ENVIRONMENTAL NIGHTMARES

Collective Continuity of Dissonance

2011-08-03T20:20:00.000-07:00

As I look back over the last 20 years of my "environmentalism," I cannot help but think that at least those years were not wasted in vain. Every now and then, I feel like I am wasting my time, advocating our very delicate, and sensitive issue to certain major environmental groups that seem to turn off the moment we tell them we are not going to allow ourselves to be part of a fund raising campaign. This is so as this stance respect both the dead and the dying. But that doesn't matter, at least they know; that since this has happened to us, it will happen to them (whether this motivates them to introspection is not our concern nor is seeking their pity).
Several years ago I described to my elders the experiences I enjoyed, sharing our tragedy with several environmental groups and that relief soothing my anguished soul, knowing their ears are mine for that moment. The elders ask, "How come they don't do anything? There is more than one group fighting for the environment? They don't seem to be working together, joining forces with other groups? There must be more than one environment for them to be fighting alone." That always amazes me, when they say that, it reminds me of traffic jams, honking horns, yelling drivers.
I tell them, "That is the way they were raised, they seek individuality before they seek community; when they seek community, that search always leads to others just as lost, not knowing that community always means more than just a group of people coming together at a point in time, it means blood stretched through time---the essence of spirit also known as the soul. They are scared of being forgotten, so they clamber over each other, screaming, deriding each other until one comes out on top, then they too get stepped upon back into the mud."
And now again, I'll be going back to the simpler things on the reservation, breathing relatively clean air for a few days, and pausing my rat race to enjoy life and our ceremonies. And again, I'll share with my elders what I've seen, heard and also what I read happening on the Internet. The Internet fascinates them as it resembles smoke signals, but in bytes and bits; millions of people talking all at once, like a strong breeze blowing through autumn cottonwood trees.
I'll have to tell them about the BP oil disaster, the flooding, the exploding nuclear stations and how it created this buzzing sound of bees, then fades out to silence until the next catastrophe happens. As long as everyone is in it for themselves, singing their our swan song; the catastrophes are sure to come to listen.

Criticizing the Work of Others Doesn’t Make You Green

2010-01-15T13:20:00.001-08:00

The other day I read “The End of Magical Thinking”, an article hosted on Foreign Policy and authored by Ted Nordhaus and Michael Shellenberger.

Overall the article was totally a waste of my time, I found it boring from the moment the authors started playing the same blame game over the cap and trade baloney. The moment I lost complete interest is the point in the article where they state we need federal subsidies in clean coal, and nuclear power (I share their support of a solar credit tax). Then as if cooing like love-struck bunny rabbits with big doe eyes would help their article, they even give a full run-down of Secretary of Energy Chu: this added even more to their copycat lameness but at least they made me laugh (to think people actually send these people their hard-earned money for their Rush Limbaugh style commentary).

In other words, bashing others behind their backs is much like your grandmother twisting your cheeks at XMAS. Get away from that computer and start cleaning up your own backyard, keep your paws out of mine, because you might try to say that after I clean it up, that you did all the work by being my cheerleaders.

Now the problem is that most environmental groups, like the authors decry, take the easy road out when it comes to climate change: they copy the slogans, the chants and even take credit of the awesome work of others who risk their freedom opposing the dirty energy industry. Talk about magical thinking, doing this is magical thinking and does nothing to protect our world from our pollution!

The real groups actively opposing dirty energy are out there, they are doing wonderful work, they are changing attitudes, one polluting person at a time. I wish I could say the same about the magical thinking article but I can’t. All I can say is:

NO NUKES

NO COAL

NO KIDDING

A who's who guide to corporate lobbying in Copenhagen

2009-12-13T09:58:00.001-08:00

http://www.corporateeurope.org/climate-and-energy/content/2009/12/corporate-lobbies-copenhagen

8 December 2009

The UN climate talks have become a "must attend" for huge numbers of business lobbyists, each eager to promote their preferred "solution" to tackling climate change – which protects their business interests.
Business lobby groups have been preparing for Copenhagen for years, lobbying national governments to ensure their interests are represented at the negotiating table. Their influence is one of the reasons why governments are finding it so hard to reach agreement on emission cuts. Many of the lobbies have urged governments to block tough targets for 2020. They want easier access to off-setting through a global carbon market (avoiding emissions cuts at source) and funding for controversial technologies including carbon capture and storage (CCS), nuclear power and agrofuels.
This guide lists some of the main lobby groups found at the talks – it is not comprehensive – but highlights some of the players involved.

International Lobby Groups

Copenhagen Climate Council

The Copenhagen Climate Council was established for COP15 by the think tank Monday Morning, whose founder Erik Rasmussen is a leading player. It brings together 30 councillors, mainly from the business world, including the CEOs of Dong Energy, Duke Energy and the Virgin Group.
In May 2009, the Council was the official host of the World Business Summit on Climate Change, organised with the UN Global Compact, the World Economic Forum, 3C, the Climate Group and the Danish government. The summit provided an opportunity for influencing national representatives and UN delegates.
The Council will host a high-level event at Kronborg Castle near Copenhagen during the climate talks to present their visions beyond 2009.
The Copenhagen Climate Council advocates a global carbon market and It wants a global carbon market with carbon credits for forests, allowing industry to offset emissions by paying for trees not to be cut down. This paves the way for industrial plantations to be considered as forest conservation projects - threatening the livelihoods of forest people and reducing biodiversity.

3C – Combat Climate Change

Combat Climate Change (3C) was launched by the Swedish energy giant Vattenfall in 2007 to help shape a global climate agreement. It has 66 corporate members from around the world, including big polluters such as BP, Bayer, Gazprom, E.ON and StatoilHydro. 3C is led by out-going Vattenfall chief executive Lars Josefsson who is also an advisor to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon on energy and climate change.
3C works closely with other business groups such as the Copenhagen Climate Council and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (and was a co-organiser of the World Business Summit on Climate Change in May 2009).
3C lobbies for a global carbon market and pushes for technologies such as carbon capture and storage (CCS), nuclear energy and second generation agrofuels – "solutions" which present a huge economic opportunity for its corporate members.

The International Chamber of Commerce (ICC)

One of the most influential corporate drivers of international trade and investment deregulation, the International Chamber of Commerce is a powerful player on the global climate scene. Its members include big polluters such as Areva, ExxonMobil, Rio Tinto, Shell and Vattenfall. It claims to be the voice of global businesses.
The ICC has access to national governments and international bodies including the UN, G8 and WTO.
The ICC Task Force on Climate Change, led by Nick Campbell, lobbies on key issues around the UN climate negotiations. Campbell also leads climate change working groups for the European chemical industry association (Cefic) and BusinessEurope.
The ICC's overall message for Copenhagen, which it will promote at the Business Day on 11 December and throughout the talks, is that business is part of the solution. The top priorities for world leaders should be economic growth and open trade.
It wants a global agreement which covers all major emitters and pivots around carbon markets and market-based mechanisms, plus government funding for new technologies, such as CCS. It also wants protection for corporate intellectual property rights (IPRs), obstructing much needed technology transfers to developing countries.

The World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD)

Led by Björn Stigson (also a councillor at the Copenhagen Climate Council), the World Business Council for Sustainable Development has 200 member companies, including Shell, Duke Energy, E.ON, BP and Rio Tinto.
The WBCSD pioneered re-branding corporations as part of the solution, achieving a major impact with its involvement in the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. Since then the WBCSD has promoted self-regulation by business and opposed legally binding environmental and social standards for corporate activities at every major international UN summit, undermining momentum for effective international solutions to solve global environmental and social problems.
The WBCSD has previously led on corporate involvement in the UN climate talks, working closely with the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC). In Copenhagen it is co-organising the Copenhagen Business Day, subtitled "Leading ACTION".
It advocates a global carbon market, voluntary sectoral agreements for industry, agrofuels, nuclear energy and the unproven and expensive carbon capture and storage technology (CCS).

The World Economic Forum's Initiative on Climate Change

The World Economic Forum (WEF) - an international forum for business leaders - lobbies through its Initiative on Climate Change. Members include BP, Shell and Vattenfall, and "experts" such as Henry Derwent, CEO of the International Emissions Trading Association (IETA) and Björn Stigson, President of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development.
It launched a Task Force on Low-Carbon Economic Prosperity in March 2009 to push for "a high growth low carbon economy" and published a plan for a "clean revolution" at the UN Climate Change Summit in September 2009, calling for nuclear power, CCS and more offsetting through the clean development mechanism as important ingredients in a new global deal.
It was involved in organising the World Business Summit on Climate Change in May 2009.

The UN Global Compact

Set up as a UN body, the UN Global Compact claims to be the "world's largest voluntary corporate citizenship initiative". But, its voluntary nature, the appalling track record of many of its members, and the cloak of legitimacy attained by members because of their link with the UN gave birth to the term "bluewash" to convey that beyond its propaganda, it lacks substance and does not improve the overall behaviour of corporations.
Their Caring for Climate Initiative, launched in 2007, has been endorsed by 367 companies and will present a series of reports at the Copenhagen Business Summit. It claims to be a commitment to action by business, but just like the Global Compact, lacks any binding commitment or mechanisms for enforcement.
The UN Global Compact will host a business event with the Copenhagen Climate Council during COP15 "bringing together prominent leaders" to discuss climate action. Among the solutions championed by the initiative are a global carbon market and agrofuels.

The Climate Group

The Climate Group was set up 2003 and brings together corporate and government members, including big polluters such as energy giants BP and Duke Energy. CEO and founder Steve Howard is close to both leading companies and state governments.
In 2008 it launched a project called Breaking the Climate Deadlock with former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair to call for an international climate agreement post 2012 which advocates unproven carbon capture and storage technology (CCS), nuclear power and biomass as crucial technologies for a low-carbon economy.
The Climate Group works closely with other business lobby groups, including the International Emissions Trading Association (IETA), which has been nominated for the Angry Mermaid Award for its efforts to sabotage climate action.

The International Air Transport Association (IATA)

The International Air Transport Association (IATA) is the main lobbying organisation representing the international airline industry. Its members include the world's leading long-haul airlines, such as American Airlines, British Airways, Cathay Pacific, KLM, Lufthansa, Qantas and United Airlines.
IATA has led the airline industry's lobbying and advertising campaigns against aviation being included in the EU Emission Trading Scheme (ETS), one of Europe's key mechanisms for reducing emissions. In June 2008, as political negotiations reached a critical stage, IATA spent €80,000 on a full-page advertisement in the International Herald Tribune, urging politicians to "stop plans to punish airlines and travellers with an ETS that will only invite international legal battles."
IATA says it wants emissions from aviation to be regulated by the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO), but is lobbying to make sure this does not happen.
IATA does not want aviation on the agenda at COP15 and attempted to pre-empt any discussions by announcing a voluntary effort by the industry to cut emissions in September 2009. However, the cuts proposed were far less than what is being demanded from other industries.

