uranium news

The mining industry  has  had  a royal run from the Australian government.  Up until this latest Federal Budget uranium mining companies could deduct the full cost of exploration immediately, or even 150 per cent of the cost of exploration in some cases. Tax breaks on exploration and equipment cost taxpayers more than $1 billion per year.

Now – mining companies will cry poor, as the new budget contains  measures to tighten the rules on exploration deductions for miners. Companies will now only be able to deduct genuine exploration spending, rather than writing off the acquisition of a company that acquired mining rights and spent money on exploration. But hey, the Government is sacking  more than 100 staff from the federal environment department, staff who help assess mining proposals

But don’t let’s feel too sorry for the uranium, or indeed, any mining corporations. For example BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto pay tax on their fuel, but the government gives nearly all of it back through the Fuel Tax Credits program. Fears the diesel fuel rebates could be targeted again proved unfounded, with no direct changes to the 32 cent rebate.

As Charles  Berge wrote (in Sydney Morning Herald May 11, 2010)    “And then there are direct government services. Geoscience Australia’s annual budget is $130 million, much of which goes to providing free data and services to the mining industry. The CSIRO and various government research centres chip in another $130 million per year in benefits to the industry. And for the research the miners have to do themselves, they get $160 million back per year in the form of research and development tax concessions.

A billion or two for fuel, … a billion for free pollution and a couple of hundred million for subsidised science . . . pretty soon we’re talking real money.

And that’s before we’ve even begun to talk about government-provided roads, rail, ports, electricity networks and other infrastructure.

 Mining is different from most other industries because it directly accesses publicly owned, non-renewable resources. It is appropriate that it pay for this privileged access, over and above its fair share of company tax. In light of the $4 billion to $5 billion in benefits the mining industry receives each year from the Australian taxpayer, the government’s proposed resource rent tax starts to look modest (and anyway, uranium mining was exempt from that tax)….. 

So don’t be snowed by the big miners’ shrieks about sovereign risk driving them out of Australia. The biggest risk is that we continue to subsidise mining operations that aren’t paying a fair return for their use of public resources and taxpayer dollars.”

AUSTRALIA’S URANIUM EXPORT REVENUE IN PERSPECTIVE  YELLOWCAKE FEVER Exposing the Uranium Industry’s Economic Myths , Australian Conservation Foundation “……BHP Billiton enjoys extensive subsidies in the  form of fuel-tax credits (formerly known as diesel  fuel rebates). Under the mine expansion plan, the  company would have enjoyed $350 million in diesel  fuel rebates over five years – more than was to  be paid to the State in royalties from the existing  underground mine over the same period – and an  effective subsidy of $85 million annually to 2050.

A 2012 Australia Institute report found that at a time  when the mining industry is earning record profits,  it received subsidies and concessions worth more  than $4 billion per year from the Federal Government alone. The biggest single subsidy comes in the formof fuel-tax credits, valued at $1.9 billion in 2009/10

Uranium mining companies – and the Australian Uranium Association – fought the proposed Resources  Super Profits Tax in 2010. Ross Gittins wrote in The Age in February 2013: “Last year the mining industry  accounted for more than a fifth of all the profit made  in Australia, even though it had a much smaller  share of the economy. This was mainly because  the royalties charged by the state governments  failed to capture enough of the market value of the  minerals the largely foreign-owned miners were being  permitted to extract.

When the Rudd government tried  to correct this with a resource super profits tax, the  industry set out to bring about its electoral defeat.”

Uranium was to be included in the proposed  Resource Super Profit Tax, but it was subsequently  excluded from the Minerals Resource Rent Tax. A 2011 report by the Australia Institute notes  that the average rate of corporate tax paid by  the mining industry in 2008/09 was 13.9% –  substantially below the theoretical 30%…..”http://www.acfonline.org.au/sites/default/files/resources/ACF_Yellowcake_Fever.pdf

Anti-uranium forces press Va. candidates for gov News Leader, May 21, 2013  RICHMOND — Opponents of uranium mining in Virginia met with Democratic gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe on the issue and they said he’s solidly in their corner, while a meeting with Republican nominee Ken Cuccinelli has yet to be arranged.

Gov. Bob McDonnell, in the meantime, has not decided his response to a February suggestion that he direct state agencies to put uranium mining regulations in place to help guide the 2014 General Assembly if it considers ending a decades-old prohibition on uranium mining in Virginia.

The two pro-mining legislators who proposed the approach after legislation fell flat in the 2013 session are divided on whether the issue will emerge in the next session of the Legislature. The meeting between mining opponents and McAuliffe occurred in Danville about three weeks ago. Two who attended said McAuliffe was clearly opposed to ending the state’s 1982 moratorium on uranium mining.

“He said he had studied the issue and that it made absolutely no sense, either economically or scientifically,” said Jack Dunavant, a longtime opponent of uranium mining from Halifax County. “He was opposed to it and he said you can quote me on that.”

Andrew Lester, executive director of the Roanoke River Basin Association, said McAuliffe called uranium mining a “horrible idea.”

Lester, who was not representing the association at the meeting, said McAuliffe assured him, “I’ll tell you right off the bat you don’t have to worry about me. I am against this thing.”….. http://www.newsleader.com/viewart/20130521/NEWS01/305210004/Anti-uranium-forces-press-Va-candidates-gov

Quebec becomes third province to impose uranium moratorium Mining.com Vladimir Basov | April 4, 2013 Quebec became the third Canadian province, after Nova Scotia and British Columbia, to establish a moratorium on uranium development.Environment minister Yves-Francois Blanchet announced last Thursday no permits for exploration or mining will be issued until an independent study on the environmental impact and social acceptance of extracting uranium has been completed…..

