Comment: Listed below are two articles about modern uranium mining in Australian and the problem with mining! Again, uranium mining has never been safely anywhere in the world!
Posted on July 18, 2009
by archiearchive FCD
I am fortunate enough to live in an Australian National Park. The Rudall River National Park in the East Pilbara region of North Western Australia. While not a completely pristine area it retains its natural beauty despite the hordes of feral camels which run free.
There are two settlements within the park boundaries. I live in Punmu on the North Eastern corner while Parrngurr or Cotton Creek is on the Southern side a couple of salt lakes and 120Km away.
For years jokes have been made about the water at Parrngurr. The fact that there are “sparkles” in it. Not little pieces of mica but little flashes from disintegrating uranium atoms.
The community was settled before it was found that the hill behind it contained the highest grade deposit of uranium in the world. Luckily it is not a large deposit and so is not worth mining.
Unlike the deposit halfway along the road to the Telfer goldmine. Which is big enough to mine.
It is within the National Park. It is so remote that few people will worry about what happens there. It is upstream from a river which, when in flood, flows North and then West until it reaches the Indian Ocean around eight hundred Kilometres away. During the dry season there are many waterholes left in the river system.
The Oakover River flows into the De Gray. Both abound in swimming holes and fishing spots. In flood there is a huge amount of water flowing down the engorged river bed as you can see with this major road totally cut in half by the Oakover.
But I heard, with my own ears, a representative of the mining company say that there was no chance of any mining pollution getting into that river system.
Of course I believed him.
Just as I believed the Government which designated the area a National Park and beyond the reach of mining activity.
The first in an occasional series
http://archiearchive.wordpress.com/2009/07/18/uranium-and-a-national-park/
Uranium Mining and a National Park #2
Posted on July 24, 2009
by archiearchive FCD
“The requirement to manage the radioactive tailings and all other solid wastes to minimise both long-term environmental as well as radiological releases and impacts makes uranium mining fundamentally different to other types of mining.”
“The long-term management of uranium mill tailings present a major environmental challenge. Given the tailings contain most of the original radioactivity of the ore (i.e. the decay products), they must be isolated from the environment for periods of at least tens of thousands of years – a time scale which is beyond collective human experience and certainly challenges engineering approaches for waste containment.” Gavin M. Mudd.
So, what is our record as a nation of Uranium miners?
Ranger:
• despite being expected to operate under a “no-release” water management system, incidents involving misplaced low grade ores or failures in water control bunds have led on numerous occasions to contaminated runoff waters being leaked into adjacent creeks (especially Corridoor Creek, a tributary of Magela Creek).
• in early 2004 incorrect plumbing saw the process water circuit being connected to the potable drinking water circuit – leading to rapid and significant toxic process water being mixed with drinking water, and much of the Ranger workforce being potentially exposed to both acute chemical and radiological exposure.
Olympic Dam:
• after operating for nearly a decade, a major ongoing leak from the tailings dam was revealed, amounting to the loss of billions of litres of tailings water to groundwater.
• in March 1999, and again October 2001, major explosions and fires caused substantive damage to the mill and smelter complexes, including major releases of noxious fumes – though the extent of radiological releases remains highly contentious, the fact that the uranium solvent extraction circuit in the 2001 incident was on fire raises serious concerns about how these incidents are handled by current regulators.
Beverley:
• numerous spills and leaks from pipelines have occurred.
Nabarlek (now closed):
• due to the need to reduce the inventory of contaminated mine site waters, evaporation pond water was irrigated over an area adjacent to the mine/mill and led to significant tree deaths and lasting impacts on water quality in the adjacent creek which have taken nearly two decades to flush through.
Can uranium mines be satisfactorily rehabilitated?
The experience of rehabilitating uranium mines to date in Australia is questionable.
The first generation of uranium mines from the Cold War, namely Rum Jungle, Radium Hill, Mary Kathleen and the South Alligator group of mines, all still present environmental and radiological management problems and require constant vigilence and maintenance.
Examples include:
• Rum Jungle – despite extensive remediation/rehabilitation works in the early 1980’s, including excavating remnant tailings and disposal into former pits, re-contouring and engineering soil covers over low grade ore and waste rock dumps, acid mine drainage continues to pollute the Finniss River, and the complete site still urgently requires more remediation/rehabilitation works.
• Radium Hill – after being abandoned in early 1962, minimal earth works were undertaken in the early 1980’s, mainly just engineering soil covers over the tailings piles – erosion is a continual problem and tailings requires ongoing maintenance.
• Mary Kathleen – operating in both the Cold War phase of the late 1950’s to mid-1960’s as well as again in the commercial era of the late 1970’s, the mid-1980’s rehabilitation of the mine won an engineering excellence award for its perceived quality – despite internal concerns by the regulators about potential for long-term seepage from the tailings dam. Recent field studies in the late 1990’s have validated this concern and shown ongoing seepage of saline, metal and radionuclide rich waters from the tailings dam – well above the quantities predicted at the time of rehabilitation – impacting on the local creek.
Conclusion;
Overall, the experience to date with uranium mining does not give rise to any sufficient degree of confidence, as past sites – even after significant rehabilitation works – are still showing problems with erosion and seepage and ongoing impacts on water quality.
The proposed mining of Uranium in the Rudall River National Park must cause concern amongst the people who live, and gather food and water from within and near to the park.