International Emissions Trading Association (IETA)

The International Emissions Trading Association (IETA) describes itself as a "non profit business organisation" created to "establish a… framework for trading in greenhouse gas emission reductions". Formed in 1999, it has 168 member companies, including big energy companies (BP, Shell, Vattenfall), banks, lawyers and carbon trading companies.
It has become a lobbying powerhouse at the UN climate change talks, with the largest accredited non-governmental delegation in both Bali and Poznan. IETA is already gearing up for a large lobbying presence at the UN climate talks in Copenhagen with some 66 events scheduled.
IETA secures valuable access to decision-makers through its staff and members. Its President is Henry Derwent, who previously led on international climate change issues in the UK government.
IETA comes to Copenhagen with the goal of a global market for greenhouse gases, a mechanism which allows corporations and governments to buy and sell the right to pollute. Key to this market is the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), which allows governments and industry in developed countries to claim to be making carbon reductions by investing in supposed "clean developments" in the developing world (offsetting). The CDM has been severely criticised because it allows rich countries to avoid making emissions cuts at home. There is also strong evidence that some of its projects are creating serious social and environmental problems in developing countries.
Although the CDM has failed to reduce global emissions, IETA claims it has been a success.

Carbon Markets and Investors Association (CMIA)

The Carbon Markets and Investors Association (CMIA) is comprised of some of the most influential investors in the carbon markets. They advocate a strong carbon market and participate in international negotations and national policy debates.

Project Development Forum (PDF)

The "Project Developer Forum" (PDF) was launched in November 2008 by a group of companies which specialise in making money from setting up carbon offset projects to lobby to make the CDM process "more efficient through improved dialogue".

International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association (IPIECA)

The International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association (IPIECA) is the formal oil and gas industry channel into the UN. The focus of its climate change working group is the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the UNFCC. While seeking to promote an image of an environmental and socially responsible industry, its members, including BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil, Repsol and Shell, are among the biggest climate change polluters and have for decades lobbied against effective action.

Carbon Capture and Storage Association

The Carbon Capture and Storage Association represents all the important players on carbon capture and storage (fossil fuels, power, finance, manufacturers) at an international level, including Shell, BP, Vattenfall, Alstom and ConocoPhillips.
CCS is unlikely to be fully applicable before 2020 or even 2030. The CCS industry has lobbied in the EU through the Zero Emissions Platform and in the US to promote this technology as a solution to climate change, securing public funding for its development.
Their main objective in Copenhagen will be the inclusion of carbon capture and storage in the Clean Development Mechanism.

BIO – Biotechnology Industry Organization

BIO is an umbrella lobby organisation for the biotech industry with more than 1,200 members worldwide including corporations like Syngenta, Monsanto, Dow and Tate & Lyle, as well as regional biotech lobby groups like EuropaBio and AfricaBio.
BIO claims that biotechnology can help solve climate change. It wants access to the carbon market so that its members can benefit from carbon trading. BIO claims that biotechnology can help prevent climate change and wants to gain access to the carbon market. A leaked BIO strategy document for Copenhagen reveals its aims for COP15: access to climate-subsidies for biotech products; fending off potential threats to Intellectual Property Rights (increasing the costs of technology transfer to developing countries) and allaying "false" messages about GM.
BIO's activities in Copenhagen include a taskforce and it has set itself clear targets for which delegates to lobby on intellectual property rights, GM and agriculture.

Palm Oil Industry: World Growth and MPOC

The "NGO" World Growth, led by Australian Alan Oxley, has launched a campaign to counter environmental campaigns against palm oil expansion. A former diplomat, Oxley worked for Malaysian logging and palm oil giant Rimbunan Hijau.
World Growth's message at the climate talks is that: "The palm oil industry is not destroying forest biodiversity in developing countries" and "The palm oil industry has a positive impact on the reduction of GHGs. The oil palm is an effective carbon sink. Its performance is superior to many established forest species."
One of the founders of World Growth is Henrik Rasmussen, the son of the former Danish prime minister, Anders Fogh Rasmussen. Two Danish Brussels-based PR consultants: Jens Thomsen and Peter Munch-Madsen from Impact are on World Growth's delegation.
World Growth's campaign is remarkably similar to a campaign run by the Malaysian Palm Oil Council (MPOC) to promote palm oil as sustainable. MPOC hired PR company Gplus in Brussels to fend off sustainability criteria for agrofuels.

Croplife

Croplife is an association for the pesticide and (GM) seeds industry including BASF, Bayer CropScience, Dow and Monsanto. They advocate GM crops as "climate-friendly". Croplife lobbied on the US climate legislation through the Alpine Group. They also use the Farmers First platform to claim to work in the interests of both the climate and farmers (www.farmersfirst.org). Croplife's target for COP15 is to avoid a clear target for emissions reductions from agriculture. Instead they want a voluntary carbon credit system that will allow credits for offsetting using agriculture.

International Biochar Initiative (IBI)

The International Biochar Initiative is the main vehicle lobbying for biochar – using charcoal to store carbon in soils. IBI represents Biochar Engineering (US), Carbon Gold (UK), Crucible Carbon (Australia), Mantira Industries (US), Carbon Zero (Switzerland) and Carbonscale (New Zealand).
IBI claims that charcoal (produced by burning trees) can act as a "soil improver", but critics warn that it could lead to a vast expansion of tree monocultures.
The International Biochar Initiative lobbied the UN Convention to Combat Deforestation (UNCCD) and 14 governments, persuading them to call for the inclusion of biochar in the Clean Development Mechanism. IBI also wants biochar to be included in carbon trading schemes like the European Emissions Trading Scheme.

World Nuclear Association

The World Nuclear Association represents 180 companies involved in the nuclear industry, including Westinghouse, Areva, EoN, Vattenfall, Atomstroyexport, Mitsubishi, Deutsche Bank and Ernst&Young, which are using climate change as a vehicle to win political and financial support. Despite widespread public opposition, the industry hopes to build around 400 to 700 new reactors over the next 20 years.
The WNA is lobbying in Copenhagen for nuclear plants to become eligible for financial support, including through the Clean Development Mechanism.

World Steel Association

The World Steel Association (worldsteel) represents some 180 steel producers, national and regional steel industry associations, and steel research institutes. Its head quarters are in the EU capital, Brussels, and it has an office in Beijing.
Worldsteel says that climate change is the biggest issue facing the global steel industry in the 21st century and the organisation has launched its own climate change website.
It argues that steel is "essential to economic growth" and that not only can it be part of the solution, but that the sector also needs to grow to meet global demand. According to the IPCC, steel accounts for 6-7% of global greenhouse gas emissions1 (worldsteel quotes this figures as 3-4%!).
Worldsteel is pushing for a "sectoral approach" to emissions cuts in Copenhagen - with targets set by industry applied to the whole of the steel industry rather than to individual countries or regions.

US Lobby Groups

US Chamber of Commerce

This American giant of a business federation has more than 3 million business members, including Monsanto, Dow Chemical, Exxon Mobil and Duke Energy. Some of its prominent members, including Apple, Nike and Pacific Gas and Electric have left in protest against its climate policy, and its lobbying position against the US Waxman-Markey bill on climate change. The Chamber has threatened a lawsuit to challenge the science behind climate change.

American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity (ACCCE)

The American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity (ACCCE) acts as the public relations organisation for the US coal industry. Members include E.ON US, GE Energy, the Murray Energy Corporation and other mining and electricity companies.
It promotes coal as a source of reliable electricity and lobbies for clean coal technology (CCS) and has lobbied against climate legislation in the US, including using fake letters, sent by a PR company to legislators.
See also: http://www.angrymermaid.org/accce
Not registered for Copenhagen.

American Petroleum Institute

The American Petroleum Institute (API) represents the US petroleum and natural gas industry, with 400 corporate members including BP America, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil and Shell.
It has a track-record of lobbying against action on climate change and has lobbied the US government to minimise the impacts of US climate legislation, spending more then $4 million trying to defeat the US climate bill, including setting up an "astroturf" campaign - which appeared to be a grassroots movement objecting to legislation, but which in fact was a front group for API.
See also: http://www.angrymermaid.org/api
Not registered for Copenhagen.

Air-Conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI)

The US based Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) lobbies to fend off efforts to limit the use of fluorinated gases (F-gases) that are major contributors to climate change. Representing companies like Dupont, and working in Europe as part of the EPEE ("European Partnership for Energy and the Environment"), run by PR company Grayling. ICC lobbyist Nick Campbell has been particularly active lobbying for the continued production of F-gases.

European Lobby Groups

BusinessEurope

BusinessEurope, the European employers' confederation, represents the interests of big business in the EU, including companies such as Arcelor Mittal, BASF, Lafarge and Rio Tinto. Business Europe enjoys privileged access to decision makers within the European Commission, and has made climate change one of their priority issues.
Business Europe has lobbied to undermine efforts to tighten the EU's cap and trade system - the Emission Trading Scheme (ETS) - successfully arguing that penalties inside the EU will lead to increased costs, forcing companies to relocate production, resulting in carbon leakage. As a result, 77% of the European manufacturing sector will receive free permits to pollute at least until 2020.
Business Europe has presented EU Commission President Barroso with a "Copenhagen Scorecard" in October, highlighting their wish list, which includes binding emission targets for advanced developing countries by 2020, voluntary sectoral agreements for industry, support for CCS and nuclear, an expanded clean development mechanism, allowing more offsetting, and protection for intellectual property rights at the expense of technology transfer to developing countries.

European Chemicals Industry Council (CEFIC)

Cefic is the European Chemicals Industry Council, which represents the main players in the European chemical arena, including Arkema, BASF, Bayer, Dow, DuPont, ExxonMobil chemical, Shell Chemicals and Solvay. Its working group on climate change is led by Arkema´s Nick Campbell, who also leads the climate working groups of BusinessEurope (see above) and the International Chamber of Commerce (see above).
Cefic has lobbied in the EU to protect the chemicals industry from the costs of the ETS, pushing the argument that extra costs will lead businesses to relocate resulting in carbon leakage. It is also actively lobbying to get the EU not to increase its emission reduction commitments at the climate talks in Copenhagen. The chemical industry wants a new international agreement to include equivalent targets for industrialised countries and emerging economies, which would effectively block an agreement.
Cefic has launched a PR campaign to highlight how the chemicals industry is, in fact, helping reduce emission levels in Europe, with materials highlighting energy saving products. The same message has also been promoted by the International Council of Chemical Associations (ICCA) which launched a report in July 2009 claiming that the benefits of the chemical industry's products in terms of emission savings were greater than their carbon footprint.

Eurelectric

Eurelectric is the European association of electricity companies. Members include major climate change polluters such as Vattenfall, Enel, E.ON, RWE and DONG Energy. Power companies have made windfall profits (look for figure)i´ll send you later as a result of the EU's emissions trading scheme (ETS) – receiving permits to pollute for free, while passing the theoretical costs on to the consumers.
Eurelectric has lobbied on climate policies both in the EU and internationally. Eurelectric's president is Christian Jourquin, chief executive of Solvay. In March 2009 Eurelectric handed EU Energy Commissioner Piebalgs a declaration in which EU electricity companies pledge to achieve a carbon-neutral power supply by 2050. For what it's worth, this pledge relies primarily on controversial technologies, including carbon capture and storage (CCS) and nuclear power.
Eurelectric wants the UN climate talks to set a target for 2050, not before, and they are lobbying for public support for nuclear power and CCS.
Vattenfall is one of the biggest investors in the development of CCS and Josefsson lobbies for it through the European Technology Platform for Zero Emission Fossil Fuel Power, securing massive funding for the development of demonstration plants.

The European Round Table of Industrialists

The European Round Table of Industrialists (ERT) group is an exclusive club of 44 leaders from the strongest European multinationals. Their climate working groups is chaired by former Shell's CEO Jeroen van der Veer. ERT's position on Copenhagen is that Europe should only move decisively if developing countries move as well, to protect the competitiveness of the European industry is lobbying against moving from a 20 to a 30% target. It wants nuclear energy and financing for new technologies, especially carbon capture and storage. It also lobbies for a global carbon market and asks for sectoral agreements for developing countries It wants technology transfer to be through investment in member companies working in the developing world.

