Archive for the ‘water’ Category

Jharkhand’s radioactively poisoned land and water, due to uranium minng

June 10, 2013

Uranium waste contaminates water in Jharkhand  , Jun 8, 2013, New Delhi | Agency: DNA Reckless dumping of radioactive waste in Jharkhand is contaminating surface and ground water, putting thousands of locals at risk of developing cancer, according to a report by independent researchers.

The Uranium Corporation of India Limited (UCIL), a subsidiary of the Department of Atomic Energy, supplies uranium (yellow cake) to nuclear power plants in the country. It mines and processes uranium at seven mines in Jharkhand’s Jaduguda area. According to atomic experts, sludge and waste from uranium mines has to be scientifically disposed of as it contains around 85% radioactive substances.

Scientific disposal means creating pits that are covered, protected, cordoned off and made flood-proof. A tailing pond over an area of 30-40 acres must be created for disposal of sludge. These ponds too have to be cordoned off, made flood-proof and ensure that it prevents overflow. The waste decays to produce radium-226, which in turn produces Radon gas, a very powerful cancer-causing agent. For its three new mines i.e. Turamdih, Banduhurang and Mohuldih Uranium Mine, UCIL has one tailing pond at Talsa village, which fails to prevent sludge overflow and is not even fenced.

PT George, director of research institute Intercultural Resources, and independent writer Tarun Kanti Bose, spent six months studying the effects of uranium mining in the areas around the mines. Their report, Paradise Lost, released recently, states that UCIL’s irresponsible dumping in the vicinity of Jaduguda village (in Purbi Singhbhum district) is extremely worrisome as continued exposure to radiation will lead to increased cases of leukaemia and other blood diseases.

Heaps of uranium mining wastes have been abandoned in Dhodanga, Kerwadungri villages and those around Banduhurang open cast mine, according to the report. “The dumping has been going on for the last five years,” said Ghanshyam Birulee, a 45-year-old resident of Jaduguda village. “Despite complaints to UCIL, it has failed to take any action.”

Danger zone
Their report, Paradise Lost,  states that UCIL’s irresponsible dumping in the vicinity of Jaduguda village (in Purbi Singhbhum district) is extremely worrisome as continued exposure to radiation will lead to increased cases of leukaemia and other blood diseases…… 
http://www.dnaindia.com/india/1845207/report-uranium-waste-contaminates-water-in-jharkhand

 

Scandalous environmental destruction through uranium mining – Canada’s Beaverlodge area

June 10, 2013

Uranium mining legacy expensive, The Star Phoenix,  By Ann Coxworth, May 30, 2013 “…….The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission recently reviewed plans for continuing management of some of the contaminated sites in northern Saskatchewan – relics of uranium mining activities that took place during the 1960s and 1970s.

The cost of remediating surface waters to levels compatible with Saskatchewan surface water quality objectives is so overwhelming thatwe know it will never happen.

Because the companies that caused the pollution are no longer in existence, these costs now fall to the federal and provincialtaxpayers. The goal of industry and regulators now is simply to prevent the contamination from getting any worse.

One such contaminated region is the Beaverlodge area.

Beaverlodge Lake, just north of Lake Athabasca and east of Uranium
City, is linked to Lake Athabasca through a series of small lakes and
rivers. It is beautiful, and is home to an abundance of fish……..
Beaverlodge Lake, however, is contaminated with the poorly managed
wastes from uranium mining operations that closed down in the early
1980s. Eldorado Nuclear was a federal crown corporation that mined and
milled uranium close to the northeast corner of Beaver-lodge
Lake……
Eldorado no longer exists. The federal government created a new body,
Canada Eldor Inc., to be responsible for liabilities remaining from
Eldorado’s operations.

Canada Eldor has been financing work on continuing monitoring,
decommissioning and planning of remediation of the actual mine and
mill sites. However, this does not include Beaver-lodge Lake itself,
although much of the contamination has drifted downstream into that
lake and, from there, into the smaller lakes and streams that feed
into Lake Athabasca.

The situation is complicated by the fact that other abandoned mine
sites a little further west, owned by other defunct companies, have
also contributed to the problem in Beaverlodge Lake. The end result is
that Beaverlodge, a 57-squarekilometre body of water, is contaminated
with uranium and selenium at levels many times higher than
Saskatchewan surface water quality objectives require. Fish
consumption restrictions now apply…..
In April, Cameco appeared at a public hearing of the CNSC to apply for
a 10year extension of its licence to manage the old Eldorado sites on
behalf of Canada Eldor Inc. Cameco presented a plan for stabilization
of the contamination which, it hopes, would get the sites into a
condition where they could be turned over to Saskatchewan’s
Institutional Control Program, relieving the federal government of
responsibility and of the need for CNSC licensing.

