration holes near Chatham to confirm what is believed to be the richest uranium deposit in the United States.

Virginia Uranium to begin test drilling at Coles Hill
A company that hopes to eventually mine a huge uranium deposit in Pittsylvania County has received a state permit for exploration drilling.

Local company hopes to mine uranium
A locally owned and managed company, Virginia Uranium Inc., has been formed to mine and mill a huge uranium deposit in Pittsylvania County if, according to the company's chairman, Walter Coles, it can be done safely.

Virginia Uranium Inc. principles
Virginia Uranium Inc.'s "Seven Guiding Principles" include:

Energy report raises prospect of uranium mining
A state energy plan scheduled to be released next week may renew the prospect of uranium mining in Virginia - a prospect that could dramatically affect Pittsylvania County.

Uranium opponents, supporters square off over resolutions
Opponents and supporters of uranium mining squared off at Chatham Town Council Monday night.

Southside needs straight answers on uranium issues
A recent editorial in the Danville Register and Bee stated: "If the environmentalists are right, allowing Virginia Uranium to mine the Coles Hill site will both stigmatize and pollute the community. We will be known as that town with the uranium mine, and that uranium mine will poison our land, water and air."

Engineer believes uranium can be mined safely
I was born and raised in Danville. My family roots in Pittsylvania County go back nearly 300 years.

Are you against uranium mining?
My name is Crystal. I live in a little community called Chatham, Virginia.

Is county's climate suited for uranium mining and milling?
In an article in the Oct. 3, 2007, issue of the Star-Tribune it was stated that representatives of Virignia Uranium Inc., had visited a site for mining and milling uranium operated by the French firm Areva located in Saskatchewan, Canada.

Virginia Uranium ads only present one side
The ads on uranium mining being sponsored by Walter Coles Jr. in the Star-Tribune are very interesting and give the viewpoint of those supporting uranium mining in Pittsylvania County.

U.S. should explore all resources - including uranium
This is a story about fear-and uranium.

Do you want to be guinea pigs?
Do you want to be guinea pigs?

Virginia Uranium cannot cope with mining risks
To Virginia's appointed and elected officials:

Coles, cronies only ones who would benefit from uranium
In their third propaganda report, published in the Star Tribune on January 23, Virginia Uranium, or whatever name they are going by this week, stated that they ..."are asking for an independent, scientific study, paid for by us in a hands-off manner and authorized by the Commonwealth of Virginia, to determine if mining can be done safely in Virginia."

Prospect of uranium mining taints holiday
Christmas in Chatham, Virginia, has always been a special time for my family.

Uranium should remain in the ground
The author of, "Advances increase safety of uranium mining," (9/19/07) was most likely right when he said that "significant technological advances have taken place in uranium mining and tailings disposal over the past 25 years."

Uranium mining is a bad idea
Can you put a price tag on your health and safety, air that you breathe, water that you drink? If you could, what might that figure be?

Fair and balanced, please
Editor's note: The following letter to the editor refers to a recent editorial on uranium mining in the Danville Register & Bee.

Uranium mining would be a huge mistake
I feel that uranium mining in Pittsylvania County would be a huge mistake.

Virginia Uranium needs to answer questions
Last week's ad in the Star Tribune titled, II. Virginia Uranium, Inc. Questions We've Been Hearing, was the second full-page ad run by Walter Coles Sr.

County should hold public hearing on uranium mining
Someone told me about asking Pittsylvania County Administrator Dan Sleeper questions on uranium mining in the county and Dan, reportedly, has a question of his own: "What is wrong with uranium mining?"

Uranium opponents too close minded
Editor's note: The following comment was posted to the Star-Tribune's website last week.

Technological advances increase safety of uranium mining
Please allow me to comment on recent news articles and Ms. Susan Stilwell's 9-12-07 letter to the editor on the possibility of uranium mining in Pittsylvania County.

'New technology' in uranium mining little comfort
In the discussion about beginning uranium mining in Pittsylvania County, people keep mentioning progress in uranium mining processes now make this a matter to which no informed person can have objections.

