Comment: Yeah! No to uranium mining!
By the tickerspy.com Staff
On Wednesday July 29, 2009, 12:25 pm EDT
Uranium stocks got hammered on Wednesday after the Department of Energy denied USEC's (NYSE: USU - News) request for $2 billion in loan guarantees.
Yesterday USEC expressed its disappointment in the Department of Energy's denial of its previously promised loan guarantee. Without the government support, private financing cannot be obtained according to the company. USEC's CEO, John K. Welch said, "President Obama promised to support the loan guarantee for the American Centrifuge Plant while he campaigned in Ohio. We are disappointed that campaign commitment has not been met." Investors share Welch's disappointment, as they are now down close to -40% in two days.
As a whole, the Uranium Stocks Index is down by -4.1% today. It is now lagging the S&P 500 over the last month by -15.7%.
All the Index's components are down by more than -2% today. Paladin Energy (OTC: PALAF - News) is leading the drop, down -7%.
Uranerz Energy (AMEX: URZ - News) and Toronto-based Denison Mines (AMEX: DNN - News) are down by -4% in the selloff.
Uranium Energy (AMEX: UEC - News) and Cameco (NYSE: CCJ - News) are top performers with losses of less than -3%. Cameco will report its earnings on August 12.
As of this writing the Uranium Stocks Index is the second-worst performing tickerspy Index over the last month, down -10.6%.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Uranium-Shares-Struggle-in-indie-2279813385.html/print?x=0
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Groups Intervene to Stop Transmission Lines for Coal Plants
Comment: So we can block the State of Virginia!
$1.9 billion project would boost profits for dirty old coal plants and hamper clean energy efforts
July 27, 2009
Richmond, VA – The Sierra Club is intervening in Virginia State proceedings to consider approval of a $1.9 billion high-voltage transmission line project that would bring coal-fired power to new markets in the Northeast. The Sierra Club, represented by Earthjustice, will try to block construction of these new, unnecessary power lines which would only help dirty coal plants in West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Kentucky and Ohio to ramp up production and dangerous emissions of air pollution, including carbon dioxide (CO2). The power lines are proposed by two of the country’s most powerful coal producers: American Electric Power and Allegheny Energy.
“This is the worst possible investment we could make in energy development at this moment,” said Earthjustice attorney Abigail Dillen. “We need new investments to help develop wind, solar, and other renewable energy resources – not a hugely expensive project that helps polluting old coal plants to make even more money.”
The Potomac-Appalachian Transmission Highline (PATH) calls for construction of high-voltage transmission lines starting in West Virginia near the John E. Amos coal-fired power plant, which is ranked as one of the dirtiest coal plants in the country for mercury, sulfur dioxide, and CO2 pollution. The lines would extend east for 275 miles, cutting through Virginia to end up in Maryland.
In papers filed today with the Virginia State Corporation Commission, Sierra Club and Earthjustice stressed that the proposed power lines are not needed to satisfy any unmet needs for electricity. Instead, the lines will only give coal a greater market share of the power mix in the Northeast. According to a recent statement from the West Virginia Coal Association, the new lines will help “preserve the future” of aging coal plants, encourage development of new coal plants, and increase coal mining in Appalachia. All of this increased coal use would mean more dangerous air pollution and more environmental devastation from mountaintop removal mining, which already has transformed the landscape and historically rich natural system in West Virginia and Virginia, leveling and deforesting an area the size of Delaware and burying an estimated 1,200 miles of streams.
“This country can no longer afford to depend on dirty fossil fuel sources to generate energy,” said Glen Besa, Director of the Sierra Club-Virginia Chapter. “Instead of building a giant extension cord that links the East Coast with distant coal plants, eastern states could be developing clean, renewable — and profitable — energy sources closer to home.”
http://climateofourfuture.org/groups-intervene-to-stop-transmission-lines-for-coal-plants/
$1.9 billion project would boost profits for dirty old coal plants and hamper clean energy efforts
July 27, 2009
Richmond, VA – The Sierra Club is intervening in Virginia State proceedings to consider approval of a $1.9 billion high-voltage transmission line project that would bring coal-fired power to new markets in the Northeast. The Sierra Club, represented by Earthjustice, will try to block construction of these new, unnecessary power lines which would only help dirty coal plants in West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Kentucky and Ohio to ramp up production and dangerous emissions of air pollution, including carbon dioxide (CO2). The power lines are proposed by two of the country’s most powerful coal producers: American Electric Power and Allegheny Energy.
“This is the worst possible investment we could make in energy development at this moment,” said Earthjustice attorney Abigail Dillen. “We need new investments to help develop wind, solar, and other renewable energy resources – not a hugely expensive project that helps polluting old coal plants to make even more money.”
The Potomac-Appalachian Transmission Highline (PATH) calls for construction of high-voltage transmission lines starting in West Virginia near the John E. Amos coal-fired power plant, which is ranked as one of the dirtiest coal plants in the country for mercury, sulfur dioxide, and CO2 pollution. The lines would extend east for 275 miles, cutting through Virginia to end up in Maryland.
In papers filed today with the Virginia State Corporation Commission, Sierra Club and Earthjustice stressed that the proposed power lines are not needed to satisfy any unmet needs for electricity. Instead, the lines will only give coal a greater market share of the power mix in the Northeast. According to a recent statement from the West Virginia Coal Association, the new lines will help “preserve the future” of aging coal plants, encourage development of new coal plants, and increase coal mining in Appalachia. All of this increased coal use would mean more dangerous air pollution and more environmental devastation from mountaintop removal mining, which already has transformed the landscape and historically rich natural system in West Virginia and Virginia, leveling and deforesting an area the size of Delaware and burying an estimated 1,200 miles of streams.
“This country can no longer afford to depend on dirty fossil fuel sources to generate energy,” said Glen Besa, Director of the Sierra Club-Virginia Chapter. “Instead of building a giant extension cord that links the East Coast with distant coal plants, eastern states could be developing clean, renewable — and profitable — energy sources closer to home.”
http://climateofourfuture.org/groups-intervene-to-stop-transmission-lines-for-coal-plants/
Worker killed at Samples Mine identified
Comment: All mining is dangerous and experienced drivers have accidents. How many experienced heavy duty truck drivers do we have in Pittsylvania County, Virginia to drive the same trucks in open pit uranium mining? Hard rock miners will come from West Virginia and Canada!
July 28, 2009
A contract employee at a mountaintop-removal mine near Cabin Creek was killed Tuesday when his truck overturned into a pond, state and federal officials said. By
Ken Ward Jr.
Staff writer
CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- A contract employee at a mountaintop-removal mine near Cabin Creek was killed Tuesday when his truck overturned into a pond, state and federal officials said.
The worker was identified Wednesday as 28-year-old Mark Gray of Belle. Gray is survived by his wife and a teenage daughter, officials said.
The accident occurred at the Samples Mine, operated by the Catenary Coal Co. subsidiary of Patriot Coal Corp. The worker was employed by the firm Hawkeye Construction of Robinson Creek, Ky., said Amy Louviere, spokeswoman for the federal Mine Safety and Health Administration.
The worker is the ninth coal miner in the U.S. and the second in West Virginia to die on the job in 2009, according to MSHA's official count.
Jama Jarrett, spokeswoman for the state Office of Miners Health, Safety and Training, said the worker was using an excavator, which overturned into a mine pond at the site.
But Louviere identified the equipment being used as an articulating truck, with a pivoting joint between the cab and trailer allowing it to turn more freely. Such vehicles can be especially tricky to operate because the rear trailer moves independently of the cab.
The Samples Mine is one of the largest surface mines in the state, though production last year dipped below 3 million tons for the first time in more than a decade.
Two years ago, the mine was targeted by state and federal investigators and received dozens of citations after management allowed the use of leftover military munitions from the Talon Manufacturing plant to be used along with traditional strip-mine explosives.
And since 2001, there have been at least three other deaths at the Samples Mine, with all of them bringing citations and fines against mine operators.
Earlier this year, a worker from an adjacent underground mine died in a single-vehicle accident while using a Samples Mine haul road as a shortcut home from work. State officials did not count the death as mining-related, but MSHA has yet to issue a formal finding on the matter.
Reach Ken Ward Jr. at kw...@wvgazette.com or 304-348-1702.
http://wvgazette.com/News/200907280373
July 28, 2009
A contract employee at a mountaintop-removal mine near Cabin Creek was killed Tuesday when his truck overturned into a pond, state and federal officials said. By
Ken Ward Jr.
Staff writer
CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- A contract employee at a mountaintop-removal mine near Cabin Creek was killed Tuesday when his truck overturned into a pond, state and federal officials said.
The worker was identified Wednesday as 28-year-old Mark Gray of Belle. Gray is survived by his wife and a teenage daughter, officials said.
The accident occurred at the Samples Mine, operated by the Catenary Coal Co. subsidiary of Patriot Coal Corp. The worker was employed by the firm Hawkeye Construction of Robinson Creek, Ky., said Amy Louviere, spokeswoman for the federal Mine Safety and Health Administration.
The worker is the ninth coal miner in the U.S. and the second in West Virginia to die on the job in 2009, according to MSHA's official count.
Jama Jarrett, spokeswoman for the state Office of Miners Health, Safety and Training, said the worker was using an excavator, which overturned into a mine pond at the site.
But Louviere identified the equipment being used as an articulating truck, with a pivoting joint between the cab and trailer allowing it to turn more freely. Such vehicles can be especially tricky to operate because the rear trailer moves independently of the cab.
The Samples Mine is one of the largest surface mines in the state, though production last year dipped below 3 million tons for the first time in more than a decade.
Two years ago, the mine was targeted by state and federal investigators and received dozens of citations after management allowed the use of leftover military munitions from the Talon Manufacturing plant to be used along with traditional strip-mine explosives.