This plan would still leave unacceptably high levels of contamination
in five watersheds. 
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/Uranium+mining+legacy+expensive/8453403/story.html#ixzz2UvWzGKon

Radioactive water still leaking from Mary Kathleen uranium mine – 30 years after closure

April 28, 2013

Queensland’s last uranium mine still leaking radioactive water 30 years after production stopped   John McCarthy  The Courier-Mail  March 21, 2013  THE state’s last uranium mine at Mary Kathleen – in the Selwyn Range between Mount Isa and Cloncurry – is still leaking radioactive water from the site 30 years after production stopped. But, according to a committee report handed to the State Government this week, the return of uranium mining to Queensland is “risky but manageable”.

“The uranium mining industry has a number of inherent environmental risks,” the report said….. The report says the Mary Kathleen mine’s pit is still full of highly contaminated water to a depth of about 50m, and since the mine closed in 1982, several other studies have found “ongoing environmental legacy issues”.

Those include the seepage of acidic, metal-rich, radioactive waters from the base of the tailings dam into the former evaporation ponds and local drainage system.

 Surface waters downstream of the mine’s tailings dam have concentrations of contaminants that exceed the Australian water quality guideline values for livestock drinking water.

Australian Conservation Foundation spokesman Dave Sweeney said there was no evidence that uranium mining was safe because not one former mine had been rehabilitated properly.

“In the Northern Territory there is a range of old mines, maybe a dozen or more, that are still being cleaned up 50 years after the event,” Mr Sweeney said…… 
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/queenslands-last-uranium-mine-still-leaking-radioactive-water-30-years-after-production-stopped/story-e6freoof-1226601866129

Expert warns on groundwater contamination danger for Wiluna uranium project

February 11, 2013

 Dr Mudd also highlighted the use and contamination of ground water
sources in the area as a key issue, saying there have been issues at
other uranium mines across Australia and it remains unclear where
water for this site will come from or what techniques will be used to
source it

Monash mining expert examines Wiluna uranium proposal
Science Network, 23 December 2012 AN AUSTRALIAN expert on mining
sustainability has highlighted some of the key environmental aspects
for West Australia, as the state moves closer to its first uranium
mine. (more…)

In situ leaching, fracking for uranium – it’s all the same danger to groundwater

February 11, 2013

When it comes to fracking for yellowcake, even more pressing than shaky economics is the obvious potential for environmental contamination. The process is not only extremely water intensive, as is typical of fracking, but it’s also happening at a shallow depth. Unlike the Eagle Ford’s oil and gas reserves, which are miles underground, the in situ uranium mining is taking place at the same level as local groundwater supplies.

Fracking for Yellowcake: The Next Frontier? 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-rubin/fracking-for-yellowcake-t_b_2612418.html
 Jeffrey Rubin  02/04/2013
 It works for oil and natural gas, so why not frack for uranium too? After all, America relies on foreign uranium just like it depends on foreign oil.

In the U.S. these days, it seems like you can sell almost anything if you spin it as part of the pursuit of energy independence. Enter Uranium Energy Corp. A junior mining company with Canadian roots, UEC is developing the newest uranium mine in the U.S. And it’s counting on fracking to do it.

Texans, in general, are no strangers to fracking. UEC is operating in the heart of fracking country, south Texas’s Eagle Ford basin, one of the most prolific shale plays in the country. Instead of oil and gas, though, UEC (recently profiled by Forbes Magazine) is fracking for yellowcake.

The technology is basically the same. It involves injecting a mixture of highly pressurized water and sand into an underground formation in order to break open fissures in the rock that allow the energy riches within to be extracted. In this case, it’s a slurry of uranium ore that’s then dried and processed into powdery yellowcake, an intermediate product that eventually becomes fuel for nuclear reactors. (more…)

In situ leaching for uranium – worse danger to groundwater than fracking

February 11, 2013

A spokesperson for Uranium Energy disputes the similarities to fracking that is made in the article.

“By contrast, ‘in-situ recovery’ is the process of injected-solution mining that reverses the natural process of deposited uranium in sandstones. On-site groundwater fortified with oxygen is introduced into the ground through a pattern of injection wells.  The solution dissolves uranium from the sandstone host rock, and the uranium-bearing solution is brought back to surface through vacuum-suction production wells, where the uranium is concentrated on resin beads for trucking to a nearby processing plant where it is concentrated further and dried into yellowcake.”

