“Since the negotiation of the Indenture Agreement, it has been clear that the parliamentary process would simply be a rubber stamp. For example, in the Parliamentary Select Committee hearing, the opposition had the chance to question BHP for an hour, and the nature of their investigations were along the lines of concerns for the caravans that may be inconvenienced if a road was closed, never mind the tailings dams that are designed to leak,” said Nectaria Calan from Friends of the Earth Adelaide.

“Neither Labor not Liberal have shown any inclination to critically scrutinise the implications of the project, with the government bending over backwards to accommodate the mining giant. BHP wanted to recognise a historical version of the Aboriginal Heritage Act  that was repealed over 20 years ago – they got it. They wanted a mining lease that spans 70 years, despite the fact that their Environmental Impact Statement only covers 40 years – they got it. They wanted the right to be granted the expanded mining lease, covering nearly 50, 000 ha as freehold, free of charge – they got it. They wanted royalties capped for 45 years – they got it,” said Ms. Calan.

The scope of the Indenture Agreement extends far beyond the 40 years covered in the Environmental Impact Statement.

“It’s a strange state of affairs to have an Environmental Impact Statement that only covers 40 years, a mining lease granted for 70 years, and an indenture agreement that creates the right for future mining leases that will not expire until the last of the extended mining leases have expired. The intention appears to be to avoid any further Parliamentary scrutiny at all cost,” continued Ms. Calan.

New Uranium Enrichment Technology Alarms,  Aviation Week, By Kristin Majcher Washington 23 Nov 11 General Electric says it has successfully tested a faster, cheaper way to produce nuclear reactor fuel, and is planning to commercialize the technology by building a facility in Wilmington, N.C. While the prospect of saving resources to generate energy at a lower price sounds like a breakthrough, scientists are concerned that the top-secret method of enrichment that GE is using will indirectly elevate proliferation risks around the world, thus inspiring rogue states to develop their own laser enrichment facilities for nuclear
weapons.
The enrichment technology is the Separation of Isotopes by Laser Excitation (Silex). It was developed by Silex of Australia in 1992. The technology company USEC funded early research on Silex, but abandoned it in favor of focusing on centrifuge enrichment. In 2006, GE signed an exclusive agreement to commercialize and license the technology and spearhead further research and development.
Although Silex is the only known method of laser enrichment that works and could be commercially viable, scientists are concerned because many countries have funded laser-enrichment projects. According to the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations, more than 20 countries have researched laser isotope separation techniques, including China, India, Iraq, Russia, Japan and Pakistan. Although they were unsuccessful, scientists say that putting Silex back into the public eye, regardless of the safeguards GE promises, poses a problem. Showing that it works could renew efforts by countries to develop the process.

“Once you popularize the technology, you draw attention to it and have
people out there that have bits and pieces, and may talk to other
people,” says a scientist knowledgeable about Silex, who asked to
remain anonymous. “Anyone who has tried it, plus anyone who thinks
this is a promising way forward” may try to use Silex if they see that
it works.
“The people who were not able to do it in the past because they were
using older styles of laser enrichment will say ‘this is what we’re
doing wrong,’” the scientist adds. “In every country, there is a
bureaucracy or interest section that may find this as an obvious and
natural research agenda for them.”…..

security concerns about what happens to the material
that is created at GLE’s site are irrelevant. Instead, the debate is
that if GLE proves that this once-dormant and powerful technology
works, other countries may be inspired to try again.

One big concern about Silex is that it requires significantly less
electricity, resources and facility space than gas centrifuge
enrichment. Also, while governments are familiar with means for
detecting gas centrifuge plants, the same methods do not exist for
laser enrichment because it is so new.
A study group from the American Physical Society (APS) says in a
report titled “Technical Steps to Support Nuclear Arsenal Downsizing,”
that many of the good things GE is using to make a case about
Silex—less use of resources and electricity and increased
efficiency—are actually negatives that make it easier for rogue states
to hide clandestine plants. GE says Silex needs a 25% smaller
footprint than enrichment centrifuge technology.