And since 2001, there have been at least three other deaths at the Samples Mine, with all of them bringing citations and fines against mine operators.
Earlier this year, a worker from an adjacent underground mine died in a single-vehicle accident while using a Samples Mine haul road as a shortcut home from work. State officials did not count the death as mining-related, but MSHA has yet to issue a formal finding on the matter.
Reach Ken Ward Jr. at kw...@wvgazette.com or 304-348-1702.
http://wvgazette.com/News/200907280373
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Uranium Mining Poisoning WA ’s Groundwater Forever
Comment: People in Australia are worried about their water just like we are worried about uranium mining! The author of the article included VA in their list!
July 25, 2009
July 25, 2009
In regard to the recent announcement by Federal Resources Minister Martin Ferguson for a yet another proposal for a uranium mine in WA, this time at Lake Maitland 950kms Northeast of Perth, I don’t believe the average West Australian actually realises what we are in for here in the West by opening up our state to uranium mining. The Federal Environment Ministers recent decision to approve the Beverley Four Mile uranium mine in South Australia, however gives us some insight into what we can expect here.
Described by Minister Garrett as being ‘world’s best practice’, the American owned Beverley Four Mile Uranium mine will use the controversial in-situ leach mining technique which involves deliberately pumping sulphuric acid into a public owned water aquifer to dissolve the uranium ore. Once the uranium is extracted from the surface the radioactive liquid waste from this process is then dumped into the aquifer. Given that the environmental regulators in the US refuse to allow this practice on their own soil, and the fact that aquifers in Eastern Europe have been heavily polluted by this practice why is our Federal government allowing it in Australia?
Although Minister Garrett has talked about ’strict’ monitoring requirements ‘well after this South Australian mine ceases’, a long-term problem will undoubtedly arise from the fact that concentrated radioactive materials survive for thousands of years. How can the uranium mining company have ’strict’ monitoring for that length of time? Another WA proposal to mine uranium at the Yeelirie deposit some 550 kms east of Geraldton, will also be dependant on Minister Garrett’s approval.
As with all uranium mines enormous quantities of water are going to be needed to mine the Yeelirie uranium deposit and Premier Barnett and Mines Minister Moore would have to be well aware of just how very thirsty this type of mining is.
With more than one hundred uranium mining companies currently exploring in WA it is interestingly to note that the WA State Water Resources Minister Graham Jacobs has been urging WA householders to reduce their water consumption and to conserve our precious water resources through household sprinkler bans.
Is polluting our groundwater aquifers with sulphuric acid on the one hand, and then asking householders to turn off their sprinklers, the Barnett Governments idea of being ‘water wise?
I urge all West Australians to become acquainted with all the facts surrounding uranium mining before we find ourselves with a toxic legacy that never, ever goes away and the website for the
Antinuclear Alliance of WA (ANAWA) is a good place to start.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)
From Hiroshima To Iraq-Uranium Wars: A Suicidal, Genocidal and Omnicidal Co…
No Title
In Virginia, the Appeal of Uranium Mining
Mining Claims on Federal Land in Ariz. Halted Pending Review
http://dawnjecks.wordpress.com/2009/07/25/uranium-mining-poisoning-wa-s-groundwater-forever/
Ohio uranium plant financing nixed
Published: July 28, 2009 at 4:12 PM
A planned Ohio uranium enrichment plant seems doomed after U.S. officials refused to grant it a $2 billion loan guarantee, officials say.
The decision by the U.S. Department of Energy to refuse the loan guarantee to the proposed USEC Inc. facility in Piketon, Ohio, means the effort has begun to "demobilize," a company spokeswoman told Tuesday's Columbus (Ohio) Dispatch.
USEC was seeking the loan to help it build a $3.5 billion advanced technology uranium plant on the same site where the company ran a Cold War-era enrichment facility until it was closed in 2001, the newspaper said.
The Dispatch, citing two unnamed sources, reported that Ohio officials have been given the news by the U.S. Energy Department, which reportedly turned down the request for a variety of reasons. The company was invited to reapply in 18 months, but one of the sources said that kind of delay would mean "financial death" for the effort.
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2009/07/28/Ohio-uranium-plant-financing-nixed/UPI-68921248811941/
A planned Ohio uranium enrichment plant seems doomed after U.S. officials refused to grant it a $2 billion loan guarantee, officials say.
The decision by the U.S. Department of Energy to refuse the loan guarantee to the proposed USEC Inc. facility in Piketon, Ohio, means the effort has begun to "demobilize," a company spokeswoman told Tuesday's Columbus (Ohio) Dispatch.
USEC was seeking the loan to help it build a $3.5 billion advanced technology uranium plant on the same site where the company ran a Cold War-era enrichment facility until it was closed in 2001, the newspaper said.
The Dispatch, citing two unnamed sources, reported that Ohio officials have been given the news by the U.S. Energy Department, which reportedly turned down the request for a variety of reasons. The company was invited to reapply in 18 months, but one of the sources said that kind of delay would mean "financial death" for the effort.
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2009/07/28/Ohio-uranium-plant-financing-nixed/UPI-68921248811941/
Letter From Europe: Foreign Disbelief of Topless America
And here's a trailer for the forthcoming film documentary, On Coal River, that expertly details the human costs of "minimizing adverse environmental impacts," as the Obama administration likes to say, of mountaintop removal:
Comment: Mt. Top Removal is a legal form of mining, it has destroy people lives, their water and their land. Uranium mining will do the same to us!
Jeff Biggers
Author, The United States of Appalachia
Posted: July 28, 2009 05:57 AM
Spoleto, Umbria -- When President Barack Obama trundled into the bel paese of Italy for the G8 gathering last month, some of my neighbors in the verdant hills of Umbria were surprised to learn about their country's small but lingering dependence on coal-fired plants.
Draping banners down five coal-fired towers of carbon emissions that week, Greenpeace reminded the European gathering -- and President Obama -- of the inconvenient reality of coal.
Coal mining in Italy is considered a relic of yesteryear. Only a few miles from this Umbrian hilltown, the last smoldering lignite mine closed a couple of decades ago after a series of fatal accidents, and with it went the haze of sulfuric acid, mercury, lead and fly ash that cloaked much of Europe.
But, the greatest surprise -- sheer disbelief -- for my neighbors in Italy's protected Umbrian range was reserved for our own American style of Big Coal-gone-wild -- that federally sanctioned process of mountaintop removal mining that has laid waste to over a million acres of our nation's most diverse and ancient mountains in Appalachia, in order to produce less than 5-7 percent of national coal production.
Blowing up your mountains? The Italian asked again. How is that possible under President Obama?
It's hard for any foreigner to believe that President Obama has quietly acquiesced to the marketing and machinations of Big Coal, and allows millions of pounds of ammonium nitrate/fuel oil explosives to rip across our nation's first frontier, topple hundreds of mountains, and ruin and displace historic mountain communities -- that would have easily been granted regional protection by the United Nations or the European Community.
In fact, when I describe the process of mountaintop removal, and its 38-year reign of terror in Appalachia, no one believes me, so I am compelled to pull out my laptop and show them pictures and videos, including the creative work from Chicago's environmental-artist collective called Topless America.
Here is an incredible list of the scores of films on mountaintop removal documented by film critic and historian Steve Fesenmaier.
Last month in the west country of Ireland, I chatted in a pub with a shopkeeper from County Roscommon. We shared stories of our grandfathers, both of whom were coal miners. After telling me about Ireland's plans for off-shore wind turbines and other renewable energy projects outside Galway, the shopkeeper urged me to go and visit the Arigna Coal Mine in Derreenavoggy, County Roscommon. His grandfather had worked in the underground mine there; my grandfather worked in various underground mines in southern Illinois.
The Arigna mine is part of the Miners Way Historical Trail, which treks along the gorgeous hills and valleys of Arigna. Closed in 1990, after being mined underground for 400 years, the Arigna mine--the last working coal mine in Ireland -- has been turned into a heritage site. The shopkeeper raved about the natural beauty of the area -- his own "little Appalachia," he claimed. He told me to take a hike after I visited the museum. As the coal mine brochure hailed, "Arigna is situated in a picturesque valley with breathtaking scenery and unspoiled landscape."
Unspoiled landscape.
My grandparent's 150-year-old ancestral homestead in the Shawnee National Forest in southern Illinois was strip mined 10 years ago this month and has been turned into a leveled graveyard of foreign grasslands.
Over 1.5 million acres of hardwood deciduous forests, and over 500 mountains that would have been celebrated as a national park in any other region in the world, have been wiped out in Appalachia from mountaintop removal, the devastated ruins flatted into monuments of destruction.
I told the Irish shopkeeper he needed to visit Appalachia to believe it.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-biggers/letter-from-europe-foreig_b_245992.html
Comment: Mt. Top Removal is a legal form of mining, it has destroy people lives, their water and their land. Uranium mining will do the same to us!
Jeff Biggers
Author, The United States of Appalachia
Posted: July 28, 2009 05:57 AM
Spoleto, Umbria -- When President Barack Obama trundled into the bel paese of Italy for the G8 gathering last month, some of my neighbors in the verdant hills of Umbria were surprised to learn about their country's small but lingering dependence on coal-fired plants.
Draping banners down five coal-fired towers of carbon emissions that week, Greenpeace reminded the European gathering -- and President Obama -- of the inconvenient reality of coal.
Coal mining in Italy is considered a relic of yesteryear. Only a few miles from this Umbrian hilltown, the last smoldering lignite mine closed a couple of decades ago after a series of fatal accidents, and with it went the haze of sulfuric acid, mercury, lead and fly ash that cloaked much of Europe.