“It’s a little bit like asbestos — people have come to the conclusion that there are certain minerals that are so dangerous that they’re not worth mining, they’re better to leave underground,” Edwards said. “One is asbestos, and one is uranium

Quebec imposes moratorium on uranium development, Montreal Gazette, By Kevin Dougherty and Monique Beaudin, March 28, 2013
QUEBEC — No permits for the exploration or mining of uranium in Quebec will be issued until an independent study on the environmental impact and social acceptance of extracting uranium has been completed, Environment Minister Yves-François Blanchet announced Thursday.

Blanchet has asked Quebec’s Bureau d’audiences publiques sur l’environnement to examine the issue of uranium development and uranium waste in general, with hearings throughout the province……Blanchet said he realizes the northern Quebec Crees of Eeyou Istchee have called for a permanent moratorium on uranium development and he hopes the Crees and other aboriginals participate in the process.

In a statement, the Crees welcomed the “moratorium,” while expressing reserves……..

Christian Simard, of the environmental groups Nature Québec and Québec meilleure mine, applauded Blanchet’s announcement, while adding that environmentalists wanted a complete halt to uranium exploration.

But Simard noted uranium prices are very low and the number of active exploration sites in Quebec now stands at about 10.

He is concerned about preliminary exploration, which can involve drilling, saying the cleanup of sites “is not always done properly.”

“De facto it will stop for a time,” Simard said, predicting the BAPE study can only conclude that Quebec should not allow uranium extraction, and noting that no effective way has been found to deal with nuclear waste, which remains dangerous for 1,600 years.

“I am confident at the end of this process there will be a consensus in Quebec society to say that uranium is not a mineral like the others,” Simard said. “It’s radioactive, there are problems with radioactivity in the very long term.”

Simard suggested Quebec follow the example of Virginia, which recently ordered a study to determine whether to lift its moratorium on uranium, only to conclude, based on scientific evidence, that the moratorium should remain permanent……

Blanchet’s announcement came after years of lobbying by environmental groups and communities across Quebec. More than 300 communities have passed resolutions calling for a uranium moratorium. In 2009, more than 20 doctors in Sept-Îles threatened to quit their jobs and leave Quebec unless a moratorium was put in place.

There are so many concerns about uranium that Quebec should enact a permanent moratorium, said Gordon Edwards, president of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility.

“It’s a little bit like asbestos — people have come to the conclusion that there are certain minerals that are so dangerous that they’re not worth mining, they’re better to leave underground,” Edwards said. “One is asbestos, and one is uranium

http://www.montrealgazette.com/technology/Quebec+imposes+moratorium+uranium+development/8165239/story.html#ixzz2OyNBPe5Y

The Lowy Institute’s dangerous nuclear propaganda, Online Opinion, Jim Green, 28 December 12 The Lowy Institute portrays itself as an independent think-tank. But a close looks at the Institute’s work in relation to uranium sales to India suggests it is a dangerous, reactionary propaganda outfit.

First to briefly recap the debate over uranium sales to India (as discussed in Online Opinion earlier this year). India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea are the four nuclear weapons states outside the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Five countries are ‘declared’ nuclear weapons states within the NPT − the USA, Russia, UK, France and China. The declared weapons states are obliged under the NPT to seriously pursue nuclear disarmament, though none of them do so and nothing is done to hold them to account.

For many years it was bipartisan policy in Australia to permit uranium sales to NPT states (including declared weapons states) but not to countries outside the NPT. The Howard government reversed that policy in 2007, the Rudd Labor government held firm on the principle of refusing uranium sales to non-NPT states, but Julia Gillard orchestrated a policy reversal at the 2011 ALP National Conference. Bilateral uranium export negotiations are slowly progressing between Australia and India. (more…)

conservation groups that had challenged the decision to reopen Arizona
1 said the court’s ruling sets a precedent that will let “zombie
mines” operate under old regulations and ignore years of new
environmental science.

“They are basically zombie mines that will live perpetually without
ever being subject to new environmental reviews,”

Appeals court upholds reopening of uranium mine near Grand Canyon By
Mary Shinn, Cronkite News Service February 5, 2013
WASHINGTON – A federal appeals court Monday upheld the government’s
decision to let a uranium mine near Grand Canyon National Park
continue to operate under environmental standards now decades old.

A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled
that the Bureau of Land Management did not violate environmental
protection law by letting the Arizona 1 mine reopen in 2009 after a
17-year break in production……
conservation groups that had challenged the decision to reopen Arizona
1 said the court’s ruling sets a precedent that will let “zombie
mines” operate under old regulations and ignore years of new
environmental science. (more…)

South Dakota Senate panel rejects uranium mining bill
http://www.ksfy.com/story/21076787/south-dakota-senate-panel-rejects-uranium-mining-bill

PIERRE, S.D. (AP) - A South Dakota Senate committee has rejected a
plan to restore some of the state’s permitting authority over a
proposed uranium mine.

The Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee voted 7-1 to kill the
bill after committee members said they see no need for the state to
duplicate federal regulatory programs.

The committee hearing focused on Powertech Uranium Corp.’s proposed
uranium mine near Edgemont. It would pump groundwater into the
underground ore deposits to dissolve the uranium. The water would be
pumped back to the surface, where the uranium would be extracted.

The Legislature two years ago suspended state rules on permitting such
uranium mines. That means federal agencies will decide if the mine
gets a license and can inject water underground.

The state controls water rights permits.