“The study group found that some of the new enrichment and
reprocessing technologies could represent proliferation
‘game-changers’ since they would lead to smaller, more efficient and
possibly less expensive methods for the production and use of nuclear
materials that would be more difficult to detect,” the report
states………
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/dti/2011/11/01/DT_11_01_2011_p23-382620.xml&headline=New%20Uranium%20Enrichment%20Technology%20Alarms

Though mineral mining occurs throughout the U.S. near water supplies, the study said, “Uranium mining and milling represent unique risks that require additional process controls to prevent impacts from toxic and radioactive byproducts.”…. ”uranium mining and milling activities initiated in the Potomac and/or Occoquan watersheds have the potential to increase the risk of negative impacts to Fairfax Water’s source water quality and water supply reliability.”

The Washington Post reported that the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering also found that “steep hurdles” would need to be crossed before the ban should be lifted.

“A study commissioned by the Danville Regional Foundation also came out this month,” the Post article read. “It concluded that uranium mining could have economic benefits but also environmental risks.” http://lakeridge.patch.com/articles/uranium-mining-could-leave-toxic-waste-in-occoquan-watershed

Port Hope Uranium Plant Contamination Circumstances Contain Similarities to Huntington’s Buried Uranium Plant, December 29, 2011  BY TONY RUTHERFORD HUNTINGTON NEWS Port Hope has a water treatment plant supplying its drinking water. Incredibly, adjacent to this water treatment plant, is a huge factory which emits uranium gas and dust into the air and Lake Ontario.

The Cameco plant manufactures uranium
fuel robs for export. Back in the 1950’s the Port Hope facility “used
to refine uranium for fuel rods in nuclear reactors” and it supplied
uranium for U.S. weapons until 1957.

Dr. Dale Dewar, Executive Director (Canada), Physicians for Global
Survival , has written about this  Ontario town on the shores of Lake
Ontario.

In the Common Dreams.org article she reported “hundreds of thousands
of tons of waste containing many radioactive carcinogenic elements —
uranium, radium, radon and polonium — accrued at the site and “were
randomly dispensed throughout the town in ravines and playing fields
and used as landfill and building materials in foundations for schools
and public buildings.”

Port Hope closed a “highly polluted” St. Mary’s School in 1975. It was
polluted with radon gas. After the closure , she reported that 200,000
tons of “severely contaminated soil” was “excavated” from 400
properties and “exported” into the Chalk River.
“Contrary to statements provided by federal government agencies, no
level of radiation is safe and it is cumulative — each dose adds to
the risk of cancer. Children are 10 to 20 times more radiosensitive
than adults, and fetuses are extremely sensitive,” the doctor wrote.
“Uranium waste is radioactive for billions of years, decaying
sequentially to radioactive elements ( “daughters”), all of which can
induce cancer or genetic diseases when entering the human body as hot
spots or “internal emitters.”

She revealed that “relevant research” has not been done to date on the
relationship between radiation and genes, which was “little
understood” at the beginning of the Cold War when atomic and nuclear
facilities were first in operation. Still, Dr. Dewar stated that “a
number of partial studies” have suggested increased cancer incidence
such as brain cancers in women and children, lung cancer in women,
arterio-vascular disease in women, and non-Hodgkins lymphoma ,
nasopharyngeal cancer…… http://www.huntingtonnews.net/17682

Coalition forms to address uranium concerns By: TARA BOZICK | GoDanRiver.com December 29, 2011 Halifax County area business owners and other professionals formed The Virginia Coalition on Tuesday in an effort to keep the moratorium on uranium mining in Virginia.

Many felt the socioeconomic reports and National Academy of Sciences study on uranium mining released this month didn’t allay concerns about potential health risks. The General Assembly could take up the issue of whether to allow uranium mining next session, although opponents and local lawmakers would like to wait until 2013.
The coalition is affiliated with the Roanoke River Basin Association,
a staunch opponent of Virginia Uranium Inc.’s proposed project to mine
and mill a 119-million-pound uranium deposit in Pittsylvania County.
Andrew Lester, the water group’s executive director, will also head up
The Virginia Coalition.

The group aims to distribute study information and educate the public
and legislators about uranium issues in hopes of maintaining the
30-year moratorium. It would like residents to share concerns with
their representatives.

Lester said the group is different from environmental groups in that
it comprises business, medical and health professionals who are
concerned about potential health impacts from uranium mining. The
group’s founders would like to attract members from the region and
throughout the state.