But, the greatest surprise -- sheer disbelief -- for my neighbors in Italy's protected Umbrian range was reserved for our own American style of Big Coal-gone-wild -- that federally sanctioned process of mountaintop removal mining that has laid waste to over a million acres of our nation's most diverse and ancient mountains in Appalachia, in order to produce less than 5-7 percent of national coal production.
Blowing up your mountains? The Italian asked again. How is that possible under President Obama?
It's hard for any foreigner to believe that President Obama has quietly acquiesced to the marketing and machinations of Big Coal, and allows millions of pounds of ammonium nitrate/fuel oil explosives to rip across our nation's first frontier, topple hundreds of mountains, and ruin and displace historic mountain communities -- that would have easily been granted regional protection by the United Nations or the European Community.
In fact, when I describe the process of mountaintop removal, and its 38-year reign of terror in Appalachia, no one believes me, so I am compelled to pull out my laptop and show them pictures and videos, including the creative work from Chicago's environmental-artist collective called Topless America.
Here is an incredible list of the scores of films on mountaintop removal documented by film critic and historian Steve Fesenmaier.
Last month in the west country of Ireland, I chatted in a pub with a shopkeeper from County Roscommon. We shared stories of our grandfathers, both of whom were coal miners. After telling me about Ireland's plans for off-shore wind turbines and other renewable energy projects outside Galway, the shopkeeper urged me to go and visit the Arigna Coal Mine in Derreenavoggy, County Roscommon. His grandfather had worked in the underground mine there; my grandfather worked in various underground mines in southern Illinois.
The Arigna mine is part of the Miners Way Historical Trail, which treks along the gorgeous hills and valleys of Arigna. Closed in 1990, after being mined underground for 400 years, the Arigna mine--the last working coal mine in Ireland -- has been turned into a heritage site. The shopkeeper raved about the natural beauty of the area -- his own "little Appalachia," he claimed. He told me to take a hike after I visited the museum. As the coal mine brochure hailed, "Arigna is situated in a picturesque valley with breathtaking scenery and unspoiled landscape."
Unspoiled landscape.
My grandparent's 150-year-old ancestral homestead in the Shawnee National Forest in southern Illinois was strip mined 10 years ago this month and has been turned into a leveled graveyard of foreign grasslands.
Over 1.5 million acres of hardwood deciduous forests, and over 500 mountains that would have been celebrated as a national park in any other region in the world, have been wiped out in Appalachia from mountaintop removal, the devastated ruins flatted into monuments of destruction.
I told the Irish shopkeeper he needed to visit Appalachia to believe it.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-biggers/letter-from-europe-foreig_b_245992.html
Caswell Co. Residents 'Shocked' to Learn of Terrorist Training
Comment: Scary, our NC neighbor, just down the road from Pittsylvania County! To think that an uranium mining and milling could be so close to a terrorist activities, which is not the first time NC had trouble with terrorist groups, happen back in 2001 in Wake County! Please read both articles listed below!
By Roxanna Haynes FOX8 News
July 28, 2009
CASWELL COUNTY, N.C. - Residents were shocked Monday when they learned that a group of North Carolina men charged with terrorism conspiracy had allegedly trained on property nearby.
Caswell County, a rural area of about 20,000 residents in the eastern Piedmont, is popular among hunters because of its remote areas and wide-open spaces. Residents like it for its relaxed, country-living atmosphere.
"It makes me feel a little scared," said resident Deanna Ballard after federal authorities announced that seven men had been charged with plotting "violent jihad." On Tuesday, authorities said they believe an eighth suspect is in Pakistan.
Investigators believe the men had used private property in Caswell County to train for their terrorist missions.
"For such a small town, it's very, sort of, unexpected," said Carolyn Poteat.
"I was shocked," said another resident, Thomas Lee. "Mostly everybody around here knows everybody and, see, that's the thing that got me. I don't know how they got in here without anyone ever suspecting."
Investigators won't say exactly where, but they do say Daniel Boyd -- the alleged ringleader -- stockpiled military-style weapons and trained at a rural site.
"People aren't aware. You should have though since 9/11, people would be more aware of this kind of thing," said Ballard.
http://www.myfox8.com/wghp-caswell-terrorist-reax-090728,0,3874650.story
Feds search for 8th suspect
http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/1624612.html
Sarah Ovaska, Staff Writer
An unnamed eighth member of a suspected North Carolina-based terrorism group is at large and wanted by federal authorities, U.S. Attorney George Holding said early this afternoon.
The individual, whose name was redacted from an indictment made public yesterday, doesn't appear to pose a danger to the larger public, said Holding, the head of the Raleigh-based federal prosecutor's office for the Eastern District of North Carolina.
"We do not believe that this defendant poses a threat to anyone in the area," Holding said.
FBI agents are actively looking to take the person into custody. Holding would not name the person, nor describe his or her involvement beyond the indictment. That individual is described as a U.S. citizen and North Carolina resident who traveled to Pakistan in October 2008 to participate in violent jihad.
Seven other men were arrested and charged yesterday with plotting to kill themselves and others in the name of Islam as part of a three-year investigation by the FBI.
Those arrested Monday include Daniel Patrick Boyd, 39, who was considered the ringleader of the group, and who fought with Afghan Muslims against the Soviets; Hysen Sherifi, 24; Anes Subasic, 33; Zakariya Boyd, 20, and Dylan Boyd, 22; Mohammad Omar Aly Hassan, 22; and Ziyad Yaghi, a 21-year-old Cary High School graduate.
Holding added that this week's indictments and charges have no bearing on the larger Muslim community in the Triangle.
"No one should take this as an indictment of the Muslim community," Holding said.
The named suspects are expected to be in court later this week for detention hearings.
Monday, July 27, 2009
Energy conference draws crowd in Lynchburg
Comment: Pro-Nuke Bunch will mine Southside and all of Virginia! Nuke power is too expensive and with the French involved, most of the profits will go back to France and the Canadian uranium mining companies will take most of their money back to Canada! No to Uranium mining! The NRC represents corporations so do not depend on them to report the real conditions of uranium milling or nuke plants! Oh, by the way, write to the senator and explain to him Nuke Plants are not CO2 free, he needs to study the problems of uranium mining!
By Ray Reed
Published: July 27, 2009
More than 300 people turned out in Lynchburg today to hear Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-6th District, tell why he doesn’t support the cap-and-trade energy bill that passed the House of Representatives about a month ago.
“The bill sets us on a track that I find not very compelling,“ Goodlatte said at the energy conference he sponsors once a year in the Sixth district.
The cap-and-trade bill now is pending in the U.S. Senate, and Goodlatte said the House-passed version would increase energy costs without lowering global temperatures very much.
Goodlatte said the best energy scenario is nuclear power — a line that won applause from the crowd at Central Virginia Community College. Nuclear technol-ogy is improving and it generates power without releasing carbon emissions, Goodlatte said.
Another speaker at the conference was Kristine Svinicki, a director of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Svinicki said she expects new nuclear plant worldwide to increase electricity production by 10 percent.
In the U.S., Svinicki said the Department of Energy has forecast 10 new reactors will be built in the next couple of decades. Svinicki said one signal that nuclear power may be making a comeback in the U.S. came last week when Areva and Northrop Grumman shipbuilding broke ground on a plant to make nu-clear-power equipment in Newport News.
http://www2.newsadvance.com/lna/news/local/article/energy_conference_draws_crowd_in_lynchburg/18017/
Goodlatte explains opposition to energy bill
http://www2.newsadvance.com/lna/news/local/article/goodlatte_explains_opposition_to_energy_bill/18019/ By Ray Reed
Published: July 27, 2009
More than 300 people turned out in Lynchburg today to hear Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-6th District, tell why he doesn’t support the cap-and-trade energy bill that passed the House of Representatives about a month ago.
“The bill sets us on a track that I find not very compelling,“ Goodlatte said at the energy conference he sponsors once a year in the Sixth district.
The cap-and-trade bill now is pending in the U.S. Senate, and Goodlatte said the House-passed version would increase energy costs without lowering global temperatures very much.
Goodlatte said the best energy scenario is nuclear power — a line that won applause from the crowd at Central Virginia Community College. Nuclear technology is improving and it generates power without releasing carbon emissions, Goodlatte said.
Another speaker at the conference was Kristine Svinicki, a director of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Svinicki said she expects new nuclear plant worldwide to increase electricity production by 10 percent.
In the U.S., Svinicki said the Department of Energy has forecast 10 new reactors will be built in the next couple of decades. Svinicki said one signal that nuclear power may be making a comeback in the U.S. came last week when Areva and Northrop Grumman shipbuilding broke ground on a plant to make nuclear-power equipment in Newport News.
By Ray Reed
Published: July 27, 2009
More than 300 people turned out in Lynchburg today to hear Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-6th District, tell why he doesn’t support the cap-and-trade energy bill that passed the House of Representatives about a month ago.
“The bill sets us on a track that I find not very compelling,“ Goodlatte said at the energy conference he sponsors once a year in the Sixth district.
The cap-and-trade bill now is pending in the U.S. Senate, and Goodlatte said the House-passed version would increase energy costs without lowering global temperatures very much.
Goodlatte said the best energy scenario is nuclear power — a line that won applause from the crowd at Central Virginia Community College. Nuclear technol-ogy is improving and it generates power without releasing carbon emissions, Goodlatte said.
Another speaker at the conference was Kristine Svinicki, a director of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Svinicki said she expects new nuclear plant worldwide to increase electricity production by 10 percent.