Other National Lobby Groups

Australian Industry Greenhouse Network (AIGN)

The Australian Industry Greenhouse Network is a coalition of the heaviest polluters in Australia , including the Australian divisions of Shell, Rio Tinto, Exxon Mobil and BP as well as industry associations. It is widely known as the Greenhouse Mafia.
The chief executive officer of AIGN is Mike Hitchen, who is described as one of Australia's "dirty dozen" because of his efforts to protect the interests of the fossil fuel industries by blocking and slowing effective action to reduce Australia's greenhouse gas emissions. Hitchen used to work in the Department of Primary Industry and Energy (DPIE) and is reported to be close to the government.
AIGN advocates free emission permits for companies as compensation for reduced asset values following the introduction of an Australian emissions trading scheme. It also promotes "clean coal" using carbon capture and storage and nuclear energy.

Brazilian Climate Alliance

The Brazilian Climate Alliance unites Brazil's agribusiness, including soy, sugar and tree plantation giants. It is pushing for a Copenhagen agreement that will provide them with carbon credits under the clean development mechanism (CDM) for environmental damaging soy, sugar and tree monocultures, and for charcoal production for the steel industry. The Alliance has lobbied the Brazilian government and President Lula is expected to push their position in Copenhagen.
The Alliance includes 14 Brazilian associations, such as sugar barons united in UNICA, the Brazilian Cellulose and Paper Association (Bracelpa), the Brazilian Agribusiness Association (ABAG). UNICA set up offices in Brussels to lobby for the 10% agrofuel target, spreading misleading environmental and social information as part of its lobbying campaign.
Among the official lobbying goals of the alliance are to "reform" the CDM and to persuade the EU to remove barriers to buying forest carbon credits under the Emissions Trading Scheme, making it possible for EU industry to offset emissions by investing in Brazilian monocultures.

Confederation of Danish Industry (DI)

The Confederation of Danish Industry (DI) is the Danish member of BusinessEurope. It hosts the "Copenhagen Business Day" (Business leading ACTION), co-organised by the WBCSD and the ICC (see above) on 11 December in Copenhagen.
http://www.sustainable-finance.org/templates/TemplateWBCSD9/layout.asp?type=p&MenuId=MTY2OQ&doOpen=1&ClickMenu=LeftMenu

Nippon Keidanren

Nippon Keidanren (Japan Business Federation) is the most powerful Japanese corporate lobby group, bringing together over one thousand companies including Nippon Oil Corporation, Tokyo Electric Power, Toyota, Mitsubishi or Nippon Steel Corporation. Nippon Keidanren had extremely close ties with the former government, Japan's Liberal Democratic Party.
When the recent Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama, leader of the Democratic Party DPJ committed to cut Japan´s emissions by 25% by 2020 (from a 1990 baseline), Nippon Keidanren campaigned against the proposed target.
Keidanren continues to question the science of climate change, saying: "Because the consequences of climate change for society and ecosystems are potentially serious and far-reaching, steps to address the risks of such climate change are prudent now, even while the science continues to evolve."
It is pushing for an international agreement that includes emerging economies (China, India); corporate-friendly technologies; voluntary industry sectoral agreements; respect for free market policies, an expanded clean development mechanism and for corporate intellectual property rights at the expense of needed technology transfer to developing countries.
They are a member of the Major Economies Business Forum on Energy and Climate which calls for a greater voice for business in the UN climate talks, including a more formal role in the UNFCCC.

Carbon Emissions Across the United States - Interactive Graphic - NYTimes.com

2008-06-15T05:07:00.001-07:00

Electric power production and transportation are the two largest sources of carbon emissions in the United States. But there are big differences in emissions between companies, and from state to state, that may make it harder to reach any agreement on cuts.

State committee gives temporary protection to Mount Taylor - Las Cruces Sun-News

2008-06-15T05:00:00.001-07:00

By HEATHER CLARK Associated Press Writer

Article Launched: 06/14/2008 06:49:20 PM MDT

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M.—A state committee has approved a proposal from five American Indian tribes to give central New Mexico's Mount Taylor temporary protection as a cultural property at a contentious meeting attended by hundreds of people.

The state Cultural Properties Review Committee voted 4-2 Saturday in Grants for an emergency listing of more than 422,000 acres (660 square miles) surrounding the mountain's summit on the state Register of Cultural Properties.

The Navajo Nation, the Acoma, Laguna and Zuni pueblos and the Hopi tribe of Arizona asked the state to approve the listing for a mountain they consider sacred to protect it from an anticipated uranium mining boom, according to the nomination report.

State committee gives temporary protection to Mount Taylor - Las Cruces Sun-News

Tornado Slams Greeley Colorado

2008-05-22T12:37:00.000-07:00

This tornado must be a reason why PowerTech Uranium must be kicked out of the US. If a tornado hits PowerTech Uranium uranium recovery extraction facility, will they be given a variance as to scattering their poisons across Weld County?

Photo Link for Crow Butte Resources ISL mines

2008-05-10T12:03:00.001-07:00

Defenders of the Black Hills current aerial photo link to Crow Butte Resources In Situ Leach Uranium Mine.

Sure doesn't look like minimal impact to me but of course I am not a scientist with degrees in tomfoolery so this is just my opinion.

But again it does show just how expansive the ISR/ISL well field will be and it should doesn't look like minimal impact. I wonder what effect this has on the wildlife?

Navajo Challenge Uranium Mining Permit on Tribal Lands

2008-04-20T18:57:00.000-07:00

Way to go...The war drums are beating in Navajo Country, URI aka Hydro is going to get scalped!!!

The Navajo communities of Crownpoint and Church Rock, New Mexico will fight the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the permitted company, Hydro Resources, Inc., demanding that they stay off Navajo lands in New Mexico.

Can't steal uranium any more, no more suffering, no more pain. Time to open eyes on those that believe nuclear energy is going to stop the "electricity shortage." What shortage, the only shortage is in those people's pockets that speculate that nuclear energy will save polar bears from drowning.

The only way to deal with climate change is to stop using those current sources of energy that are causing the problem in the first place. If that seems impossible, then perhaps we are heading down that road to self-extinction without the help of a comet or any other natural catastrophe.

Nuclear energy is not clean energy, it is not renewable energy...it is just another lethal weapon as a wolf hiding under sheep skin.

2 Die in Pakistan Nuclear Plant Accident

2008-04-08T11:28:00.000-07:00

Today two nuclear workers died at the Khushab nuclear plant north of Islamabad.

This plant purportedly is producing electricity but is also a nuclear weapons manufacturing plant.

As this is a developing story, and horrible tragedy, more news and possible mass civilian evacuations are possible. People living near the accident have already been evacuated with buses on standby should the accident escalate.

Nuclear energy in the wrong hands is dangerous, especially those gotten by elicit means through espionage as was Pakistan's case with A.Q. Khan.

Visit our new website: WAKINYAN HOKSILA

2008-04-02T20:29:00.000-07:00

We have uplinked another website Wakinyan Hoksila, which means Thunder Boy. This name was told to me by my grandmother, who said that it is the name of the last warrior society in our community. These Hunkpapa warriors vowed to never have children so they'd never have to know that suffering in reservation society. The most notable of these Hunkpapa warriors was Rain in the Face whose very name struck terror in the hearts of early trespassers. It is with honor that our new website uses the honorable namesake.

Please visit our website http://www.wakinyanhoksila.com/ Use our forum to discuss news and other personal reflections on the nuclear nightmares.

Always remember that the new corporate nukewashing has discovered that they could use drowning polar bears as their evil marketing strategy to promote nuclear energy. While I agree there is climate change, I don't agree that nuclear energy has part in finding the solution. My firm belief is that the energy giants knew that they were harming our climate, poisoning our air. But they also knew that the days of large construction projects are over, there can only be so many bridges, so many mega-skyscrapers, so many railroads, superhighways; so they invented this delusion that we need nuclear energy.

What we really need is to reconsider our use of our existing energy sources, we need to make them less harmful to our air, our water, and our land. We need leaders that aren't two-faced shills to corporate interests. Nuclear energy is not clean energy, it is not renewable energy; it is too expensive: the costs of accidents, destruction to our environment, our air and our land and water are not worth the supposed benefits.

But above all, ask yourself...Do we have an energy shortage? Or do we have a shortage of leaders, willing to tell us the truth---THAT NUCLEAR ENERGY IS NOT THE SOLUTION TO CLIMATE CHANGE!!!

NAVAJO PRESIDENT JOE SHIRLEY, JR., TELLS CONGRESSIONAL SUBCOMMITTEE NATION WILL NOT WATCH ANOTHER GENERATION HARMED BY URANIUM MINING

2008-04-01T22:12:00.000-07:00

NEWS FROM THE NAVAJO NATION
OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT & VICE PRESIDENT

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 30, 2008

NAVAJO PRESIDENT JOE SHIRLEY, JR., TELLS CONGRESSIONAL SUBCOMMITTEE NATION WILL NOT WATCH ANOTHER GENERATION HARMED BY URANIUM MINING

FLAGSTAFF, Ariz. – Navajo Nation President Joe Shirley, Jr., told a Congressional subcommittee here Friday that the Navajo Nation remains opposed to uranium mining on or near its land, and will take whatever action necessary to prevent it.

"It is unconscionable to me that the federal government would consider
allowing uranium mining to be restarted anywhere near the Navajo Nation when we are still suffering from previous mining activities," he said. "In response to attempts to renew uranium mining, the Navajo Nation Council passed, and I signed into law, the Diné Natural Resources Protection Act. This law places a ban on all uranium mining both within the Navajo Nation boundary, and within Navajo Indian Country."

Testifying at a joint oversight hearing before the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands at the Flagstaff City Council Chambers, President Shirley said Navajos "do not want to not sit by, ignorant of the effects of uranium mining, only to watch another generation of mothers and fathers die."

"We are doing everything we can to speak out and do something about it," he said. "We do not want a new generation of babies born with birth defects. We will not allow our people to live with cancers and other disorders as faceless companies make profits only to declare bankruptcy and then walk away from the damage they have caused, regardless of the bond they have in place."

The hearing was held to gather testimony on "Community Impacts of Proposed Uranium Mining Near Grand Canyon National Park." In December 2007, the U.S. Forest Service authorized VANE Minerals, LLC, to conduct exploratory drilling for uranium three miles south of Grand Canyon National Park. The Park Service used Categorical Exclusion Category 8 to approve the drilling, which covers short-term investigations and which had limited public involvement. Consultation with tribes amounted to sending a letter.

On March 6, Subcommittee Chairman Congressman Raul Grijalva wrote to U.S. Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer to ask that the Forest Service re-initiate the process "to ensure a more rigorous public involvement and environmental analysis process."

About 200 people filled the council chamber at the Flagstaff City Hall. Also presenting testimony during the first morning panel with President Shirley was Kaibab Paiute Tribal Chairwoman Ono Segundo and Havasupai Tribal Chairman Don Watahomigie. Both also testified that their tribes are opposed to renewed uranium mining in and around the Grand Canyon region.

Appearing with Congressman Grijalva was Arizona Congressman Ed Pastor and California Congresswoman Grace Napolitano.

President Shirley said that as the Cold War raged more than 50 years ago, the United States government began a massive effort to mine and process uranium ore for use in the country's nuclear weapons programs. Much of that uranium was mined on or near Navajo lands by Navajo hands.