Nancy Pool, president of the Halifax County Chamber of Commerce, said
helping to start to coalition evolved from the chamber’s efforts in
2008 to identify and public residents’ concerns about uranium mining.

“We all feel there is the potential for the impact on businesses
economically, but the primary concern that all of us share, or for
most that we have spoken with, is just the health of the citizens,”
Pool said……
http://www2.godanriver.com/news/2011/dec/29/coalition-forms-address-uranium-concerns-ar-1573726/

that mining activities benefited more investors than Tanzanians.

“Take an example of Niger, they are now suffering from the impacts of uranium extraction, including high levels of environmental degradation,”

PP Media 28 Dec 11, “………The Legal and Human Rights Centre Legal Officer in-charge of Corporate and Environment Flaviana Charles says the metal posses dangers not only to human beings but to animals and environment.
Already companies including Mantra (T) and Uranex (T) limited are exploring the minerals in various parts including Namtumbo (Mkuju River Project) Bahi and Manyoni, a move which has been criticised by majority of the members of public including legislators.

“We have decided to take the initiative to raise awareness to the public on this new mineral expected to start being mined in the country,” says Charles.

She says extraction of uranium requires a wide land.
“It requires cutting so many trees, construction of roads,
infrastructures and human activities which will contribute in cutting
down natural forests home to the number and variety of plant and
animal species,” she says
The director says failure to control cutting down of forests leads to
loss of plants that depend forests for their existence , animals and
insects to a great extent.
“This is very dangerous because it can lead to annihilation of some
animals, plants and insects in the history of this world,” she
observes
The extraction involves the use of chemicals like mercury and
sulphuric acids in various processes many of which flow into sources
of water located closer to mines and pollute water.
“This polluted water kills animals, insects and natural vegetation in
a particular environmental area,” she says.
Research and experience of countries mining uranium confirms that
extraction of uranium is dangerous to the environment and other
biodiversity including destruction of land due to having big holes and
remains of mines, water pollution, radiation and poisonous gas, and
excess use of energy and water that in turn affect other uses to the
ordinary people.
She says the mining has great affects to farmers and pastoralists
whose land are taken for one investor and be left struggling with land
disputes.
“But the mining also has direct impact to the community and workers in
the uranium mining through various way including inhaling polluted
air,” says Charles.
The history has it that companies mining uranium had never solved
problems associated with extraction of the minerals and also they had
never employed good way of settling remains of the minerals after the
mining activity is complete.
Some of the companies run away from implementing their social
cooperate responsibility to the communities .
All this entail that until now there is no proper way of destroying
completely remains of uranium and therefore it is difficult to control
effects of the mineral that will end thousands of years.
It has been reported that Uranium mines in Namibia use a lot of water
than the actual demand of water by Namibians.
The director says the extraction of the mineral has unnecessary costs
which impact countries’ economy citing expenses of cleaning up the
environment and avoidance of effects that are caused by remains of big
uranium mines……

Uranium Mining industry itself is a complete disaster. Large mining
companies are allowed to take public lands and dispoil them, making
huge profits, leaving behind huge mining pits, water and soil
contaminated with heavy metals and radioative radon.
So many calls have been raised advising the government to stop
extraction of uranium since it has not been prepared for that. Harold
Sungusia LHRC director of advocacy and reforms advises the government
to stop uranium extraction in Bahi district, Dodoma and Manyoni in
Singida and called for a serious environmental assessment before
implementing the uranium extraction project in Namtumbo district,
Ruvuma region.
According to him, the mines in Bahi and Manyoni districts are
surrounded by villagers and the government is not prepared to relocate
them.
He says they had conducted research in Nzega, Geita, North Mara Gold
Mine, Namtumbo, Manyoni and Bahi districts and realised that mining
activities benefited more investors than Tanzanians.
Sungusia says the government was duty-bound to educate villagers on
the impacts and benefits of uranium and take precautions against
health hazardous to be caused by uranium wastes.
“Take an example of Niger, they are now suffering from the impacts of
uranium extraction, including high levels of environmental
degradation,” says
Sungusia…..http://www.ippmedia.com/frontend/index.php?l=36885

A confidential federal memo obtained through the Access to Information
Act says at least one payload of spent, U.S.-origin highly enriched
uranium fuel has already been moved stateside under a new Canada-U.S.
deal.