In the U.S., Svinicki said the Department of Energy has forecast 10 new reactors will be built in the next couple of decades. Svinicki said one signal that nuclear power may be making a comeback in the U.S. came last week when Areva and Northrop Grumman shipbuilding broke ground on a plant to make nu-clear-power equipment in Newport News.
http://www2.newsadvance.com/lna/news/local/article/energy_conference_draws_crowd_in_lynchburg/18017/
Goodlatte explains opposition to energy bill
http://www2.newsadvance.com/lna/news/local/article/goodlatte_explains_opposition_to_energy_bill/18019/ By Ray Reed
Published: July 27, 2009
More than 300 people turned out in Lynchburg today to hear Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-6th District, tell why he doesn’t support the cap-and-trade energy bill that passed the House of Representatives about a month ago.
“The bill sets us on a track that I find not very compelling,“ Goodlatte said at the energy conference he sponsors once a year in the Sixth district.
The cap-and-trade bill now is pending in the U.S. Senate, and Goodlatte said the House-passed version would increase energy costs without lowering global temperatures very much.
Goodlatte said the best energy scenario is nuclear power — a line that won applause from the crowd at Central Virginia Community College. Nuclear technology is improving and it generates power without releasing carbon emissions, Goodlatte said.
Another speaker at the conference was Kristine Svinicki, a director of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Svinicki said she expects new nuclear plant worldwide to increase electricity production by 10 percent.
In the U.S., Svinicki said the Department of Energy has forecast 10 new reactors will be built in the next couple of decades. Svinicki said one signal that nuclear power may be making a comeback in the U.S. came last week when Areva and Northrop Grumman shipbuilding broke ground on a plant to make nuclear-power equipment in Newport News.
A US contamination from Uranium mining reality highlighted by the New York Times. Uranium Contamination Haunts Navajo Nation.
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 27th, 2009
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)
Uranium Contamination Haunts Navajo Country
Dan Frosch, The New York Times, July 27, 2009.
“There were a lot of things people weren’t told about the plight of Navajos and uranium mining,” Stephen B. Etsitty said.
The Slowman home, the same one-level cinderblock structure his family had lived in for nearly a half-century, was contaminated with potentially dangerous levels of uranium from the days of the cold war, when hundreds of uranium mines dotted the vast tribal land known as the Navajo Nation. The scientist advised Mr. Slowman, his wife and their two sons to move out until their home could be rebuilt.
“I was angry,” Mr. Slowman said. “I guess it was here all this time, and we never knew.”
The legacy wrought from decades of uranium mining is long and painful here on the expansive reservation. Over the years, Navajo miners extracted some four million tons of uranium ore from the ground, much of it used by the United States government to make weapons.
Many miners died from radiation-related illnesses; some, unaware of harmful health effects, hauled contaminated rocks and tailings from local mines and mills to build homes for their families.
Now, those homes are being demolished and rebuilt under a new government program that seeks to identify what are very likely dozens of uranium-contaminated structures still standing on Navajo land and to temporarily relocate people living in them until the homes can be torn down and rebuilt.
Stephen B. Etsitty, executive director of the Navajo Nation Environmental Protection Agency, and other tribal officials have been grappling for years with the environmental fallout from uranium mining.
“There were a lot of things people weren’t told about the plight of Navajos and uranium mining,” Mr. Etsitty said. “These legacy issues are impacting generations. At some point people are saying, ‘It’s got to end.’ ”
After a Congressional hearing in 2007, a cross-section of federal agencies committed to addressing the environmental and health impacts of uranium mining on the reservation. As part of that commitment, the federal Environmental Protection Agency and the Navajo Nation began working together to assess uranium levels in 500 structures through a five-year plan set to end in 2012.
Using old lists of potentially contaminated structures, federal and Navajo scientists have fanned out to rural reaches of the 27,000 square mile reservation — which includes swaths of Arizona, New Mexico and Utah — to measure levels of radium, a decay product of uranium that can cause lung cancer. Of 113 structures assessed so far, 27 contained radiation levels that were above normal.
“In these situations, you have contamination in somebody’s yard or in their house,” said Harry Allen, the E.P.A.’s section chief for emergency response in San Francisco who is helping lead the government’s efforts. “To us, that is somewhat urgent.”
Many structures that showed high levels of radiation were vacant; some families had already moved out after hearing stories of contamination in their homes. But eight homes still had people living in them, and the E.P.A. and Navajo officials have worked to convince residents that it would be unsafe to stay.
“People had been told they were living in contaminated structures, but nobody ever did anything about it,” said Will Duncan, an environmental scientist who has been the E.P.A.’s main representative on the reservation. “They would tell us, ‘We don’t believe you are going to follow through.’ ”
But with a budget of nearly $8 million, the E.P.A. has demolished all 27 contaminated structures and has begun building ones to replace those that had been occupied. Typically, the agency pays a Navajo contracting company to construct a log cabin or a traditional hogan in the structure’s stead, depending on the wishes of the occupants. Mr. Allen said the cost, including temporarily relocating residents, ran approximately $260,000 per dwelling and took about eight months.
The agency also offers $50,000 to those who choose not to have an old home rebuilt.
Lillie Lane, a public information officer with the Navajo Nation E.P.A. who has acted as a liaison between the federal government and tribal members, said the program held practical and symbolic importance given the history of uranium mining here.
Ms. Lane described the difficulty of watching families, particularly elders, leaving homes they had lived in for years. She told of coming upon two old miners who died before their contaminated homes could be rebuilt. “In Navajo, a home is considered sacred,” she said. “But if the foundation or the rocks are not safe, we have to do this work.”
Some families, Ms. Lane said, complained that their children were suffering from health problems and had wondered if radiation were to blame.
The E.P.A. has started sifting through records and interviewing family members to figure out whether mining companies that once operated on the reservation are liable for any damages, Mr. Allen said.
On a recent summer day, Fred and Clara Slowman proudly surveyed their new home, a one-level log cabin that sits in the quiet shadows of Black Rock Point, miles away from the bustle of Farmington, N.M., where the family has been living in a hotel.
Mr. Slowman said he suspected that waste materials from a nearby abandoned mine seeped into his house. The family plans on having a traditional Navajo medicine man bless their dwelling before they move in.
“In our traditional way, a house is like your mom,” he said. “It’s where you eat, sleep, where you’re taken care of. And when you come back from the city, you come back to your mom. It makes you feel real good.”
http://www.sustainabilitank.info/2009/07/27/a-us-contamination-from-uranium-mining-reality-highlighted-by-the-new-york-times/
by Pincas Jawetz (PJ@SustainabiliTank.com)
Uranium Contamination Haunts Navajo Country
Dan Frosch, The New York Times, July 27, 2009.
“There were a lot of things people weren’t told about the plight of Navajos and uranium mining,” Stephen B. Etsitty said.
The Slowman home, the same one-level cinderblock structure his family had lived in for nearly a half-century, was contaminated with potentially dangerous levels of uranium from the days of the cold war, when hundreds of uranium mines dotted the vast tribal land known as the Navajo Nation. The scientist advised Mr. Slowman, his wife and their two sons to move out until their home could be rebuilt.
“I was angry,” Mr. Slowman said. “I guess it was here all this time, and we never knew.”
The legacy wrought from decades of uranium mining is long and painful here on the expansive reservation. Over the years, Navajo miners extracted some four million tons of uranium ore from the ground, much of it used by the United States government to make weapons.
Many miners died from radiation-related illnesses; some, unaware of harmful health effects, hauled contaminated rocks and tailings from local mines and mills to build homes for their families.
Now, those homes are being demolished and rebuilt under a new government program that seeks to identify what are very likely dozens of uranium-contaminated structures still standing on Navajo land and to temporarily relocate people living in them until the homes can be torn down and rebuilt.
Stephen B. Etsitty, executive director of the Navajo Nation Environmental Protection Agency, and other tribal officials have been grappling for years with the environmental fallout from uranium mining.
“There were a lot of things people weren’t told about the plight of Navajos and uranium mining,” Mr. Etsitty said. “These legacy issues are impacting generations. At some point people are saying, ‘It’s got to end.’ ”
After a Congressional hearing in 2007, a cross-section of federal agencies committed to addressing the environmental and health impacts of uranium mining on the reservation. As part of that commitment, the federal Environmental Protection Agency and the Navajo Nation began working together to assess uranium levels in 500 structures through a five-year plan set to end in 2012.
Using old lists of potentially contaminated structures, federal and Navajo scientists have fanned out to rural reaches of the 27,000 square mile reservation — which includes swaths of Arizona, New Mexico and Utah — to measure levels of radium, a decay product of uranium that can cause lung cancer. Of 113 structures assessed so far, 27 contained radiation levels that were above normal.
“In these situations, you have contamination in somebody’s yard or in their house,” said Harry Allen, the E.P.A.’s section chief for emergency response in San Francisco who is helping lead the government’s efforts. “To us, that is somewhat urgent.”
Many structures that showed high levels of radiation were vacant; some families had already moved out after hearing stories of contamination in their homes. But eight homes still had people living in them, and the E.P.A. and Navajo officials have worked to convince residents that it would be unsafe to stay.
“People had been told they were living in contaminated structures, but nobody ever did anything about it,” said Will Duncan, an environmental scientist who has been the E.P.A.’s main representative on the reservation. “They would tell us, ‘We don’t believe you are going to follow through.’ ”
But with a budget of nearly $8 million, the E.P.A. has demolished all 27 contaminated structures and has begun building ones to replace those that had been occupied. Typically, the agency pays a Navajo contracting company to construct a log cabin or a traditional hogan in the structure’s stead, depending on the wishes of the occupants. Mr. Allen said the cost, including temporarily relocating residents, ran approximately $260,000 per dwelling and took about eight months.
The agency also offers $50,000 to those who choose not to have an old home rebuilt.
Lillie Lane, a public information officer with the Navajo Nation E.P.A. who has acted as a liaison between the federal government and tribal members, said the program held practical and symbolic importance given the history of uranium mining here.