"Today, the legacy of uranium mining continues to devastate both the people and the land," he said. "The workers, their families, and their neighbors suffer increased incidences of cancers and other medical disorders caused by their exposure to uranium. Fathers and sons who went to work in the mines and the processing facilities brought uranium dust into their homes to unknowingly expose their families to radiation."

"The mines, many simply abandoned, have left open open scars in the ground with leaking radioactive waste. The companies that processed the uranium ore dumped their waste in open – and in some cases unauthorized – pits, exposing both the soil and the water to radiation."

Asked by Congressman Pastor whether the Navajo Nation sees any benefits to come from uranium mining, President Shirley the opposite has been true in the past.

"Many of my people have died. Many of my medicine people have died, Congressman, " he said. "And as a result, our culture has gone away, some of it. Some of the medicine people with the knowledge they have, when they go on, it's just like a library has gone on. You lose a lot of culture. That has happened to my people."

He said the tragedy of uranium's legacy extends not only to those who worked in the mines but to those who worked and lived near the mines that also experienced devastating illnesses. Decades later, families who live in those same areas continue to experience health problems.

"The remnants of uranium activity continue to pollute our land, our water, and our lives," he said. "It would be unforgivable to allow this cycle to continue for another generation."

He explained that in recent years, many companies have approached the Navajo Nation with promises of riches.

"They have promised us newer and cleaner methods of mining that they say will not harm the land, the water, or the people," he said. "We have repeatedly declined their offers."

He said the Nation has been told that in situ leach mining is a process that injects a solution into the ground to separate the ore from the surrounding rock.

"These companies claim the process is harmless," President Shirley said. "The science on this process is, at best, inconclusive, and, at worst, points to increased radioactive contaminants in the groundwater after the mining operations cease."

He said he cannot believe the claims of safety "when history and science establish a different record."

"The Navajo people have been consistently lied to by companies and government officials concerning the effects of various mining activities. Unfortunately, the true cost of these activities is understood only later when the companies have stolen away with their profits leaving the Navajo people to bear the health burdens."

Asked by whether he was contacted by the Forest Service about allowing VANE to conduct exploratory drilling near the Grand Canyon, President Shirley said no. He added that any Navajo official or division director who may have been contacted would have given the Forest Service the same answer.

"Every testimony coming from the Navajo Nation, whether it's through me, any of our council delegates, any of our legislators, it's no, we do not want the further mining of the uranium ore on Navajoland or on land contiguous to Navajoland," he said. "So if there's any conversation that took place with any of the U.S. Forest representatives, that's what they've heard."

"We just don't want it," he said. "We have a law in place, and that's the Diné Natural Resources Protection Act that says no way will we allow, no way will the Navajo Nation or any of its departments or any of its staff allow the further mining of uranium ore on Navajo land."

# # #
PHOTOS, AUDIO AVAILABLE

CONTACT
George Hardeen, Communications Director
Office of the President & Vice President
The Navajo Nation
DESK 928-871-7917
CELL 928-309-8532
pressoffice@ opvp.org

Defenders of the Black Hills Announcements

2008-03-19T09:18:00.000-07:00

Uranium Hearing in Rapid City, SD
April 2 and 3, 2008 - Wed. and Thurs. 8:30 AM (MDST)

On March 12, 2008, the SD Water Management Board held a hearing in Pierre, SD, on changes to the rules for Chapter 74:55:01 - 74:55:01:61 Underground Injection Control -- Class III Wells. The changes are being made to coincide with the changes that the Board of Minerals made last year to accommodate 'In Situ Leach' uranium mining. However, as the Board violated state law in cutting off the time for submitting written comments to three weeks before the hearing, a continuation was sought and obtained.

The Water Management Board has continued the hearing for April 2 & 3, 2008, in the Angostura and Deerfield Rooms at theRadisson Hotel on Mount Rushmore Road and Main St., Rapid City, SD. The Hearing will begin at 8:30 AM with a presentation on ISL Uranium Mining by Powertech Uranium Mining Company. General comments and specific comments for changes to the rules will follow. The Board is asking that spokespersons for groups present their comments and not repeat what has been stated previously.

One of the most important rules being considered is 74:55:01:24, Designation of exempted aquifers. With a ten year drought in the Region, with changing weather patterns and global warming, it is very important to maintain underground sources of water for the years to come. We strongly encourage everyone to ask for a copy of the rules by calling 605-773-3296, on the Internet at http://www.state.sd.us/denr/DES/Ground/grundprg.htm

We also ask as many people as possible to attend this hearing to show your support for keeping our groundwater intact and unpolluted with disturbed uranium. In every place in the world where groundwater has been disturbed for In Situ Leach uranium mining, the groundwater has NOT been able to be restored to its previous condition.

THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT MEETING FOR THE FUTURE OF THE REGION'S GROUNDWATER SOURCES.

Remember, water = life.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

April 1 - Hearing - Stark County Commissioners
Dickinson, ND - 8:30 AM

To determine zoning change from agricultural to industrial for mining coal and uranium. All down winders urged to attend to keep the air and water safe.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IMPORTANT --URGENT!!
Rochford Road Announcement

The Pennington County Highway Department held a meeting regarding the reconstruction of South Rochford Road at Hill City, SD, on Monday, March 3, 2008, at 6:30 pm. This project runs from Deerfield Lake to the village of Rochford passing through the middle of Reynolds Prairie, or the Pe Sla, one of the most important and sacred Lakota annual pilgrimage sites. Currently it is a gravel road but the plans are to asphalt eleven (11) miles of road with $7.5 million dollars. If the road is blacktopped, housing development and increased traffic will occur. The Hill City Chamber of Commerce is pushing this project.

Although this project is located on 80% federal land and is funded 80% by federal dollars, the federal NEPA process has not been started. The federal NEPA process should handle this project. Please send letters to the Rapid City Journal urging the federal agencies, the US Federal Highway Administration and the US Forest Service, Custer SD Office, to begin the NEPA process to protect this sacred place and the environment. Thank you.

********************************************************************************************

An International Commemoration of the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1868

April 12, 2008

9:00 AM -5:00PM (MDST)

Mother Butler Center, 221 Knollwood Drive
Rapid City, SD

?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

In memory of Akicita Cikala (Garfield Grassrope) and Oyate Olotapi (Tony Black Feather)
Teton Sioux Nation Treaty Council delegates to the United Nations

????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Agenda

Honoring Ceremony

International Report on United Nations Activities

Discussion on Trans Canada Keystone Pipeline

Discussion on Long Term Plans for Bear Butte

Discussion on a Special Meeting on Decolonization

???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Noon meal to be provided.
Donations welcome. Salads, desserts, drinks for the noon meal welcome.

??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Sponsored by Defenders of the Black Hills on behalf of the Teton Sioux Nation Treaty Council
Email: bhdefenders@msn.com Phone: 605-399-1868

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PRESS RELEASE
March 17, 2008

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

ORGANIZATIONS FROM FIVE STATES JOIN TOGETHER
TO ADDRESS PROPOSED URANIUM MINING

CASPER, WY - Organizations from Wyoming, North and South Dakota, Nebraska, and Colorado met in Casper, WY, on Saturday, March 15, to discuss their joint concerns about uranium mining in the Northern Great Plains. Citizens from ten organizations are voicing their concerns about surface and ground water, human health, and local property values.

Defenders of the Black Hills, South Dakota Sierra Club, and ACTion for the Environment attended from South Dakota, which faces mining proposals along the southern Black Hills. The Powder River Basin Resource Council and Biodiversity Conservation Alliance came from Wyoming, where exploratory and mining permits have been applied for in the state. Coloradoans Against Resource Destruction traveled from the northern part of Colorado where uranium mining is also proposed near Fort Collins. Western Nebraska Resources Council, Nebraskans for Peace, and Nebraska Sierra Club arrived from northwest Nebraska where Crow Butte Resources is seeking to expand their uranium mining operations. Members of Dakota Resource Council from northwestern North Dakota are also facing new plans for uranium mining in their part of that state.

In all five states, companies plan to use 'in situ' leach mining (ISL) which injects a dissolving solution underground into suspected uranium deposits. The solution dissolves the uranium and its radioactive decay products, as well as heavy metals. This radioactive solution is pumped to the surface. The uranium is then removed and shipped to a mill for concentration into "yellowcake." The water is re-treated and then injected back underground in a cycle that continues until all the uranium has been extracted. Reverse osmosis is then often used to remove some of the toxics from the water, and the remaining liquid is either injected underground or retained in shallow ponds. Numerous uranium mining companies are making plans throughout the West as a result of recent increases in the price of uranium.

"In Wyoming, there are significant questions about regulation and oversight of uranium operations," according to Wilma Tope, Powder River Basin Resource Council Board Member. "Citizens need to have a stronger voice in uranium activities." Wilma's family owns a ranch in Crook County, WY, and has banded together with other local residents to pressure regulators to ensure adequate protection of local water supplies - both quality and quantity.

In South Dakota, Powertech Uranium Corporation has started drilling more uranium exploratory wells in an area where they already have 4,000 wells in the southwestern Black Hills. "It's already been proven world-wide that ISL mining contaminates aquifers and then those aquifers cannot be restored to their previous state," said Charmaine White Face, Coordinator for Defenders of the Black Hills. "South Dakota relies very heavily on aquifers for drinking water and livestock use. We've been in a drought for the last ten years and the last thing we need to do is poison our water," she said.

ACTion for the Environment is very concerned that South Dakota taxpayers will once again have to take on the toxic messes that are left when a mining company leaves as happened previously with Canadian companies. Powertech is a Canadian company. "The Board of Minerals and Environment should remember what happened when they gave approval for the Brohm gold mine. Now SD people are paying for that mess. Are we going to have to pay for a radioactive mess left by another Canadian company?" said Gary Heckenliable of ACTion for the Environment. "Not only South Dakota residents but all the taxpayers of the United States are going to have to pay for this for many, many years to come," he said.

Coloradoans Against Resource Destruction (CARD), formed last year in response to Powertech's proposal to mine in the rapidly-growing area near Fort Collins. "Of course uranium mining always causes some form of contamination. Water at in situ leach mining sites is not returned to its original condition," said Jackie Adolph, a member of CARD. "Most people don't know that federal policies that subsidize the nuclear industry aren't just about power plants. The nuclear industry's largest negative impacts have always been in uranium mining and milling processes."

In Nebraska, Crow Butte Resources (a subsidiary of the Canadian company Cameco Corp.) is seeking to expand one the largest and oldest ISL mines in the country. Organizations have intervened in the NRC's licensing procedures. "We are particularly concerned about protection of local water supplies and cultural resources," said Buffalo Bruce, Vice Chair of the Western Nebraska Resources Council. "The NRC has failed to fulfill its duties under the Trust Doctrine, which protects indigenous rights granted to Native American populations under U.S. treaties."

North Dakota just recently started public hearings to accept comments on ISL mining in that state. Ken Kudrna, a member of Dakota Resource Council, lives only a few miles from where uranium mining is planned to begin.

The groups have issued a common statement:

"We want the uranium industry to know that we stand together on this issue. Whether in a rural setting or a populated area, uranium mining causes radioactive contamination. Past uranium sites continue to contaminate the air, land, and water. Any bonds designed to pay for clean-up of former mining areas have not been sufficient, and taxpayers have been forced to pay the bill. We call on the public and all elected officials to do everything possible to protect the water, land, and local economies from proposed uranium activities."