From a briefing paper by Gavin M. Mudd for energy science.
http://archiearchive.wordpress.com/2009/07/24/uranium-mining-and-a-national-park-2/
Posted on July 18, 2009
by archiearchive FCD
I am fortunate enough to live in an Australian National Park. The Rudall River National Park in the East Pilbara region of North Western Australia. While not a completely pristine area it retains its natural beauty despite the hordes of feral camels which run free.
There are two settlements within the park boundaries. I live in Punmu on the North Eastern corner while Parrngurr or Cotton Creek is on the Southern side a couple of salt lakes and 120Km away.
For years jokes have been made about the water at Parrngurr. The fact that there are “sparkles” in it. Not little pieces of mica but little flashes from disintegrating uranium atoms.
The community was settled before it was found that the hill behind it contained the highest grade deposit of uranium in the world. Luckily it is not a large deposit and so is not worth mining.
Unlike the deposit halfway along the road to the Telfer goldmine. Which is big enough to mine.
It is within the National Park. It is so remote that few people will worry about what happens there. It is upstream from a river which, when in flood, flows North and then West until it reaches the Indian Ocean around eight hundred Kilometres away. During the dry season there are many waterholes left in the river system.
The Oakover River flows into the De Gray. Both abound in swimming holes and fishing spots. In flood there is a huge amount of water flowing down the engorged river bed as you can see with this major road totally cut in half by the Oakover.
But I heard, with my own ears, a representative of the mining company say that there was no chance of any mining pollution getting into that river system.
Of course I believed him.
Just as I believed the Government which designated the area a National Park and beyond the reach of mining activity.
The first in an occasional series
http://archiearchive.wordpress.com/2009/07/18/uranium-and-a-national-park/
Uranium Mining and a National Park #2
Posted on July 24, 2009
by archiearchive FCD
“The requirement to manage the radioactive tailings and all other solid wastes to minimise both long-term environmental as well as radiological releases and impacts makes uranium mining fundamentally different to other types of mining.”
“The long-term management of uranium mill tailings present a major environmental challenge. Given the tailings contain most of the original radioactivity of the ore (i.e. the decay products), they must be isolated from the environment for periods of at least tens of thousands of years – a time scale which is beyond collective human experience and certainly challenges engineering approaches for waste containment.” Gavin M. Mudd.
So, what is our record as a nation of Uranium miners?
Ranger:
• despite being expected to operate under a “no-release” water management system, incidents involving misplaced low grade ores or failures in water control bunds have led on numerous occasions to contaminated runoff waters being leaked into adjacent creeks (especially Corridoor Creek, a tributary of Magela Creek).
• in early 2004 incorrect plumbing saw the process water circuit being connected to the potable drinking water circuit – leading to rapid and significant toxic process water being mixed with drinking water, and much of the Ranger workforce being potentially exposed to both acute chemical and radiological exposure.
Olympic Dam:
• after operating for nearly a decade, a major ongoing leak from the tailings dam was revealed, amounting to the loss of billions of litres of tailings water to groundwater.
• in March 1999, and again October 2001, major explosions and fires caused substantive damage to the mill and smelter complexes, including major releases of noxious fumes – though the extent of radiological releases remains highly contentious, the fact that the uranium solvent extraction circuit in the 2001 incident was on fire raises serious concerns about how these incidents are handled by current regulators.
Beverley:
• numerous spills and leaks from pipelines have occurred.
Nabarlek (now closed):
• due to the need to reduce the inventory of contaminated mine site waters, evaporation pond water was irrigated over an area adjacent to the mine/mill and led to significant tree deaths and lasting impacts on water quality in the adjacent creek which have taken nearly two decades to flush through.
Can uranium mines be satisfactorily rehabilitated?
The experience of rehabilitating uranium mines to date in Australia is questionable.
The first generation of uranium mines from the Cold War, namely Rum Jungle, Radium Hill, Mary Kathleen and the South Alligator group of mines, all still present environmental and radiological management problems and require constant vigilence and maintenance.
Examples include:
• Rum Jungle – despite extensive remediation/rehabilitation works in the early 1980’s, including excavating remnant tailings and disposal into former pits, re-contouring and engineering soil covers over low grade ore and waste rock dumps, acid mine drainage continues to pollute the Finniss River, and the complete site still urgently requires more remediation/rehabilitation works.
• Radium Hill – after being abandoned in early 1962, minimal earth works were undertaken in the early 1980’s, mainly just engineering soil covers over the tailings piles – erosion is a continual problem and tailings requires ongoing maintenance.
• Mary Kathleen – operating in both the Cold War phase of the late 1950’s to mid-1960’s as well as again in the commercial era of the late 1970’s, the mid-1980’s rehabilitation of the mine won an engineering excellence award for its perceived quality – despite internal concerns by the regulators about potential for long-term seepage from the tailings dam. Recent field studies in the late 1990’s have validated this concern and shown ongoing seepage of saline, metal and radionuclide rich waters from the tailings dam – well above the quantities predicted at the time of rehabilitation – impacting on the local creek.
Conclusion;
Overall, the experience to date with uranium mining does not give rise to any sufficient degree of confidence, as past sites – even after significant rehabilitation works – are still showing problems with erosion and seepage and ongoing impacts on water quality.
The proposed mining of Uranium in the Rudall River National Park must cause concern amongst the people who live, and gather food and water from within and near to the park.
From a briefing paper by Gavin M. Mudd for energy science.
http://archiearchive.wordpress.com/2009/07/24/uranium-mining-and-a-national-park-2/
No comments:
Post a Comment