Ms. Lane described the difficulty of watching families, particularly elders, leaving homes they had lived in for years. She told of coming upon two old miners who died before their contaminated homes could be rebuilt. “In Navajo, a home is considered sacred,” she said. “But if the foundation or the rocks are not safe, we have to do this work.”
Some families, Ms. Lane said, complained that their children were suffering from health problems and had wondered if radiation were to blame.
The E.P.A. has started sifting through records and interviewing family members to figure out whether mining companies that once operated on the reservation are liable for any damages, Mr. Allen said.
On a recent summer day, Fred and Clara Slowman proudly surveyed their new home, a one-level log cabin that sits in the quiet shadows of Black Rock Point, miles away from the bustle of Farmington, N.M., where the family has been living in a hotel.
Mr. Slowman said he suspected that waste materials from a nearby abandoned mine seeped into his house. The family plans on having a traditional Navajo medicine man bless their dwelling before they move in.
“In our traditional way, a house is like your mom,” he said. “It’s where you eat, sleep, where you’re taken care of. And when you come back from the city, you come back to your mom. It makes you feel real good.”
http://www.sustainabilitank.info/2009/07/27/a-us-contamination-from-uranium-mining-reality-highlighted-by-the-new-york-times/
County Supervisor Archuleta Testifies Before House Subcommittee
July 27th, 2009 by NAZ Today Staff
Flagstaff, Az. – On July 21, Coconino County Supervisor Liz Archuleta traveled to Washington, D.C. to testify before the House Subcommittee on National Parks, Forest and Public Lands in support of H.R. 644.
H.R. 644, the Grand Canyon Watersheds Protection Act of 2009, was introduced in this session by Representative Raul Grijalva. If adopted, it would permanently withdraw the Tusayan Ranger District and federal land managed by the Bureau of Land Management (in the vicinity of Kanab Creek and House Rock Valley) from “location, entry and patent under the mining laws, and for other purposes”.
The hearing came one day after Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar’s announcement to temporarily exempt the area from uranium mining for the next two years, while federal agencies complete an environmental review to determine whether or not claims should be halted for a longer period. Following the results of the review, the Department of Interior could order a ban on new claims for twenty years, although preexisting approved claims would be honored and allowed to continue.
In Supervisor Archuleta’s testimony, she referred to previous uranium development operations in Coconino County and the long-term health and environmental effects, specifically on the Navajo and Hopi Nations in the vicinity of Tuba City, as well as remnants of the Orphan Mine in the Grand Canyon National Park.
“Coconino County has witnessed serious negative health and environmental effects associated with uranium mining,” said Supervisor Archuleta. “Uranium development operations in the County have caused considerable contamination and environmental degradation, particularly on the Navajo and Hopi Nations, and they have been an ongoing concern in our County.”
Coconino County’s economy is based primarily on revenue generated by tourism, and long-term uranium mining could potentially have a devastating impact on tourism, particularly near Grand Canyon National Park.
“While Coconino County continues to support regional economic development opportunities, we are cognizant of potential impacts from certain industries,” said Supervisor Archuleta.
http://www.naztoday.com/news/local-news/2009/07/county-supervisor-archuleta-testifies-before-house-subcommittee/
Flagstaff, Az. – On July 21, Coconino County Supervisor Liz Archuleta traveled to Washington, D.C. to testify before the House Subcommittee on National Parks, Forest and Public Lands in support of H.R. 644.
H.R. 644, the Grand Canyon Watersheds Protection Act of 2009, was introduced in this session by Representative Raul Grijalva. If adopted, it would permanently withdraw the Tusayan Ranger District and federal land managed by the Bureau of Land Management (in the vicinity of Kanab Creek and House Rock Valley) from “location, entry and patent under the mining laws, and for other purposes”.
The hearing came one day after Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar’s announcement to temporarily exempt the area from uranium mining for the next two years, while federal agencies complete an environmental review to determine whether or not claims should be halted for a longer period. Following the results of the review, the Department of Interior could order a ban on new claims for twenty years, although preexisting approved claims would be honored and allowed to continue.
In Supervisor Archuleta’s testimony, she referred to previous uranium development operations in Coconino County and the long-term health and environmental effects, specifically on the Navajo and Hopi Nations in the vicinity of Tuba City, as well as remnants of the Orphan Mine in the Grand Canyon National Park.
“Coconino County has witnessed serious negative health and environmental effects associated with uranium mining,” said Supervisor Archuleta. “Uranium development operations in the County have caused considerable contamination and environmental degradation, particularly on the Navajo and Hopi Nations, and they have been an ongoing concern in our County.”
Coconino County’s economy is based primarily on revenue generated by tourism, and long-term uranium mining could potentially have a devastating impact on tourism, particularly near Grand Canyon National Park.
“While Coconino County continues to support regional economic development opportunities, we are cognizant of potential impacts from certain industries,” said Supervisor Archuleta.
http://www.naztoday.com/news/local-news/2009/07/county-supervisor-archuleta-testifies-before-house-subcommittee/
America’s Secret Chernobyl - Uranium Mining & Pollution in the Upper Midwest
July 27, 2009 by admin1
The following report was produced by Defenders of the Black Hills:
1. World War II ended with the nuclear bomb and introduced the use of nuclear energy for the production of electricity which caused the price of uranium to rise. Uranium mining in South Dakota, Wyoming, Montana, and North Dakota began in the middle of the 1960s. As the economy of the Midwestern states depends primarily on agriculture, when uranium was discovered in the region, many get-rich-quick schemes were adopted.
Not only were large mining companies pushing off the tops of bluffs and buttes, but small individual ranchers were also digging in their pastures for the radioactive metal. Mining occurred on both public and private land, although the Great Sioux Nation still maintains a claim to the area through the Fort Laramie Treaties of 1851 and 1868, the March 3rd Act of 1871, Article VI of the US Constitution, and the 1980 Supreme Court decision on the Black Hills.
2. In northwestern South Dakota, the Cave Hills area is managed by the US Forest Service. The area currently contains 89 abandoned open-pit uranium mines. Studies by the USFS show that one mine alone has 1,400 millirems per hour (mR/hr) of exposed radiation, a level of radiation that is 120,000 times higher than normal background of 100 millirems per year (mR/yr)! In the southwestern Black Hills, the US Forest Service reported on 29 abandoned open-pit uranium mines, one of which is about 1 square mile in size.
3. It is estimated that more than 1,000 open-pit uranium mines and prospects can be found in the four state region from a map developed by the US Forest Service. The water runoff from the creeks and rivers near these abandoned uranium mines eventually empties into the Missouri River which empties into the Mississippi River.
4. The following agencies are aware of these abandoned uranium mines and prospects: US Forest Service, US Environmental Protection Agency, US Bureau of Land Management, SD Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the US Indian Health Service. Only after public concern about these mines was raised a few years ago did the USFS and the EPA pay for a study in 2006 of the off site effects caused by only 1 abandoned mine.
5. More than 4,000 exploratory holes, some large enough for a person to fall into, are found in the southwestern Black Hills with an additional 3,000 holes just 10 miles west of the town of Belle Fourche, SD near the Wyoming border. These holes go to depths of 600 feet. This exploratory process itself allows radioactive pollutants to cross contaminate underground water sources. More exploratory holes for uranium are being drilled in Wyoming and South Dakota.
6. The US Air Force also used small nuclear power plants in some of their remote radar stations. No data is available on the current status or disposal of these small nuclear power sources or of their wastes. The US Air Force is responsible for monitoring these sites although there is no stopping the radioactive pollution that could contaminate aquifers.
7. In Wyoming, hundreds of abandoned open-pit uranium mines and prospects can be found in or near the coal in the Powder River Basin, and the coal is laced with uranium ore. The coal is shipped to power plants in the Eastern part of the United States.
Radioactive dust and particles are released into the air at the coal fired power plants and often set off the warning systems at nuclear power plants. The same radioactive dust and particles are released into the air that travels across South Dakota and to the South and East in the coal strip mining process.
8. In 1972, President Richard Nixon signed a secret Executive Order declaring this four State region in the Upper Midwest to be a ‘National Sacrifice Area’ for the mining and production of uranium and nuclear energy.
Conclusion
This Fact Sheet regarding past and planned uranium and coal mining in the Upper Midwest region should give cause for alarm to all thinking people in the United States. This is the area that has been called “the Bread Basket of the World.” For more than forty years, the people of South Dakota and beyond have been subjected to radioactive polluted dust and water runoff from the hundreds of abandoned open pit uranium mines, processing sites, underground nuclear power stations, and waste dumps.
There needs to be a concerted effort to determine the extent of the radioactive pollution in the environment, and the health damage that has been and is currently being inflicted upon the people of the United States.
It is imperative that a federal bill be passed in Congress appropriating enough funds for the cleanup of ALL the abandoned uranium mines in this four State region. This harmful situation must not be placed on the end of the Superfund list of hazardous sites to be addressed in twenty years. Those responsible for this disaster must be held responsible for the consequences, but the cleanup and health concerns of the nation need to be addressed first. The health of the nation is at stake!
The cleanup of all of these mines and underground sites must begin NOW!
We hope you will consider our request for concerted actions to be taken at the national level regarding these grave concerns. This problem of radiation pollution spreading throughout the United States has been allowed to continue quietly for much too long.
********* What you can do ***********
1. Contact your Congressional Representative and Senators by phone (202) 224-3121, through the mail, and email. Ask that they consider sponsoring a bill for the cleanup of all the abandoned uranium mines and prospects, and underground nuclear sites in the Upper Midwest Region of South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana, and Wyoming.
2. Ask your Congressional Representatives and Senators to support the Expansion of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA) to include also those harmed by abandoned uranium mines and prospects in the Upper Midwest Region.