Planning Commission praised for stand against uranium
We commend the Pittsylvania County Planning Commission for the decision to recommend to the Board of Zoning Appeals the denial of issuance of the special -use permits requested by Southside Cattle Company, LLC.

Unanswered questions remain about uranium mining
On Oct. 15, Aberdeen International, headquartered in Toronto, Canada, announced that it had completed its investment in Virginia Uranium Inc.

Three Mile Island, Chernobyl were all 'regulated'
The people, including our elected and appointed officials that are depending on the various governmental agencies to protect us by regulating uranium mining, in Pittsylvania County, are in for a shock.

Science teacher wants facts, not opinions
As I am neutral on the possibilities of uranium mining in Virginia, I would like to see the proposed study by an unbiased entity, such as the National Academy of Science, go forward.

Does democracy exist in Pittsylvania County?
In the past three weeks I have attended three public forums on uranium mining - meetings of the Pittsylvania County Planning Commission, Pittsylvania County Board of Zoning Appeals, and Chatham Town Council.

Study needed to know if mining is safe
The Orange County Board of Supervisors recently passed a resolution to "support a continued moratorium" on uranium mining in Virginia.

Uranium drilling allowed to violate local ordinance
It has been approximately 30 days since the concerns noted in the letter below were first raised verbally to both the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors and the county administrator at the regular December 2007 meeting by SCC affiliate Karen Maute.

Leave uranium in the ground
At the Chatham Town Council meeting of Jan. 14, 2008, Virginia Uranium Inc. chairman Walter Coles stated that he favors retaining the current moratorium on uranium mining until a study can be made to determine whether such mining could be done safely in Pittsylvania County.

Contact legislators about uranium study bill
I am writing to ask that everyone - on all sides of the uranium mining issue - contact legislators about Senate Bill No. 525 relating to establishing the Virginia Uranium Mining Commission.

Response to Walter Coles Sr.'s Op-Ed Piece
Virginia Uranium Inc. chairman Walter Coles' column is the first public presentation I have seen in his words about your proposal to mine uranium at Coles Hill and other sites in Pittsylvania County. I would like to respond.

Elected officials should protect against uranium
Why do I feel someone is not telling me the truth when you are told they want no change, then they present a resolution for a study to see if uranium mining would be safe.

People need to fight uranium mining
As a long-time resident of Pittsylvania County, I have some serious concerns about uranium mining.

Proposed uranium study bill flawed
On Jan. 28, Sen. Frank Wagner presented a substitute Senate Bill 525 to the Virginia Senate Agriculture, Conservation, and Natural Resources Committee.

County residents deserve direct answers on uranium
Here are some questions I think we should ask our Board of Supervisors, Town Council, and Zoning Commission as they approve "only a study" of uranium mining:

State Issues Exploration Permit to Virginia Uranium, Inc.
Richmond, VA - A permit to conduct exploratory drilling for uranium in Pittsylvania County, VA, was issued to Virginia Uranium, Inc. on Tuesday, November 27, 2007, by the Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy (DMME).

County should pass resolution to keep moratorium
In response to the Register and Bee editorial on Dec. 10, titled "The First Shot," I attended the meeting of Southside Concerned Citizens in October, where Walter Coles outlined the type of uranium mining and concluded by saying that the proposed mine at Coles Hill would in fact be an open pit mine.

Uranium mining poses host of problems
1. Tailings Waste

Uranium argument 'laced with hysteria'
I have read several letters from environmentalists in your newspaper recently. Every one of these letters is laced with the hysteria so emblematic of the environmental movement over the last 50 years.

Uranium mining could spell disaster
There has been much public interest in recent months about the proposed mining of uranium in Pittsylvania County.

Long-term impact of uranium mining prompts concerns
As a graduate of Hargrave Military Academy, I am concerned about the possible long-term impact of uranium mining in Pittsylvania on Hargrave, Chatham Hall and other such institutions in the area.

Are we prepared to sacrifice county?
In his Dec. 29 letter to the editor, concerning the "safety" of uranium mining, Walter Coles Sr. cited Lynchburg as having a safe uranium-handling facility.

If your friends jump off a cliff, will you follow?
That's the question that my mom used to ask me when I was about to do something foolish. It was a good question then and it's a good question for all of us to ask ourselves now.