More information can be found at:

Defenders of the Black Hills: www.defendblackhills.org
Coloradoans Against Resource Destruction: www.nunnglow.com
Powder River Basin Resource Council: www.powderriverbasin.org
Nebraskans for Peace: http://www.nebraskansforpeace.org/
Contact: Charmaine White Face: (605) 399-1868 Shannon Anderson: (307) 763-1816

Colorado State University - News & Information

2008-01-25T10:58:00.001-08:00

Colorado State University - News & Information

FEB 2, 2008 URANIUM SYMPOSIUM AT COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY EXPLORES SCIENTIFIC, TECHNICAL QUESTIONS

Note to Editors: Reporters interested in attending the symposium are asked to register as well as to RSVP to Dell Rae Moellenberg at 970-491-6009 or dellrae.moellenberg@colostate.edu.

The symposium will provide an overview of the basic sciences associated with uranium, particularly as it relates to environmental, medical and health questions, for professionals and members of the public. The symposium will not cover social or economic issues around uranium mining.

Hopefully some of the anti-nuclear groups can attend this very important symposium and ask the right questions regardless if these questions involve the social and economic impacts as well as the environmental impacts that in-situ-recovery uranium mining has.

The people have a right to know and a right to contest top-down mining initiatives. For too long have we been beguiled by the insufficient, bewildering permitting process!

Way to go, Colorado! Don't forget Montrose County either!

The Associated Press: Nuclear Revival Rekindles Waste Concerns

2008-01-19T14:51:00.001-08:00

BEAUMONT-HAGUE, France (AP) — Thousands of canisters of highly radioactive waste from the world's most nuclear-energized nation lie, silent and deadly, beneath this jutting tip of Normandy. Above ground, cows graze and Atlantic waves crash into heather-covered hills.

The spent fuel, vitrified into blocks of black glass that will remain dangerous for thousands of years, is in "interim storage." Like nearly all the world's nuclear waste, it is still waiting for the long-term disposal solution that has eluded scientists and governments in the six decades since the atomic era began.

....

The Associated Press: Nuclear Revival Rekindles Waste Concerns

And the French nuclear giant AREVA says that nuclear energy is safe, but never says anything about what is going in its own country in terms of storing its nuclear waste...another case of "they screaming the loudest, are often heard, but not listen to."

Come on, America, we need the French Connection as much as we need a case of hemorrhoids...don't fall for their slightly misleading spiel as have the availability entrepreneurs (danged nook spooks) have in this country. It isn't about an energy shortage as much as it really is about actually constructing the nuclear plants, the support facilities, and the mining for iron, uranium and other exotic ores necessary for construction; often found in third world countries like Africa, South America, Navajo Reservation and in Lakota Treaty land (Wyoming, South Dakota, North Dakota, Colorado, and Nebraska)!

NO NUKES
NO COAL

NO KIDDING

Opponents challenge uranium mine expansion » RapidCityJournal.com

2008-01-17T10:57:00.001-08:00

Opponents challenge uranium mine expansion » RapidCityJournal.com

Seeking to block the mine expansion are Tom Cook of Chadron and Debra White Plume of Pine Ridge, S.D., the Slim Buttes Agricultural Development Corp., Owe Aku, a nonprofit Oglala Lakota cultural group from Pine Ridge, and the Western Nebraska Resources Council.

Hopefully this serves notice to the Tribal councils that more and more Native Americans are becoming aware of the increasing drive by the foreign uranium mining companies such as CAMECO to continue their plundering of treaty land. Also since the tribal councils are the only body recognized by the federal government, the tribal councils should take the lead in furthering their own independent water quality studies of the ground and surface water.

To back up the data in any proposed tribal water study, all Indian Health Service health records must be acquired to provide a legal basis for the coming water conflict. Correlation of the reservation's health crises to water quality analysis will provide the legal basis for tribes, increasing their sovereignty as well as strengthening their individual roles in the Winters Doctrine.

Bismarck Tribune - The Weeklies: Public asked to provide input on uranium mining

2008-01-12T21:48:00.001-08:00

Bismarck Tribune - Bismarck News - The Weeklies: Public asked to provide input on uranium mining

With uranium mining potentially starting up again in North Dakota’s western counties, some state officials want to meet with the public to talk about uranium mining rules.
State geologist Ed Murphy said he’s organizing a public meeting at 6:30 p.m. Feb. 12 at the Belfield Memorial Hall.

First Nations vow to occupy eastern Ont. site to block uranium mining | Published January 11th, 2008

2008-01-11T14:53:00.001-08:00

First Nations vow to occupy eastern Ont. site to block uranium mining | Published January 11th, 2008

Keith Leslie, THE CANADIAN PRESS

Published Friday January 11th, 2008

TORONTO - Aboriginals in eastern Ontario warned Friday that they would ignore a court order and illegally occupy the site of a proposed uranium mine north of Kingston later this month unless the province calls a halt to the project.

The Ardoch Algonquin First Nation said it usually permits mining activities on its lands, but will not tolerate uranium exploration because of its impact on the environment and potential to adversely affect people's health.

"The destruction of the land, the consequence of a uranium mine being built, and the health effects will be devastating on our community," former Ardoch chief Robert Lovelace told a news conference at the legislature.

"We have taken a stand that there will be no uranium mine in that area."

The Ardoch First Nation is fighting Frontenac Ventures Corp., which has staked approximately 400 mineral claims covering more than 8,000 hectares of land, and successfully won a court injunction last October to prevent aboriginals from occupying the site.

Tri-City Herald: Mid-Columbia news

2008-01-11T14:23:00.001-08:00

Hanford workers prepare for high-risk excavation of waste (w/video)

Hanford cleanup

Published Thursday, January 10th, 2008

By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer

Hanford workers are preparing to start next week digging up radioactive and chemical waste that could spontaneously catch fire when exposed to air.

"We're planning for the worst case," said John Darby, project manager for the Department of Energy's contractor, Washington Closure Hanford.

The 618-7 Burial Ground was used from 1960 to 1973 for waste from the Hanford nuclear reservation's 300 Area just north of Richland where fuel was made for Hanford's reactors and research was conducted.

Tri-City Herald: Mid-Columbia news

Energy Prospects - No Nukes or Coal, Idaho Petition Says

2008-01-09T09:39:00.000-08:00

Energy Prospects - No Nukes or Coal, Idaho Petition Says
Here is a good one...help Idahoans stop the nuclear reactor expansion in their state!

Uranium company wants to start drilling - Denver Business Journal:

2008-01-08T09:27:00.000-08:00

Uranium company wants to start drilling - Denver Business Journal:

I wonder how CARD will respond to this?

How to make uranium, in five easy steps.

2007-12-06T23:20:00.000-08:00

Powertech Uranium, facing an extreme embarrassment, loses its wits to Coloradan opposition as shown in this timeline listed in the Rocky Mountain Chronicle.

The cartoon character sucking uranium through a straw, looks just like Mr. Blubaugh, PowerTech vice-president...evidently they read my repeated statement, posted in all their newspapers, that he should prove to us that in-situ leach uranium mining is safe by drinking some of the dissolving solution (lixiviant), then I'll believe him. Now if we could just get South Dakota to hear this same message!

Oh well!!! It really isn't about the uranium, it is really about increasing property values, and speculating on company stocks. Ever since Mr. Gore proclaimed Global Warming, the nuclear industry shills daily that their energy is safe for the environment and will start Global Cooling, formerly known as Nuclear Winter, through nuclear proliferation.

New Mexico Governor Calls on NRC to Abandon Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Uranium Mining Applications

2007-12-04T10:38:00.000-08:00

Process Violates Government-to Government Consultation, Limits Public Participation

December 3, 2007 -- (SANTA FE – NM) -- In a recent letter, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson called on the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to abandon the Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) process for new uranium mining activities in New Mexico and across the West, citing concerns about the lack of site-specific environmental review and public participation. Under the NRC’s proposal, new uranium mining activities – and the public’s right to comment on them -- would fall principally under one single “generic” environmental impact statement rather than separate, site-specific environmental reviews.

In the letter, Governor Richardson notes that a generic approach is contrary to the principles of government-to-government consultation with sovereign Native American Tribes and Pueblos, is contrary to NRC’s duties and obligations under the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA), and limits the ability of local communities and citizens to voice concerns regarding the specific licensing of potential operators in New Mexico.

“The NRC should abandon the “generic” process for reviewing any proposed uranium recovery operation,” said Governor Richardson. “The west is a diverse, unique, and vast area where one size does not fit all. As such, the State of New Mexico does not support the scope and approach of the proposed process."

The majority of uranium resources in New Mexico are located in the northwest portion of the state, which includes a large portion of Indian lands. Any proposed uranium recovery will pose unique cultural and environmental justice issues that the GEIS process will not adequately address. A GEIS approach looks at the bigger picture without adequately considering the specifics on the ground of each license in each location. The real concern is that down the road the NRC will rely on the GEIS as the primary environmental document and not conduct a separate, in-depth environmental review when reviewing license applications for specific sites in New Mexico.

The GEIS proposal is contrary to the State of New Mexico’s commitment to a full public participation in its state permitting process. Individual review of each permit is key for uranium operations due to the extensive history of environmental degradation and public health impacts from past uranium mining and milling practices.

“Overall, the state of New Mexico believes that the proposed generic statement is contrary to NRC’s duties and obligations under NEPA and any generic analysis will fall far short of assessing and identifying all possible environmental impacts in the western United States,” said Governor Richardson. “The State of New Mexico remains committed to an open, transparent and thorough review process of all uranium permits and we implore the NRC to commit itself to the same level of public involvement."

Governor Richardson’s letter was sent to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission on Friday, November 30th.

Text of letter follows:

November 21, 2007
Chairman Dale E. Klein
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Washington, DC 20555

Dear Chairman Klein:

As outlined in my letter dated July 31, 2007, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC) proposed Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) for newly proposed uranium recovery operations in the western United States concerns me greatly. This proposal will directly impact New Mexico, a state rich in uranium reserves but with an unfortunate history of environmental degradation from past uranium mining and milling.

The NRC’s decision to pursue a GEIS is highly questionable since it is not clear that there is a wide-ranging federal program that is concerted, systematic, and connected which would warrant the use of a “programmatic” approach as opposed to separate, site-specific environmental reviews. The State of New Mexico requests that the NRC reconsider its decision to use a GEIS approach. A GEIS results in a more “generic” review on a broader scale of general concepts without taking into consideration that there are unique issues related to specific sites within each specific geographical area.

Moreover, a GEIS often is used as a tool in the “tiering” process to serve as a master document whereby subsequent, site specific environmental reviews only amount to an environmental assessment with heavy reliance on the “generic” document. This means that instead of performing a comprehensive, in-depth environmental review at each site in New Mexico for each license application, the NRC would only conduct an environmental assessment and rely on the GEIS for a large portion of its site-specific analysis. Given the unique environmental, geographical, cultural, historical, economic, and regional aspects of New Mexico, it is contrary to the goals and purposes of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for the NRC to use a GEIS approach in this instance.

A significant issue pertains to the unique cultural and historical factors in the State of New Mexico. The majority of uranium resources in New Mexico are located in the Grants Mineral Belt in the northwestern portion of the State. This area includes large portions of “Indian Lands.” Consequently, any proposed uranium recovery and processing operations in New Mexico will pose unique cultural and environmental justice issues that the GEIS process will not adequately address.