3. Encourage the use of alternative sources of energy such as wind, solar, and geothermal. Nuclear energy is not the answer and only creates very long term problems to the entire environment.
Thank you!
Produced by Defenders of the Black Hills, PO Box 2003, Rapid City, SD 57709, a nonprofit corporation.
For more information check out www.defendblackhills.org
http://www.russellmeansfreedom.com/2009/americas-secret-chernobyl-uranium-mining-pollution-in-the-upper-midwest/
The following report was produced by Defenders of the Black Hills:
1. World War II ended with the nuclear bomb and introduced the use of nuclear energy for the production of electricity which caused the price of uranium to rise. Uranium mining in South Dakota, Wyoming, Montana, and North Dakota began in the middle of the 1960s. As the economy of the Midwestern states depends primarily on agriculture, when uranium was discovered in the region, many get-rich-quick schemes were adopted.
Not only were large mining companies pushing off the tops of bluffs and buttes, but small individual ranchers were also digging in their pastures for the radioactive metal. Mining occurred on both public and private land, although the Great Sioux Nation still maintains a claim to the area through the Fort Laramie Treaties of 1851 and 1868, the March 3rd Act of 1871, Article VI of the US Constitution, and the 1980 Supreme Court decision on the Black Hills.
2. In northwestern South Dakota, the Cave Hills area is managed by the US Forest Service. The area currently contains 89 abandoned open-pit uranium mines. Studies by the USFS show that one mine alone has 1,400 millirems per hour (mR/hr) of exposed radiation, a level of radiation that is 120,000 times higher than normal background of 100 millirems per year (mR/yr)! In the southwestern Black Hills, the US Forest Service reported on 29 abandoned open-pit uranium mines, one of which is about 1 square mile in size.
3. It is estimated that more than 1,000 open-pit uranium mines and prospects can be found in the four state region from a map developed by the US Forest Service. The water runoff from the creeks and rivers near these abandoned uranium mines eventually empties into the Missouri River which empties into the Mississippi River.
4. The following agencies are aware of these abandoned uranium mines and prospects: US Forest Service, US Environmental Protection Agency, US Bureau of Land Management, SD Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the US Indian Health Service. Only after public concern about these mines was raised a few years ago did the USFS and the EPA pay for a study in 2006 of the off site effects caused by only 1 abandoned mine.
5. More than 4,000 exploratory holes, some large enough for a person to fall into, are found in the southwestern Black Hills with an additional 3,000 holes just 10 miles west of the town of Belle Fourche, SD near the Wyoming border. These holes go to depths of 600 feet. This exploratory process itself allows radioactive pollutants to cross contaminate underground water sources. More exploratory holes for uranium are being drilled in Wyoming and South Dakota.
6. The US Air Force also used small nuclear power plants in some of their remote radar stations. No data is available on the current status or disposal of these small nuclear power sources or of their wastes. The US Air Force is responsible for monitoring these sites although there is no stopping the radioactive pollution that could contaminate aquifers.
7. In Wyoming, hundreds of abandoned open-pit uranium mines and prospects can be found in or near the coal in the Powder River Basin, and the coal is laced with uranium ore. The coal is shipped to power plants in the Eastern part of the United States.
Radioactive dust and particles are released into the air at the coal fired power plants and often set off the warning systems at nuclear power plants. The same radioactive dust and particles are released into the air that travels across South Dakota and to the South and East in the coal strip mining process.
8. In 1972, President Richard Nixon signed a secret Executive Order declaring this four State region in the Upper Midwest to be a ‘National Sacrifice Area’ for the mining and production of uranium and nuclear energy.
Conclusion
This Fact Sheet regarding past and planned uranium and coal mining in the Upper Midwest region should give cause for alarm to all thinking people in the United States. This is the area that has been called “the Bread Basket of the World.” For more than forty years, the people of South Dakota and beyond have been subjected to radioactive polluted dust and water runoff from the hundreds of abandoned open pit uranium mines, processing sites, underground nuclear power stations, and waste dumps.
There needs to be a concerted effort to determine the extent of the radioactive pollution in the environment, and the health damage that has been and is currently being inflicted upon the people of the United States.
It is imperative that a federal bill be passed in Congress appropriating enough funds for the cleanup of ALL the abandoned uranium mines in this four State region. This harmful situation must not be placed on the end of the Superfund list of hazardous sites to be addressed in twenty years. Those responsible for this disaster must be held responsible for the consequences, but the cleanup and health concerns of the nation need to be addressed first. The health of the nation is at stake!
The cleanup of all of these mines and underground sites must begin NOW!
We hope you will consider our request for concerted actions to be taken at the national level regarding these grave concerns. This problem of radiation pollution spreading throughout the United States has been allowed to continue quietly for much too long.
********* What you can do ***********
1. Contact your Congressional Representative and Senators by phone (202) 224-3121, through the mail, and email. Ask that they consider sponsoring a bill for the cleanup of all the abandoned uranium mines and prospects, and underground nuclear sites in the Upper Midwest Region of South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana, and Wyoming.
2. Ask your Congressional Representatives and Senators to support the Expansion of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA) to include also those harmed by abandoned uranium mines and prospects in the Upper Midwest Region.
3. Encourage the use of alternative sources of energy such as wind, solar, and geothermal. Nuclear energy is not the answer and only creates very long term problems to the entire environment.
Thank you!
Produced by Defenders of the Black Hills, PO Box 2003, Rapid City, SD 57709, a nonprofit corporation.
For more information check out www.defendblackhills.org
http://www.russellmeansfreedom.com/2009/americas-secret-chernobyl-uranium-mining-pollution-in-the-upper-midwest/
King Coal
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
July 26, 2009 08:38 PM
Over the past decade, nearly one hundred coal burning power plants have died in the proposal stage trumped by the legitimate objections of local communities fearful of a dirty deadly fuel that is neither cheap nor clean. Ozone and particulates from coal plants kill tens of thousands of Americans each year and cause widespread illnesses and disease. Acid rain emissions have destroyed the forests over the length of the Appalachian and sterilized one in five Adirondack lakes. Neurotoxic mercury raining from these plants has contaminated fish in every state--including every waterway in nineteen states--and poisons over a million American women and children annually. Coal industry strip mines have already destroyed 500 mountains in Appalachia, buried 2,000 miles of rivers and streams and will soon have flattened an area the size of Delaware. Finally, coal, which supplies 46% of our electric power, is the most important source of America's greenhouse gases.
Beating our deadly and expensive coal addiction will be lucrative. America's cornucopia of renewable energy resources and the recent maturation of solar, geothermal and wind technologies will allow us to meet most of our future energy needs with clean, cheap, abundant renewables. Bright Source, a solar thermal provider, has just signed contracts to provide California with 2.6 gigawatts of power annually from desert mirror farms. Construction costs are about the same per gigawatt as a coal plant and half the cost of a nuke plant. Once built, the energy is free forever. In contrast, once you build a coal plant, your biggest costs--fuel extraction and transportation and the harm from emissions--are just the beginning.
In the short term, a revolution in natural gas production over the past two years, has left America awash in natural gas and has made it possible to eliminate most of our dependence on deadly, destructive coal practically overnight--and without the expense of building new power plants.
How? Well it's pretty easy. Around 900 of America's coal plants--78% of the total--are small (generating less than half a gigawatt), antiquated, and horrendously inefficient. Their average age is 45 years, with many limping past 75. These ancient plants burn 20% more coal per megawatt hour than modern large coal units and are 60-75% less fuel efficient than high-efficiency gas plants. These small units account for less than 42% of the actual capacity for coal fired power but almost one half the total emission of the entire energy sector! The costs of operation, maintenance, capital improvements and repair costs of these antiquated worm-eaten facilities, if properly assessed, would make them far more expensive to run than natural gas plants. However, energy sector pricing structures make it possible for many plant operators to pass those costs to the public and make choices based on fuel costs, which in the case of coal, appears deceptively cheap because of massive subsidies.
Mothballing or throttling back these plants would mean huge cost savings to the public and eliminate the need for more than 350 million tons of coal, including all 30 million tons harvested through mountain top removal. Their closure would reduce U.S. mercury emissions by 20-25%, dramatically cut deadly particulate matter and the pollutants that cause acid rain, and slash America's CO2 from power plants by 20%--an amount greater than the entire reduction mandated in the first years of the pending Climate Change Legislation--at a fraction of the cost.
These decrepit generators can be eliminated very quickly--in many instances literally overnight by substituting power from America's existing and underutilized natural gas generation, which is abundant, cleaner and more affordable and accessible today than dirty coal.
Since 2007, the discovery of vast supplies of deep shale gas in the United States, along with advanced extraction methods, have created stable supply and predictably low prices for most of the next century. Of the 1,000 gigawatts of generating capacity currently required to meet national energy demand, 336 are coal fired, many of which are utilized far more heavily than for cleaner gas generation units. Surprisingly, America actually has more gas generation capacity--450 gigawatts--than coal. But most of the costs for coal-fired units are ignored in deciding when to operate these units. Public regulators traditionally require utilities to dispatch coal first. For that reason, high efficiency gas generators, which can replace a large percentage of U.S. coal, are used only 36% of the time. By simply changing the dispatch rule nationally, we could quickly reduce power generated by existing coal-fired plants and achieve massive emissions reductions. The new rule would change the order in which gas and coal fired plants are utilized by requiring that whenever coal and gas plants are competing head-to-head, the gas generation must be dispatched first.
To quickly gain further economic and environmental advantages, the larger, newer coal plants that remain in operation should be required to co-fire with natural gas. Many of these plants are already connected to gas pipelines and can easily be adapted to burn gas as 15 to 20% of their fuel. Experience shows using gas to partially fuel these plants dramatically reduces forced outages and maintenance costs and can be the most cost effective way to reduce CO2 emissions. This change can immediately achieve an additional 10 to 20% reduction in coal use and immediately reduce dangerous coal emissions.