The shipments stem from the highly publicized agreement signed last
year by Prime Minister Stephen Harper and U.S. President Barack Obama,
amid fears that nuclear-bomb-making material could fall into the hands
of terrorists.

The Canadian stash gradually being shipped from Chalk River, Ont.,
contains hundreds of kilograms of highly enriched uranium — large
enough to make several Hiroshima-sized nuclear bombs.

But even as the radioactive freight travels toward the U.S. border,
the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission has no plans to hold public
hearings or disclose which communities lie along the delivery route.

The shipments themselves are protected by intense security protocol,
which means specifics like routes, transportation method, quantities
and schedules remain top secret.

The federal nuclear body, a co-regulator of the uranium transfers,
says rules restrict it from disclosing such information to the public.

A ministerial memorandum, classified as “Secret,” says the nuclear
watchdog considers it unnecessary to hold public sessions that would
allow citizens to ask questions and comment on the shipments……
http://ottawa.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20111227/canada-uranium-shipments-federal-memo-111217/20111227/?hub=OttawaHome

A long-awaited independent study by the National Academy of Sciences in December raised serious concerns about whether a massive uranium ore deposit can be safely mined and milled in Pittsylvania County…..
It’s up to the Virginia General Assembly to weigh the appeal of an economic boom in Southside Virginia — an area hit hard by declines in the textile, furniture and tobacco industries — against the prospect of contaminating water supplies for huge areas of Virginia and North Carolina.

The deep-pockets consortium of investors and corporations eager to recover the 119-million-pound deposit has hired Capitol Square’s most expensive and influential lobbyists to shepherd legislation to end a 30-year uranium mining ban through a deeply divided House and Senate.

This is one of those issues more likely to create geographic divisions than partisan ones…..
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/va-at-elections-forefront-can-republicans-really-rule-uraniums-future-the-stories-of-2012/2011/12/25/gIQA9RjEHP_story.html

And, of interest to the Fredericksburg area, it concludes that only Virginia Uranium’s proposed Coles Hill site in Pittsylvania County would be commercially viable among Virginia deposits, for now. The site is about 180 miles southwest of Fredericksburg.

The NAS’ National Research Council study, supported by a grant from
Virginia Tech and funded by Virginia Uranium Inc., makes no
recommendation as to whether mining should be allowed…..
The study comes as the Virginia General Assembly  could decide  during
its session starting next month to lift a mining moratorium imposed in
1982.

Paul A. Locke, who chaired the  committee that prepared the 290-page
report, told reporters Monday that the Pittsylvania site appears to be
“the only commercially and economically viable” location to extract
uranium ore in the commonwealth.
That should ease concerns here because in the 1970s, Marline  Uranium
Corp. secured leases on thousands of acres in Orange, Culpeper,
Madison and Fauquier counties, with a plan to mine and mill the
mineral….

Chris Miller, president of the Warrenton-based Piedmont Environmental
Council, said the report “confirms that uranium mining would be a
dangerous experiment for Virginia” and that “neither the mining
industry nor federal or state regulators have any experience with
uranium mining or milling” in areas with a relatively wet climate,
such as Virginia. Most uranium mining worldwide is done in dry
climates.
The Keep the Ban Coalition said the General Assembly should take no
action toward developing regulations until after the NAS has completed
a public outreach on the study’s conclusions…..
Rusty Dennen: 540/374-5431
rdennen@freelancestar.com

http://blogs.fredericksburg.com/newsdesk/2011/12/19/uranium-report-says-local-sites-not-viable/

A broad outline of the emerging agreement has been made known to the Associated Press by people close to the negotiations.

Discussions have been taking place since summer in New York, Geneva, Switzerland, and Beijing. They already have yielded agreements by North Korea to suspend nuclear and ballistic missile testing, readmit international nuclear inspectors expelled in 2009, and resume adialogue between North Korea and South Korea, according to the people,
who spoke on condition of anonymity because of sensitivity of the negotiations…..
http://www.freep.com/article/20111219/NEWS07/112190328/U-S-will-trade-food-uranium-agreement-from-North-Korea?odyssey=mod%7Cnewswell%7Ctext%7CFRONTPAGE%7Cs