Likewise, a GEIS unduly limits the ability of local communities and citizens to voice specific concerns regarding the licensing of potential operators in their neighborhoods and communities. Given the concerns of many citizens in New Mexico about the public health, environmental, and cultural impacts of new uranium mining actions, a process that forces the public to comment on an environmental document that only considers broad-based issues for a large regional area undermines the purposes and intent of NEPA to ensure that specific major federal actions do not adversely impact the environment. The use of a generic, general, programmatic approach instead of ensuring an in-depth evaluation at the site specific level is disrespectful of the general public’s right to have a meaningful voice in decisions of such magnitude and importance.

In addition, a “generic” approach is contrary to the principles of government-to-government consultation with the many sovereign Native American Tribes and Pueblos in New Mexico. Some thirty-five Native American tribes claim cultural affiliation with historic properties in New Mexico, including archaeological sites, landscapes, traditional cultural properties and sacred sites. In many cases, traditional Native American cultural properties consist of cultural landscapes and special landforms with spiritual relationships that could be affected by this proposed undertaking having long-term adverse impacts or potentially detrimental effects to the very existence of the people.

Potential impacts on New Mexico’s sovereign Tribes and Pueblos will undoubtedly result in a “finding of significant impact” in the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) evaluation, which will require the NRC to perform an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). In this context, the NRC should abandon the GEIS process and adopt the full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process for reviewing any proposed activity that will occur at specific sites within our state. A full EIS process will give the state and the public the opportunity to address site-specific and cultural concerns unique to proposed operations in New Mexico. While the NRC may claim that site specific evaluations will occur with each license application in New Mexico at a later stage, there is no guarantee that such evaluations will be beyond an environmental assessment.

The GEIS proposal also is contrary to the State of New Mexico’s commitment to full public participation in its state permitting process in which each permit is evaluated on a case-by-case manner. This individual review is particularly important for uranium operations due to the extensive history of environmental degradation and public impacts as a result of past uranium mining and milling practices, the varying hydrologic, geologic, and ecologic conditions of each particular site, and cultural resources unique to New Mexico. A full EIS process is also consistent with the NRC’s decision to complete an EIS for new nuclear reactor applications rather than following a GEIS process.

Unlike the Navajo Nation, the State of New Mexico currently has not taken a broad policy position on uranium mining. However, if uranium mining and milling are to resume in New Mexico, the state must be sure that the public is given a robust opportunity to participate in the decisions and that all environmental, water resource, and potential public health issues are thoroughly examined for each operation. The State of New Mexico is committed to an open, transparent and thorough review process of all uranium permits and we implore the NRC to commit itself to the same level of public involvement.

Overall, the State of New Mexico believes that the proposed GEIS is contrary to NRC’s duties and obligations under NEPA and that the generic analysis of the proposed action of “construction, operation, and decommissioning of an ISL uranium mill” will fall far short of assessing and identifying all possible environmental impacts in the western United States. The west is a diverse, unique, and vast area where one size does not fit all. As such, the State of New Mexico does not support the scope and approach of the proposed GEIS.

Lastly, the State of New Mexico wishes to reiterate the importance of holding public meetings in affected communities on an ongoing basis. Such meetings are vital to the public participation process. The meetings held in August and September earlier this year were helpful and productive in establishing a dialogue with the NRC and we hope that the NRC will continue to hold such meetings in the future.

Please submit these comments as part of the official record regarding this matter. I hope that the NRC will weigh these comments heavily and provide the public with a genuine opportunity to review and evaluate individual EIS’s for all proposed in situ leach (ISL) and conventional mill operations in New Mexico.

Sincerely,
Bill Richardson
Governor of New Mexico
cc: Chief, Rulemaking, Directives and Editing Branch
Mail Stop T-6D59
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Washington, D.C. 20555-0001

Source: New Mexico Governor

Uranium Impacts Native and non-Native Seek Justice

2007-11-16T10:00:00.000-08:00

Bluewater Valley Downstream Alliance ? Church Rock Uranium Monitoring Project

Eastern Navajo Diné Against Uranium Mining ? Laguna Acoma Coalition for a Safe Environment

Navajo Uranium Radiation Vicitms Committee

New Mexico Environmental Law Center ? Post '71 Uranium Workers Committee

Sierra Club Environmental Justice Office ? Southwest Research and Information Center

Press Release

For More Information:

Thursday Nov. 15, 2007

Mitchell Capitan, 505-786-5209

Linda Evers, 505-287-2304

Candace Head-Dylla, 505-401-4349

Chris Shuey, 505-262-1862

Robert Tohe, 928-774-6103

Grass-roots and nongovernmental organizations

seek justice for uranium impacts in meetings with members of Congress

WASHINGTON , DC — Representatives of grass-roots groups and nongovernmental organizations from New Mexico and Arizona told members of Congress last week that they want a federal moratorium on new uranium development in the region until the widespread environmental and public health damages from past mining and milling are resolved and workers and communities are fully compensated.

The organizations were in Washington, D.C. to participate in the Navajo Uranium Roundtable sponsored by Rep. Tom Udall of New Mexico, and co-hosted by Rep. Jim Matheson of Utah, Rep. Rick Renzi of Arizona, and Navajo Nation President Joe Shirley, Jr.

The groups, which represented communities in the Eastern Navajo Agency, Acoma and Laguna pueblos, and the Milan and Grants area, supported the Navajo Nation's requests for funding to clean up hundreds of abandoned mines in Navajo communities, fully compensate uranium workers, conduct health studies in uranium-impacted communities, and honor and respect the Navajo Nation's 2005 law banning uranium mining and processing in Navajo Country.

Speakers for the grassroots groups joined President Shirley, other Navajo Nation officials, and Laguna Pueblo Governor John E. Antonio, in calling for a federal moratorium on new uranium mining.

Mitchell Capitan, founder of Eastern Navajo Diné Against Uranium Mining (ENDAUM), based in Crownpoint, said the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is "tilted toward industry" and cannot be trusted to properly regulate uranium in situ leach (ISL) mines and new uranium mills. He charged that the NRC did not give fair consideration to ENDAUM's technical and legal arguments challenging NRC's 1998 licensing of Hydro Resources, Inc.'s (HRI) proposed ISL mines in Churchrock and Crownpoint. To illustrate his point, Capitan provided copies of a photo from the NRC's web site showing agency officials smiling and shaking hands with executives of a Wyoming uranium company, which had just submitted an application for a new ISL mine — long before the proposed facility is subjected to NRC staff review and approved by the Commission.

Larry J. King, an ENDAUM member and Churchrock Chapter resident, said his community recommends a federal uranium mine clean-up program that would address legacy sites throughout the West. He also called for Congress to force NRC to return to its mission to protect public health and safety. He cited an NRC ruling in 2006 that classified high levels of radiation from mining wastes at a proposed ISL site across the highway from his home as "background" radiation.

Robert Tohe, environmental justice organizer for the Sierra Club in Flagstaff , Ariz. , said Congress should give federal land management agencies the authority to deny exploration and mining permits on Native American sacred sites and in sacred places. He noted that several mining companies are exploring for uranium on and around Mt. Taylor , one of the four sacred mountains of the Navajo people and a sacred place for Acoma and Laguna pueblos.

Long-time Diné uranium worker advocate Phil Harrison, Jr., who is now a delegate to the Navajo Nation Council, and attorney Keith Killian of Grand Junction , Colorado , called on Congress to amend the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA) to address disparities in compensation awards between Native Americans and non-Indian uranium workers and downwinders. They said the range of compensable diseases should be expanded and attention given to the lack of compensation for dependents of former workers and people who lived, and still live, in mining-impacted communities.

Harrison, Paguate resident Alvino Waconda, and Milan residents Linda Evers and Liz Lucero, all of whom are former uranium workers, supported amending RECA to include people who worked in the uranium industry after 1971. Evers said her group has collected nearly 1,500 surveys of post-1971 uranium workers, and that the vast majority of workers are reporting a wide range of cancers, respiratory diseases and kidney disease. Evers said she expects to report the first results by the end of the year.

Milan residents Candace Head-Dylla, Milton Head and Art Gebeau, representing the Bluewater Valley Downstream Alliance (BVDA), handed out information packets showing how groundwater contamination around the Homestake Uranium Mill north of Milan has spread to three aquifers covering several miles of land since first detected in 1961. They said the plumes contain high levels of uranium and other toxic substances and are inching toward Milan 's municipal water wells, yet no groundwater monitoring is being conducted ahead of the contamination plume. Dozens of private wells in communities near the mill have been shut down, but until very recently some residents were unknowingly still drinking tainted water from private wells, the BVDA members said. They recommended that Congress should amend federal laws, such as the Clean Water Act, to ensure that that uranium mine and mill wastes and associated discharges are regulated as toxic pollutants.

The grass-roots people were assisted by staffs of Southwest Research and Information Center , Natural Resources Defense Council, the New Mexico Environmental Law Center , Earthworks, and The Raben Group. A list of major policy objectives advocated by the groups follows.

Dr. Johnnye Lewis, a University of New Mexico toxicologist who was invited by the Navajo Nation and Udall staffs to provide scientific guidance, spoke to the need for a comprehensive health study, noting that the lack of health data is often misconstrued as a lack of effect. Dr. Lewis, who is the principal investigator for the first community-based health and exposure study in Navajo communities, emphasized the need for health studies to be conducted by independent investigators to ensure the validity and scientific integrity of results.

GRASS-ROOTS AND NONGOVERENMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS'

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FEDERAL RESPONSES TO THE URANIUM MINING LEGACY AND PROPOSED NEW URANIUM DEVELOPMENT ON THE NAVAJO NATION AND THROUGHOUT THE FOUR CORNERS AREA

1. Seek legislation to impose a federal moratorium on new uranium development until environmental pollution from previous mining and milling is cleaned up, workers are appropriately compensated, and community health studies conducted.

2. Amend the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA) to, among other things, include certain New Mexico counties in the areas exposed to fallout from nuclear weapons testing, expand the universe of compensable diseases for uranium workers, and extend eligibility for compensation to workers who worked after 1971. Congress should also investigate compensation strategies for dependents of former uranium workers and for residents of communities impacted by uranium development.

3. Respect and protect the Navajo Nation's sovereign right to enact the Diné Natural Resources Protection Act (DNRPA) of 2005, which prohibits uranium mining and processing by any means anywhere in Navajo Country.

4. Ensure full funding for health studies among residents of communities impacted by uranium mining and milling, and restore cuts in existing studies.

5. Require the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to drop work on the proposed Generic Environmental Impact Statement for uranium in situ leach mining and to return to full and fair implementation of its statutory authority to protect public health and safety.

6. Amend the Clean Water Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, and Atomic Energy Act to make clear and certain that uranium mill and mine wastes are defined as "pollutants" and are subject to the same level of regulatory control and scrutiny as all other pollutants. Uranium mine and mill waste should not be exempt from any federal public health or environmental statute.

7. Enact a comprehensive federal abandoned uranium mine clean-up program, including funds for cleanup of abandoned mines on the Navajo Nation, Laguna Pueblo and throughout the Four Corners Area. Ensure that financially viable companies are held responsible for cleaning, or paying for cleanup, of the mining and milling sites they abandoned.

8. Reaffirm the principal of religious freedom by authorizing federal land management agencies to deny exploration, mining and milling permits on sacred sites or in sacred places, including and especially Mt. Taylor in northwestern New Mexico .