Natural gas comes with its own set of environmental caveats. It is a carbon-based fuel and is extraction from shale, the most significant new source, if not managed carefully, can cause serious water, land use, and wildlife impacts, especially in the hands of irresponsible producers and lax regulators. But those impacts are dwarfed by the disastrous holocaust of coal and can be mitigated by careful regulation.
The giant advantage of a quick conversion from coal to gas is the quickest route for jumpstarting our economy and saving our planet.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-f-kennedy-jr/king-coal_b_245117.html
July 26, 2009 08:38 PM
Over the past decade, nearly one hundred coal burning power plants have died in the proposal stage trumped by the legitimate objections of local communities fearful of a dirty deadly fuel that is neither cheap nor clean. Ozone and particulates from coal plants kill tens of thousands of Americans each year and cause widespread illnesses and disease. Acid rain emissions have destroyed the forests over the length of the Appalachian and sterilized one in five Adirondack lakes. Neurotoxic mercury raining from these plants has contaminated fish in every state--including every waterway in nineteen states--and poisons over a million American women and children annually. Coal industry strip mines have already destroyed 500 mountains in Appalachia, buried 2,000 miles of rivers and streams and will soon have flattened an area the size of Delaware. Finally, coal, which supplies 46% of our electric power, is the most important source of America's greenhouse gases.
Beating our deadly and expensive coal addiction will be lucrative. America's cornucopia of renewable energy resources and the recent maturation of solar, geothermal and wind technologies will allow us to meet most of our future energy needs with clean, cheap, abundant renewables. Bright Source, a solar thermal provider, has just signed contracts to provide California with 2.6 gigawatts of power annually from desert mirror farms. Construction costs are about the same per gigawatt as a coal plant and half the cost of a nuke plant. Once built, the energy is free forever. In contrast, once you build a coal plant, your biggest costs--fuel extraction and transportation and the harm from emissions--are just the beginning.
In the short term, a revolution in natural gas production over the past two years, has left America awash in natural gas and has made it possible to eliminate most of our dependence on deadly, destructive coal practically overnight--and without the expense of building new power plants.
How? Well it's pretty easy. Around 900 of America's coal plants--78% of the total--are small (generating less than half a gigawatt), antiquated, and horrendously inefficient. Their average age is 45 years, with many limping past 75. These ancient plants burn 20% more coal per megawatt hour than modern large coal units and are 60-75% less fuel efficient than high-efficiency gas plants. These small units account for less than 42% of the actual capacity for coal fired power but almost one half the total emission of the entire energy sector! The costs of operation, maintenance, capital improvements and repair costs of these antiquated worm-eaten facilities, if properly assessed, would make them far more expensive to run than natural gas plants. However, energy sector pricing structures make it possible for many plant operators to pass those costs to the public and make choices based on fuel costs, which in the case of coal, appears deceptively cheap because of massive subsidies.
Mothballing or throttling back these plants would mean huge cost savings to the public and eliminate the need for more than 350 million tons of coal, including all 30 million tons harvested through mountain top removal. Their closure would reduce U.S. mercury emissions by 20-25%, dramatically cut deadly particulate matter and the pollutants that cause acid rain, and slash America's CO2 from power plants by 20%--an amount greater than the entire reduction mandated in the first years of the pending Climate Change Legislation--at a fraction of the cost.
These decrepit generators can be eliminated very quickly--in many instances literally overnight by substituting power from America's existing and underutilized natural gas generation, which is abundant, cleaner and more affordable and accessible today than dirty coal.
Since 2007, the discovery of vast supplies of deep shale gas in the United States, along with advanced extraction methods, have created stable supply and predictably low prices for most of the next century. Of the 1,000 gigawatts of generating capacity currently required to meet national energy demand, 336 are coal fired, many of which are utilized far more heavily than for cleaner gas generation units. Surprisingly, America actually has more gas generation capacity--450 gigawatts--than coal. But most of the costs for coal-fired units are ignored in deciding when to operate these units. Public regulators traditionally require utilities to dispatch coal first. For that reason, high efficiency gas generators, which can replace a large percentage of U.S. coal, are used only 36% of the time. By simply changing the dispatch rule nationally, we could quickly reduce power generated by existing coal-fired plants and achieve massive emissions reductions. The new rule would change the order in which gas and coal fired plants are utilized by requiring that whenever coal and gas plants are competing head-to-head, the gas generation must be dispatched first.
To quickly gain further economic and environmental advantages, the larger, newer coal plants that remain in operation should be required to co-fire with natural gas. Many of these plants are already connected to gas pipelines and can easily be adapted to burn gas as 15 to 20% of their fuel. Experience shows using gas to partially fuel these plants dramatically reduces forced outages and maintenance costs and can be the most cost effective way to reduce CO2 emissions. This change can immediately achieve an additional 10 to 20% reduction in coal use and immediately reduce dangerous coal emissions.
Natural gas comes with its own set of environmental caveats. It is a carbon-based fuel and is extraction from shale, the most significant new source, if not managed carefully, can cause serious water, land use, and wildlife impacts, especially in the hands of irresponsible producers and lax regulators. But those impacts are dwarfed by the disastrous holocaust of coal and can be mitigated by careful regulation.
The giant advantage of a quick conversion from coal to gas is the quickest route for jumpstarting our economy and saving our planet.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-f-kennedy-jr/king-coal_b_245117.html
Santoy Resources and Virginia Uranium Complete Business Combination
Tue Jul 21, 2009
Santoy Resources and Virginia Uranium Complete Business Combination
News Release: 09-14
Santoy Resources Ltd. (TSX.V: SAN) (the "Company" or "Santoy") is pleased to announce that the Plan of Arrangement (the "Arrangement") pursuant to which Santoy will complete a business combination with Virginia Uranium Ltd. ("Virginia") is expected to close today, July 21, 2009 (the "Effective Date"). Post closing, the Company will have approximately 54,377,279 common shares outstanding, will have changed its name to Virginia Energy Resources Inc. and will hold a 20.8% interest in VA Uranium Holdings, Inc. The outstanding common shares include the closing of the first tranche of the subscription receipts from the private placement financing dated July 17, 2009. The new company will trade on the TSX-V under the symbol VAE.
Procedural Information Respecting the Plan of Arrangement
The following information is a summary of certain features of the Plan of Arrangement. Immediately following the closing of the Arrangement, the Company will consolidate its shares on a one new for each five old basis. All share figures and exercise and other share prices given below are on a pre-consolidated basis.
Distribution of Santoy Incentive Warrants to Santoy Shareholders
Holders of Santoy common shares (excluding certain Small Lot Holders described below) will be entitled pursuant to the Arrangement to receive one (1) Santoy Incentive Warrant for every four (4) Santoy common shares held. Each one (1) Santoy Incentive Warrant will be exercisable to acquire one (1) Santoy common share at a price of CDN$0.12 for a period of 12 months following the closing of Arrangement. The Santoy Incentive Warrants are expected to be listed for trading on the TSX Venture Exchange.
For settlement reasons in connection with any trades of Santoy common shares during this period, the Company understands that the last day to purchase Santoy common shares that will be entitled to participate in the distribution of Santoy Incentive Warrants is July 23, 2009. Santoy common shares purchased on or after July 24, 2009 will not participate in the distribution of Santoy Incentive Warrants. The most recent private placement is not included and will not participate in the distribution of the Incentive warrants. These dates are subject to change and in such event, the Company will issue a news release announcing any such change.
Computershare Investor Services Inc. (the "Depositary") will forward to each Santoy shareholder who is entitled to receive Santoy Incentive Warrants, certificates representing their allotted number of such Warrants in accordance with the Arrangement.
Santoy Small Lot Holders (a "Small Lot" being less than 500 Santoy shares)
Registered Small Lot Holders will have their Santoy common shares cancelled as of the Effective Date and will not be entitled to receive any Santoy Incentive Warrants unless they have elected, by duly completing and returning to the Depositary an Election Form prior to the Effective Date, to retain their Santoy common shares and to receive a certificate representing Santoy Incentive Warrants.
If the election was not made, the registered Small Lot Holder will be entitled to receive only $0.10 per Santoy common share owned. To receive this cash payment in exchange for a Small Lot, the registered Small Lot Holder must complete the Election Form and deliver the Election Form together with the certificate(s) representing the Small Lot within six years of the Effective Date to the Depositary at the address provided in the Election Form. Santoy will deposit funds with the Depositary sufficient to pay the cash payments to registered Small Lot Holders, which funds will be held in a trust account to be used to pay the cash payments. Upon expiry of six (6) years from the Effective Date, all unused funds will be returned to Santoy. Due to the administrative costs of effecting exchanges, if a cash payment payable to a Small Lot Holder would be less than $10, such payment will not be made.
Registered Small Lot Shareholders should refer to the Election Form and the plan of arrangement attached to the joint information circular mailed to shareholders in connection with the Santoy meeting and available on SEDAR under Santoy's profile for additional information.
Exchange of Common Shares for shares in Virginia Energy Resources Inc.