Opponents of in situ uranium extraction start throwing around the F word MINING.com Editor | January 25, 2013 A US company is extracting underground uranium reserves in Texas using in situ methods, but opponents are comparing it to another process that is drawing high-profile protests.

Forbes reports that Texas-based Uranium Energy Corp (UEC) uses the in situ method for extracting underground uranium by pumping oxygenated water into porous rock layers via deep-drilled wells.

Forbes notes the process is raising concerns among some in Texas who compare the process to hydraulic fracturing, which has some celebrity opponents.”By design it’s much worse than fracking,” says Houston attorney Jim Blackburn, who is interviewed by Forbes.

“This is intentional contamination of a water aquifer liberating not only uranium but other elements that were bound up with the sand. We know this process will contaminate groundwater; that’s the whole point of it.” (more…)

removal of uranium from water – Kansas residents willing to pay the costs

February 11, 2013

Kansas communities pay to rid water of uranium, Enquirer Herald, 20 Jan 13,  The Associated Press KANSAS CITY, Mo. —  Residents across Kansas have safer drinking water thanks to steps their communities have taken to rid the water of harmful elements such as uranium and arsenic. But those residents also are facing considerable hikes in water bills to pay for the improvements.

Lakin residents are paying water rates about 10 times higher than they had before the city began construction on a $6.5 million water treatment plant to eliminate naturally-occurring uranium from the drinking water.

Rates are up about three times in Clay Center, where the city has built a $10-million treatment plant also to deal with uranium, which can occur in some aquifers….. 
http://www.enquirerherald.com/2013/01/20/2276642/kansas-communities-pay-to-rid.html

“In Situ” uranium mining endangers South Dakota’s fresh water supplies

February 10, 2013

as for water quality, we know from the history of in situ leach
uranium mining that the groundwater will be contaminated. Leaks and
spills are common. Every in situ uranium mine has them. And at the end
of the process — when things have supposedly been “cleaned up” — the
groundwater has always been left polluted with radioactivity and with
things like arsenic, selenium and lead.

FORUM: In situ uranium mining will pollute water

http://rapidcityjournal.com/news/opinion/forum-in-situ-uranium-mining-will-pollute-water/article_ecc53035-6f34-5293-8d5f-08b0e619bee0.html

  January 12, 2013 Plans to mine uranium north of Edgemont remain
controversial — and with good reason. The company involved, Powertech
Uranium, is a foreign corporation that has never mined anything. They
want to use 9,000 gallons per minute of our water. And they will leave
the water contaminated with radiation and other things — like every
other “in situ” leach uranium mine in U.S. history.

In situ leach mining involves pumping a solution underground, where it
loosens the uranium from the rock, and then pumping the uranium-filled
solution back to the surface. (more…)

Virginia uranium mining a threat to North Carolina’s rivers

February 10, 2013

Hawood suggested the General Assembly write and pass a strongly-worded
resolution against uranium mining to try and influence Virginia’s
lawmakers in Richmond

VIDEO Uranium mining in Virginia would affect NC Rivers 


http://myfox8.com/2013/01/10/uranium-mining-in-virginia-would-affect-nc-rivers/

January 10, 2013, by Mitch Carr EDEN, NC —Virginia’s General Assembly is considering lifting a moratorium on

mining uranium that has been in place since 1982, and doing so could
have a dramatic effect on North Carolina’s recreational waterways.
The potential mine is on a farm near Gretna and Chatham in
Pittsylvania County, Virginia. The company attempting to mine the ore
that contains the uranium, Virginia Uranium, Inc.,  estimates the lode
to be 119 million pounds.
…….., many of the locals don’t support it, and an hour and a half
southwest of Chatham in Eden, NC, the Dan River Basin Association
definitely does not support it. (more…)

Problems of water supply, and water contamination risk, at Wiluna uranium mining site

December 28, 2012

Dr Mudd also highlighted the use and contamination of ground water
sources in the area as a key issue, saying there have been issues at
other uranium mines across Australia and it remains unclear where
water for this site will come from or what techniques will be used to
source it

Monash mining expert examines Wiluna uranium proposal
Science Network, 23 December 2012 AN AUSTRALIAN expert on mining
sustainability has highlighted some of the key environmental aspects
for West Australia, as the state moves closer to its first uranium
mine. (more…)


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 26 other followers