*****

Public Meeting about Abandoned Uranium Mines in the Cave Hills Area

2007-11-06T18:25:00.000-08:00

Defenders of the Black Hills

P. O. Box 2003, Rapid City, SD 57709

Nov. 6, 2007

Public Service Announcement

“Public Meeting about Abandoned Uranium Mines in the Cave Hills Area”

On Tues. Nov. 13, 2007, the US Forest Service will hold a meeting in Ludlow regarding the abandoned uranium mines in the Cave Hills area at Riley Pass. The meeting is for the public and will be held in the Ludlow Hall from 5-8:00 PM.

Representatives from Tronox, formerly Kerr-McGee, the mining company that dug the uranium mine at Riley Pass will be there as well as representatives from SD School of Mines and Technology.

We encourage as many people as possible to attend and question how and when all of the 89 mines are going to be cleaned up, the health concerns from no cleanup after 30 years of leaving the mines exposed, possible destruction of more burial and sacred sites in the cleanup process, and how much taxpayer dollars are being used for the cleanup.

For more information call (605) 399-1868, or email: bhdefenders@msn.com

South Dakota ISL uranium mining: Now you see it, now you don't

2007-11-05T01:50:00.000-08:00

Einstein once said that nuclear reactors are terrible ways to boil water; I say that poisoning water to mine uranium and promote nuclear energy is even more dangerous since we cannot easily see radioactive poisoning and heavy metal groundwater contamination especially if it is buried deep underground.

My purpose in this blog post is continue my drive to inform the rest of this country about the dangerous situation developing in South Dakota over in situ leach uranium mining. Continuing in this, there are several factors I consider very important background information before delving into this situation with me: (1) the groundwater hydrology in South Dakota hasn't been fully mapped as it has in Colorado where the direction of groundwater flow has been illustrated beautifully; (2) as a volunteer researcher for the Defenders of the Black Hills I attended the first meetings with the State of South Dakota over uranium mining permitting regulations and PowerTech Uranium's application to conduct exploratory drilling in Fall River county where I can only felt that we experienced racism, outright bigotry and environmental injustice from state officials; and (3) our verbal comments as well as those submitted in writing were largely passed over in favor of PowerTech Uranium and its cohorts attending with them, Energy Metals (currently mining in Wyoming), and Crow Butte Resources (currently mining in Nebraska).

Current concerns and fears I share about in situ leach uranium mining are below blockquoted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In-situ_leaching#Controversies

The concerns of environmental groups and landholders centre around;

Acidification of groundwaters

Mobilisation of potentially hazardous heavy metals and, in the case of uranium, radioactive heavy metals.^[6]

Disturbance of the groundwater table, mixing of groundwater aquifers and general disturbance of the land atop the ore body

Destruction of habitat for stygofauna and other rock-inhabiting organisms, bacteria, et cetera.

Potential spills of acidic and metal-bearing or salt-bearing leachates upon the surface

As illustrated below, in situ leach uranium mining can experience several dangerous failures that are impossible or very difficult to remediate when these failures occur:

Although in-situ leach uranium mining is supposedly safe, I contend that it isn't, After reading published reports from the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission and existing controversial conditions reportedly resulting from in-situ leach uranium mining in Texas, Wyoming, and New Mexico as well as Australia and Russia, I should think that modern science could find a different means to generate electricity, other than using coal, uranium, gas, oil or hydropower.

For starters, the restoration process, technically named a groundwater sweep, at an in situ leach uranium mine uses reverse osmosis (RO) where high pressured water called the pore volume (the actual displacement yield of the well field) is injected back through the contaminated ore zone and extracted through another well head pump, then passed through a filter that usually clogs with the contaminated liquid during the first pass. This contaminated material is then removed from the filter and clean water is then repeatedly injected into the ore body until a certain groundwater standard has been achieved, usually pre-mining water quality standards.

The first critical subject to note is as quoted in NUREG/CR-6870:

The concentrate liquid waste from the RO units is either fed to evaporation ponds, injected into deep disposal wells, or dried for disposal at a licensed facility.

The waste is highly radioactive and emit high concentrations of radon to the atmosphere while also having the extreme possibility of escaping into the environment during catastrophic storms or acts of terrorism or through negligence. Disposing of this contaminant into deep disposal wells is just as dangerous since we don't really understand what happens down there yet but "out of sight, out of mind" seems to be valid science acceptable to the NRC.

Another important aspect that the NUREG states is that often the groundwater sweep doesn't remove all of the lixiviant, requiring another process of injecting more poisons (hydrogen sulfide, sodium hydrosulfide, or alkaline solutions) into the earth to stabilize the lixiviant to keep it from continuing to react with the ore body, thereby increasing the levels of uranium in the groundwater. But injecting these other poisons into the groundwater is acceptable to the NRC if it is within the pre-mining groundwater quality standards as measured by pH ratios yet this doesn't mean that it is any better because now its chemical composition is radically different.

NOW as I am finished with this, knowing that you are fully aware of my small perspective on the bigger picture as this form of toxic uranium mining, you must agree that uranium mining in all forms is dangerous to us, to all of us! Call your local congress representative, have them start investigating why uranium mining is allowed to continue in this country although the facts remain that it is very dangerous and toxic. Support all of the groups I have listed in the right sidebar!

Nuclear power and water scarcity

2007-10-30T10:32:00.001-07:00

The Pluralism Project:
ScienceAlert - Australia & NZ - Nuclear power and water scarcity

Nuclear power and water scarcity

Monday, 29 October 2007
By Sue Wareham and Jim Green

The connections between water scarcity, power generation and the federal government's promotion of nuclear power are worth reflecting on in National Water Week, held from October 21-27.

Some problems associated with nuclear power are much discussed – such as its connection to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Less well known is the fact that nuclear power is the most water-hungry of all energy sources, with a single reactor consuming 35-65 million litres of water each day.

Water scarcity is already a serious problem for Australia's power-generation industry, largely because of our heavy reliance on water-guzzling coal-fired plants. Current problems in Australia's power industry resulting from water shortages include: expensive long-distance water haulage to some power plants as local supplies dwindle; reduced electrical generating capacity and output at some coal and hydro plants; higher and more volatile electricity prices; increased risks of blackouts; and intensified competition for water between power plants, agriculture, industries, and environmental flows.

Introducing nuclear power would exacerbate those problems. A December 2006 report by the Commonwealth Department of Parliamentary Services notes that the water requirements for a nuclear power station are 20-83 per cent higher than for other power stations. Moreover, those calculations do not include water consumption by uranium mines. The Roxby Downs mine in South Australia uses 35 million litres of water each day, with plans to increase this to 150 million litres each day. Mine operator BHP Billiton does not pay one cent for this water despite recording a record $17 billion profit in 2006-07.

Water outflows from nuclear power plants can damage the local environment. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency states:

"When nuclear power plants remove water from a lake or river for steam production and cooling, fish and other aquatic life can be affected. Water pollutants, such as heavy metals and salts, build up in the water used in the nuclear power plant systems. These water pollutants, as well as the higher temperature of the water discharged from the power plant, can negatively affect water quality and aquatic life."

A report by the U.S. Nuclear Information and Resource Service details the destruction of delicate marine ecosystems and large numbers of animals, including endangered species, by nuclear power plants. Most of the damage is done by water inflow pipes, while expulsion of warm water causes further damage.

Another documented problem is 'cold stunning' - fish acclimatise to warm water but die when the reactor is taken off-line and warm water is no longer expelled. In New Jersey, local fishermen estimated that 4,000 fish died from cold stunning when a reactor was shut down.

Nuclear reactors in numerous European countries have been periodically taken off-line or operated at reduced output in recent years because of water shortages driven by climate change, drought and heat waves. Nuclear utilities have also sought and secured exemptions from operating conditions in order to discharge overheated water.

The water consumption of renewable energy sources and energy efficiency and conservation measures is negligible compared to nuclear or coal. Operating a 2,400 Watt fan heater for one hour consumes 0.01 litres of water if wind is the energy source, 0.26 litres if solar is the energy source, 4.5 litres if coal is the energy source, or 5.5 litres if nuclear power is the energy source.

Tim Flannery, the 2007 Australian of the Year, notes that hastening the uptake of renewable energy sources such as wind, solar, and geothermal 'hot rocks' will help ease the water crisis as well as reducing greenhouse gas emissions - a win-win outcome.

Globally, there is another compelling reason to ensure that decisions on water allocation - including its use in energy production - are made wisely and equitably. Limited access to water is already contributing to armed conflicts ('water wars') in a number of places around the globe. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon recently noted that shortages of food and water in sub-Saharan Africa were a precursor to the current tragic violence in Darfur. The problem goes "far beyond Darfur", he warned, as many other places are now suffering water shortages.

Australia can ill-afford to replace one thirsty industry, coal, with an even thirstier one, nuclear power.

Dr Sue Wareham became involved in MAPW over 20 years ago out of a "horror at the destructive capacity of a single nuclear weapon." Sue believes that her work through MAPW is fundamental to her commitment to the protection of human life and the improvement of human well-being.

Dr Jim Green is the national nuclear campaigner for Friends of the Earth and author of the report No Solution To Climate Change (pdf file 1.98MB) launched in September 2005. His PhD thesis dealt with the history of the Lucas Heights nuclear plant and the debate over the replacement of its nuclear research reactor. He is a member of the EnergyScience Coalition. Read his essay Environmentalists Do Not Support Nuclear Power: Critique of James Lovelock and Patrick Moore.

Know The Real ENEMY MINE

2007-10-26T11:33:00.000-07:00

Below is the running list of international uranium mining companies seeking immediate wealth at the expense of our environment currently being assaulted by the nuclear renaissance. Most agree that international mining companies often conduct their business in foreign countries on account of lax environmental laws and regulations, and are often financed through an arcane, often mystical, financing mechanisms designed to confuse their investors. In essence, profit and greed are driving this new affront to our basic sense of responsibility which is providing that we don't destroy our environment while satisfying our immediate needs for omnipotence over poverty and want.

As I write, the pro-DNA and pro-environment groups are waging a battle in Congress over two major pieces legislation HR 2272 Hardrock Mining and Reclamation Act of 2007 and the Senate energy bill (H.R.6) to protect our environment from irresponsible mining practices on Federal land and to stop the nuclear industry from obtaining unlimited construction and development loans without Congressional approval. This list intends to assist our cause; to get at the root of the issue is the easiest way to stop it until more rational thought is given by the public.

Major Uranium Mining Companies

AREVA - The AREVA group was formed through the merger of all CEA-Industrie, COGEMA, FRAMATOME ANP and FCI operations. In the nuclear sector, AREVA provides services for every aspect of power generation. From uranium mining through to site clean-up and decommissioning, for power plant construction or fuel fabrication.

AREVA NC - A wholly owned subsidiary of the AREVA group, this is an industrial group active in the energy sector offering electric utilities all over the world a full range of products and services for nuclear power generation. AREVA NC's operations range from uranium mining, conversion and enrichment through to spent fuel reprocessing and recycling.

AREVA Resources Canada Inc - The company - a subsidiary of the AREVA group - is one of the world's leading uranium exploration, mining and milling companies.

Australian Uranium - This is an independent website dedicated to furthering research and discussion about the Australian uranium mining and export industries. The site includes discussion forums and a blog.

BHP Billiton - This is the world's fourth largest producer of uranium. The company acquired the Olympic Dam mine in Australia as part of its purchase of WMC Resources.

Cameco Corporation - This is an excellent web site from the world's biggest uranium producer. It's easy to navigate, well laid out with good use of graphics. Importantly it also gives a reasonable amount of information on Cameco operations with details of uranium reserves, production, processing sites and stock prices.