Pursuant to the Arrangement, each of the issued Virginia Uranium Ltd. common shares will be exchanged for 1.2 shares in Virginia Energy Resources Inc. and each of the Santoy common shares will be exchanged at the ratio of five for one common share of Virginia Energy Resources Inc. As a result of this exchange, the new company will have post closing, approximately 54,377,279 common shares outstanding
In order to receive the Virginia Energy Resources Inc. common shares for their Virginia Uranium Ltd. common shares, a registered Virginia Uranium Ltd. shareholder must complete and sign the Letter of Transmittal and deliver it, together with certificates representing their Virginia Uranium Ltd. common shares (in the case of registered Virginia Uranium Ltd. shareholders) and the other required documents, to the Depositary in accordance with the instructions contained in the Letter of Transmittal. The Letter of Transmittal was mailed to Virginia Uranium Ltd. shareholders in connection with special meeting of Virginia Uranium Ltd. shareholders held on May 21, 2009 and is available from the Depositary upon request. Virginia Uranium Ltd. shareholders who are not registered shareholders because they hold their Virginia Uranium Ltd. common shares through their broker or other intermediary should contact their broker or other intermediary. Any Virginia Uranium Ltd. common share certificate which has not been duly surrendered, with all other documents required by the Depositary, on or before the sixth anniversary of the Effective Date, will cease to represent any claim against or interest of any kind or nature in Virginia Uranium Ltd., Santoy or the Depositary and shall be deemed to have been surrendered to Santoy and cancelled.
On Behalf of the Board of Directors
SANTOY RESOURCES LTD.
"Ron Netolitzky"
R. K. Netolitzky, President & CEO
http://www.santoy.ca/s/NewsReleases.asp?ReportID=356596&_Type=News-Releases&_Title=Santoy-Resources-and-Virginia-Uranium-Complete-Business-Combination
Santoy Resources and Virginia Uranium Complete Business Combination
News Release: 09-14
Santoy Resources Ltd. (TSX.V: SAN) (the "Company" or "Santoy") is pleased to announce that the Plan of Arrangement (the "Arrangement") pursuant to which Santoy will complete a business combination with Virginia Uranium Ltd. ("Virginia") is expected to close today, July 21, 2009 (the "Effective Date"). Post closing, the Company will have approximately 54,377,279 common shares outstanding, will have changed its name to Virginia Energy Resources Inc. and will hold a 20.8% interest in VA Uranium Holdings, Inc. The outstanding common shares include the closing of the first tranche of the subscription receipts from the private placement financing dated July 17, 2009. The new company will trade on the TSX-V under the symbol VAE.
Procedural Information Respecting the Plan of Arrangement
The following information is a summary of certain features of the Plan of Arrangement. Immediately following the closing of the Arrangement, the Company will consolidate its shares on a one new for each five old basis. All share figures and exercise and other share prices given below are on a pre-consolidated basis.
Distribution of Santoy Incentive Warrants to Santoy Shareholders
Holders of Santoy common shares (excluding certain Small Lot Holders described below) will be entitled pursuant to the Arrangement to receive one (1) Santoy Incentive Warrant for every four (4) Santoy common shares held. Each one (1) Santoy Incentive Warrant will be exercisable to acquire one (1) Santoy common share at a price of CDN$0.12 for a period of 12 months following the closing of Arrangement. The Santoy Incentive Warrants are expected to be listed for trading on the TSX Venture Exchange.
For settlement reasons in connection with any trades of Santoy common shares during this period, the Company understands that the last day to purchase Santoy common shares that will be entitled to participate in the distribution of Santoy Incentive Warrants is July 23, 2009. Santoy common shares purchased on or after July 24, 2009 will not participate in the distribution of Santoy Incentive Warrants. The most recent private placement is not included and will not participate in the distribution of the Incentive warrants. These dates are subject to change and in such event, the Company will issue a news release announcing any such change.
Computershare Investor Services Inc. (the "Depositary") will forward to each Santoy shareholder who is entitled to receive Santoy Incentive Warrants, certificates representing their allotted number of such Warrants in accordance with the Arrangement.
Santoy Small Lot Holders (a "Small Lot" being less than 500 Santoy shares)
Registered Small Lot Holders will have their Santoy common shares cancelled as of the Effective Date and will not be entitled to receive any Santoy Incentive Warrants unless they have elected, by duly completing and returning to the Depositary an Election Form prior to the Effective Date, to retain their Santoy common shares and to receive a certificate representing Santoy Incentive Warrants.
If the election was not made, the registered Small Lot Holder will be entitled to receive only $0.10 per Santoy common share owned. To receive this cash payment in exchange for a Small Lot, the registered Small Lot Holder must complete the Election Form and deliver the Election Form together with the certificate(s) representing the Small Lot within six years of the Effective Date to the Depositary at the address provided in the Election Form. Santoy will deposit funds with the Depositary sufficient to pay the cash payments to registered Small Lot Holders, which funds will be held in a trust account to be used to pay the cash payments. Upon expiry of six (6) years from the Effective Date, all unused funds will be returned to Santoy. Due to the administrative costs of effecting exchanges, if a cash payment payable to a Small Lot Holder would be less than $10, such payment will not be made.
Registered Small Lot Shareholders should refer to the Election Form and the plan of arrangement attached to the joint information circular mailed to shareholders in connection with the Santoy meeting and available on SEDAR under Santoy's profile for additional information.
Exchange of Common Shares for shares in Virginia Energy Resources Inc.
Pursuant to the Arrangement, each of the issued Virginia Uranium Ltd. common shares will be exchanged for 1.2 shares in Virginia Energy Resources Inc. and each of the Santoy common shares will be exchanged at the ratio of five for one common share of Virginia Energy Resources Inc. As a result of this exchange, the new company will have post closing, approximately 54,377,279 common shares outstanding
In order to receive the Virginia Energy Resources Inc. common shares for their Virginia Uranium Ltd. common shares, a registered Virginia Uranium Ltd. shareholder must complete and sign the Letter of Transmittal and deliver it, together with certificates representing their Virginia Uranium Ltd. common shares (in the case of registered Virginia Uranium Ltd. shareholders) and the other required documents, to the Depositary in accordance with the instructions contained in the Letter of Transmittal. The Letter of Transmittal was mailed to Virginia Uranium Ltd. shareholders in connection with special meeting of Virginia Uranium Ltd. shareholders held on May 21, 2009 and is available from the Depositary upon request. Virginia Uranium Ltd. shareholders who are not registered shareholders because they hold their Virginia Uranium Ltd. common shares through their broker or other intermediary should contact their broker or other intermediary. Any Virginia Uranium Ltd. common share certificate which has not been duly surrendered, with all other documents required by the Depositary, on or before the sixth anniversary of the Effective Date, will cease to represent any claim against or interest of any kind or nature in Virginia Uranium Ltd., Santoy or the Depositary and shall be deemed to have been surrendered to Santoy and cancelled.
On Behalf of the Board of Directors
SANTOY RESOURCES LTD.
"Ron Netolitzky"
R. K. Netolitzky, President & CEO
http://www.santoy.ca/s/NewsReleases.asp?ReportID=356596&_Type=News-Releases&_Title=Santoy-Resources-and-Virginia-Uranium-Complete-Business-Combination
Sunday, July 26, 2009
Keeping Agriculture Alive in the Shadow of a Uranium Mine: Potential Effects and Regulatory Solutions for Virginia
By admin May 20, 2009
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.
Virginia’s climate, topology, and climatology are substantially different from those areas in the Southwest where uranium historically has been mined. In addition, the location of the mine is in an area that, although considered rural within the state, has a significantly greater population density than the western mining areas.
The region of Southern Virginia where the proposed mine is located has historically been powered by nearby textile and furniture industries and agricultural production, especially tobacco.
The present-day economy of the immediate region is comprised of more than a thousand farms, primarily producing tobacco, corn, wheat, and soybeans, and beef cattle and swine.
Although uranium mining has the potential to bring short-term economic prosperity to Southern Virginia, there are potential risks to the agricultural economy.
The mining and milling process, as well as waste products, also bring significant risks of contamination to the surrounding environment.
These risks which have been realized at other mining locations, and these risks may be exacerbated by the unique hydrological environment of Virginia.
The increased exposure of crops and livestock has the potential to pose a significant safety and health risk to consumers of those products.
More importantly, the public perception of risk or danger from uranium mining may also result in serious negative repercussions for the marketability of agricultural products from the nearby regions, regardless of whether those risks present any real threat.
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.
The debate over Cole’s Hill will continue. Should Virginia tap these resources?
How should Virginia protect farmers?
What does mining Uranium say about Virginia’s balancing of energy needs and the safety of the food supply?
http://elpr.org/2009/05/20/keeping-agriculture-alive-in-the-shadow-of-a-uranium-mine-potential-effects-and-regulatory-solutions-for-virginia/
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.
Virginia’s climate, topology, and climatology are substantially different from those areas in the Southwest where uranium historically has been mined. In addition, the location of the mine is in an area that, although considered rural within the state, has a significantly greater population density than the western mining areas.
The region of Southern Virginia where the proposed mine is located has historically been powered by nearby textile and furniture industries and agricultural production, especially tobacco.
The present-day economy of the immediate region is comprised of more than a thousand farms, primarily producing tobacco, corn, wheat, and soybeans, and beef cattle and swine.
Although uranium mining has the potential to bring short-term economic prosperity to Southern Virginia, there are potential risks to the agricultural economy.
The mining and milling process, as well as waste products, also bring significant risks of contamination to the surrounding environment.
These risks which have been realized at other mining locations, and these risks may be exacerbated by the unique hydrological environment of Virginia.
The increased exposure of crops and livestock has the potential to pose a significant safety and health risk to consumers of those products.
More importantly, the public perception of risk or danger from uranium mining may also result in serious negative repercussions for the marketability of agricultural products from the nearby regions, regardless of whether those risks present any real threat.
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.
The debate over Cole’s Hill will continue. Should Virginia tap these resources?
How should Virginia protect farmers?
What does mining Uranium say about Virginia’s balancing of energy needs and the safety of the food supply?
http://elpr.org/2009/05/20/keeping-agriculture-alive-in-the-shadow-of-a-uranium-mine-potential-effects-and-regulatory-solutions-for-virginia/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