State panel would study risks, benefits of uranium mining
A bill filed in the General Assembly last week would appoint a 15-member panel to study the risks and benefits of mining uranium in Virginia.

http://www.wpcva.com/chatham/uranium/

Cancer Risks for Women and Children Due to Radiation Exposure Far Higher Than for Men

New National Academy of Sciences Report Raises Major Issues for Radiation Protection, Independent Institute Claims

Takoma Park, Maryland, July 7, 2005:

The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) latest report on radiation risk, called the BEIR VII report, issued June 29, has major implications on how radiation protection regulations are made and enforced, according to the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER). "BEIR" stands for the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation. The NAS report issued this week updates the BEIR V report issued in 1990. The BEIR series of reports are the most authoritative basis for radiation risk estimation and radiation protection regulations in the United States.

"In 1990, the NAS estimated that the risks of dying from cancer due to exposure to radiation were about five percent higher for women than for men," said Dr. Arjun Makhijani, president of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research. "In BEIR VII, the cancer mortality risks for females are 37.5 percent higher. The risks for all solid tumors, like lung, breast, and kidney, liver, and other solid tumors added together are almost 50 percent greater for women than men, though there are a few specific cancers, including leukemia, for which the risk estimates for men are higher." (Summary estimates are in Table ES-1 on page 28 of the BEIR VII report prepublication copy, on the Web at http://books.nap.edu/books/030909156X/html/28.html.)

Unlike the 1990 NAS report, BEIR VII estimates risks for cancer incidence rates as well as mortality and also provides detailed risk figures according to age of exposure for males and females, by cancer type. This is a great advance over the previous report. The BEIR VII report has thoroughly reviewed available human and animal cancer data and scientific understanding arrived at using cellular level studies. Cancer risk incidence figures for solid tumors for women are also about double those for men.

The BEIR VII report estimates that the differential risk for children is even greater. For instance, the same radiation in the first year of life for boys produces three to four times the cancer risk as exposure between the ages of 20 and 50. Female infants have almost double the risk as male infants. (Table 12 D-1 and D-2, on pages 550-551 of the prepublication copy of the report, on the Web starting at http://books.nap.edu/books/030909156X/html/550.html).

While the report states there is no direct evidence of harm to human offspring from exposure of parents to radiation, the committee noted that such harm has been found in animal experiments and that there is "no reason to believe that humans would be immune to this sort of harm." (Page 20, prepublication copy, on the Web at http://books.nap.edu/openbook/030909156X/html/20.html)

"I think it is high time that society protected those most at risk," said Dr. Makhijani. "The BEIR VIII report has done the public a great service by putting the imprimatur of the NAS on solid research that has long indicated much greater risks for women and children. Now it is up the Environmental Protection Agency to change the framework of regulation from averages of men and women to those who are most at risk."

Contrary to the beliefs of many in the nuclear industry, the BEIR VII report reaffirmed the conclusion of the prior report that every exposure to radiation produces a corresponding increase in cancer risk. The proportionality of risk means that at low exposures the risks are small, as the NAS report points out. The average risks to the population are estimated to be 10 to 15 percent higher than the reference value now used for radiation protection of the general population (565 cancer fatalities per million rem exposure in BEIR VII compared to 500 typically cited in the literature on radiation protection). While this average risk is in the general range of uncertainties and values reported previously, it indicates an increase of risk overall. Both incidence and mortality risk estimates are now greater. Finally, the committee also noted that relatively high levels of radiation exposure increase risk of heart disease and stroke, though it did not give specific risk estimates.

"I want to thank the BEIR VII committee for keeping a promise it made to IEER and 133 other organizations and individuals to consider crucial issues outlined in a letter we delivered to the committee in September 1999," said Lisa Ledwidge, Outreach Director of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research. The Institute sent several letters to the BEIR VII committee, which can be viewed at http://www.ieer.org/comments/beir/index.html. The Committee's response to IEER is in Annex C of the BEIR VII report, on the Web at http://books.nap.edu/books/030909156X/html/577.html.

http://www.ieer.org/comments/beir/beir7pressrel.html