Denison Mines Inc - Denison's interests include stakes in the McClean Lake and Midwest uranium projects, both in northern Saskatchewan.

DIAMO - Website of the Czech uranium mining company. *In CZECH only*

Energy Resources of Australia (ERA) - The company operates the Ranger mine in Australia's Northern Territory. The site includes information on the company, the Ranger mine, the Jabiluka site, environmental management (with a special focus on water management which is a big issue in this tropical area), and community relations.

Havilah Resources NL (HR) - This Australian company has formed a subsidiary, Curnamona Energy Pty Ltd, that will hold 100% of Havilah's Tertiary uranium exploration interests in its Curnamona Craton tenements.

Heathgate Resources - The website includes information about Heathgate Resources, the Beverley uranium mine, Environmental Impact Statement, publications and contact details.

Industrias Nucleares do Brasil (INB) - By law, INB is the company in charge of promoting in Brazil uranium, exploitation, from mining and primary processing up to its placement in nuclear fuel elements.

International Uranium (USA) Corp (IUC) - This company is in the business of recycling uranium-bearing waste products as an alternative to the direct disposal of these waste products. In addition, IUC is engaged in the selling of uranium recovered from these operations. IUC also sells vanadium and other metals that can be produced as a co- product with uranium. IUC, together with its affliates, owns several uranium and uranium/vanadium mines and exploration properties that are on standby.

Kazatomprom - National Atomic Company Kazatomprom was established by decree of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 14 July, 1997 in the form of closed joint- stock company in order to strengthen control over nuclear materials production and export.

Mega Uranium Ltd - This is a mining company with a focus on uranium. It has uranium resources in Australia (Ben Lomond and Maureen, total 23.6 million lbs U3O8) and uranium exploration projects in Australia, Argentina, Mongolia and Canada.

Navoi Mining & Metallurgy Combinat (NMMC) - Initially founded in the 1950s for uranium ore mining and processing at the Uchkuduk Deposit, NMMC is now among the ten largest uranium and gold producers in the world.

Rio Tinto plc - This is one of the world's most diversified mining companies. The group also includes Rossing in Namibia and Energy Resources of Australia (ERA). Both companies supply uranium oxide for use in electricity generation.

Rossing Uranium Mine - Plenty of corporate (including media releases) and operational information on the site of this Namibian uranium mine.

Saskatchewan Industry and Resources (SIR) - The Exploration and Geological Services Division promotes mineral exploration and development by maintaining a geoscience database, and administering the disposition of metallic and industrial mineral claims on Crown lands. SIR manages its mineral resources through the administration of royalty and tax systems, and collecting and maintaining production and sales information.

UraMin Inc - The company was established to acquire and develop uranium properties throughout the world. UraMin is currently focusing on the development of their advanced exploration project, the Trekkopje Uranium Project in Namibia.

Uranerz Energy Corp - The company is involved in uranium exploration and mining. Uranerz's corporate goal is to create shareholder wealth through the discovery or acquisition of quality uranium deposits, and developing those deposits into profitable producing mines using low cost mining methods such as in-situ and heap leach technologies. The company is focused in Wyoming, USA, Mongolia and Saskatchewan, Canada.

Urangesellschaft mbH (UG) - This is an international uranium mining and trading company. It supplies nuclear power plants with natural and enriched uranium, with separative work, and renders all services connected with such supplies.

Uranium Miner - Uranium Miner provides insight into uranium resource companies that offer outstanding properties, management and experience in the mining/exploration industry. Includes a comprehensive list of uranium mining companies. Also includes a glossary of uranium mining and general mining terms.

Uranium One Inc - The company is engaged in the exploration and development of uranium and gold resource properties in South Africa, Australia and Canada. The company's principal assets are the Dominion Uranium Project in South Africa, the Honeymoon Uranium Project in Australia and, through its majority-owned subsidiary, Aflease Gold Ltd, the Modder East Gold Project in South Africa. Through a joint venture with Pitchstone Exploration Ltd, the company is also engaged in the acquisition and development of uranium exploration properties in the Athabasca Basin in Saskatchewan, Canada.

Uranium Resources Inc (URI) - The Group's principal activities are to acquire, explore, develop and mine uranium properties. The Group uses the in-situ leach (ISL) mining process to extract uranium.

Uranium SA - This web site is designed to inform the general community about the current and potential uranium mining operations in South Australia. It also deals with issues related to the use and management of uranium in the context of safety and sustainable development.

UrAsia Energy - The company's annualized production is an estimated 1.4 million pounds of uranium, which comes from its 70% interest in the Akdala in-situ leach uranium mine in Kazakhstan. The company's goal is to be producing in excess of 10 million pounds annually by 2015 from at least three assets in Central Asia.

Wyoming Mining Association - Uranium (WMA) - Everything about the uranium industry in Wyoming, including a useful library of articles about the uranium industry, geological information, and technical information about the mining operations.

Junior Uranium Companies

Adresmin Gold Corp - This Canadian company has entered into negotiations with a private Peruvian prospector to acquire a 'high- quality' uranium project in Peru.

Alberta Star Development Corp - Alberta Star has high hopes for its Longtom property in Canada's Great Bear area in the Northwest Territories. The company has called this property its 'Olympic Dam-style' iron, copper, gold, silver, cobalt, and uranium project.

Aldershot Resources Ltd - This is a Canadian based company focused in uranium exploration with projects in Quebec, Australia and Zambia.

Altius Minerals Corp - The company has entered into a joint venture with JNR Resources Inc to develop the Rocky Brook uranium property in western Newfoundland, Canada. Altius and partner Fronteer Development Group have a uranium exploration program under way in the central mineral belt of Labrador.

Bayswater Uranium Corp - This is a Canadian based exploration company with a large, highly prospective and diverse property base. Bayswater is focused mainly on uranium, with properties in each of Canada's major uranium producing and exploration regions.

Bitterroot Resources Ltd - This Canadian company has entered into an option/joint venture agreement with Cameco Corp covering exploration targets within a 780 square mile area in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, USA.

CanAlaska - The company is a mineral exploration firm exploring for uranium in the Athabasca Basin of Saskatchewan, Canada. Since September 2004, the company has assembled one of the largest exploration portfolios in the region.

Commander Resources - This is a Canadian junior exploration company with control one of the largest new gold districts in Canada and a new uranium belt in Newfoundland.

Consolidated Abaddon - This is a Canadian uranium exploration company actively involved with the development of properties in the Athabasca Basin of Northern Saskatchewan and the Sims Basin of Labrador. Property partners include International Uranium Corp and Triex Minerals Corp.

Crosshair Exploration & Mining - This is a Canadian uranium and gold exploration and development company with projects in Newfoundland and Labrador. The company has developed into a dominant player in the exploration for uranium in the Central Mineral Belt of Labrador.

Dejour Enterprises Ltd - This Canadian company has aggressively been researching and acquiring uranium properties in the Saskatchewan Athabasca Basin.

El Nino Ventures Inc - The company is a major landholder in the Bancroft region of Ontario, Canada, with its option on 8 uranium properties, on which it may earn 100% interest, in the townships of Faraday, Cardiff, and Monmouth. The properties in total are comprised of 37 mineral claims containing 247 claim units, and the claims cover a total of some 3952 hectares.

Energy Metals Corp - In 2004, Energy Metals (formerly Clan Resources) acquired a 100% interest in the Aurora uranium property in Oregon and in uranium properties in Utah, Wyoming, and Arizona.

Firestone Ventures Inc - This Canadian company's portfolio includes a 100% interest in more than 110,000 acres of land in southwestern Alberta.

Fjordland Exploration Inc - The company has an option to earn up to 80% in the Olympic-Rob copper-gold-uranium project located in Yukon, Canada.

Formation Capital Corp - This Canadian company, through its wholly owned subsidiaries, has interests in base, precious metal and uranium projects in Canada, the United States and Mexico.

Forsys Metals Corp - This Canadian company recently completed a transaction to acquire 90% interest in the Valencia Uranium Deposit in Namibia, while the remaining 10% is owned by Ongopolo Mining & Processing

Forum Uranium Corp - This is a Canadian-based energy company with a focus on the acquisition, exploration and development of energy projects. The company has a 100% interest in over 165,000 hectares of uranium exploration properties located in the prolific Athabasca Basin, Saskatchewan and a 65% interest in the Costigan Lake Joint Venture nearby the Key Lake uranium mine.

Fronteer Development Group - In September 2004, Fronteer announced that it and its partner, Northwestern Development Group, had intersected high-grade uranium mineralization in a recent drill program at the Longtom property in Canada's Northwest Territories. Fronteer is also a partner with Altius Mineral Corp on a uranium exploration program in Labrador, Canada, and with Albert Star.

Globex Mining Enterprises Inc - This is a Canadian-based exploration company with a very large North American portfolio of advanced properties with gold, copper, zinc, silver, uranium, platinum, palladium, magnesium and talc potential.

International KRL Resources Corp (IRK) - The company has acquired an option on 52 claims at the Nor property in the Yukon Territory, Canada. IRK has also acquired a mineral claim block on the Carswell Dome Formation in Saskatchewan.

JNR Resources Inc (JNR) - The company has a joint venture with International Uranium Corp (IUC) to explore the Moore Lake area of northern Saskatchewan, Canada, for uranium. JNR is also planning to explore for uranium at its 100%-owned Black Lake project on the north rim of the Athabasca Basin. It has a joint venture with Altius Minerals on exploring for uranium in Newfoundland.

Khan Resources Inc - The company, through a subsidiary, owns 58% of the former-producing Dornod uranium property in the Dornod region of eastern Mongolia. This property hosts two separate deposits - the #2 open pit which was previously mined by the Russians, and the extensively explored #7 undergound deposit.

Landmark Minerals Inc - This is a Canadian junior exploration company focused on exploring and developing uranium properties in Algeria.

Laramide Resources Ltd - This Canadian company is acquiring the Westmoreland copper/gold/uranium project in Queensland, Australia. Laramide expects this developmental-stage project to become its 'flagship asset'.

Logan Resources Ltd - The company acquired the Carswell property, consisting of 7552 hectares located in the Athabasca Basin, Canada, in 2004.

Mesa Uranium Inc - This is a Canadian exploration company focused on exploring for uranium on the 100% owned Lisbon Valley Project in the historic Lisbon Valley Mining District in Southeastern Utah, USA.

Northern Continental Resources Inc (NCR) - The company is planning an exploration program for the Russell Lake uranium project in the Athabasca Basin of Saskatchewan, Canada.

Northwestern Mineral Ventures Inc - This is an emerging junior exploration company, which is concentrating on the acquisition of properties with potential uranium and/or silver-gold targets. The company has acquired 100% exploration rights to two uranium concessions in Niger, and also has an option to earn up to 75% ownership of the Waterbury Project, which consists of nine uranium claims in the Athabasca Basin, Saskatchewan, Canada.

Paladin Resources Ltd - This is an Australian listed company involved in the mineral resource sector with projects both in Australia and Africa. The resource arm of Paladin has a strong emphasis on uranium. With the recent acquisition of the Langer Heinrich Uranium Project in Namibia, Paladin believes that, in combination with its Kayelekera Project in Malawi, it has control of the two most advanced uranium projects in Africa.

Pan African Mining Corp - This Canadian company is an exploratory resource company with approximately 10,000 square kilometres of diversified mineral properties and 2500 square kilometres of uranium properties in Madagascar. The company is exploring these properties for gold, uranium, precious stones, base metals and industrial commodities.

Pathfinder Resources Ltd - This is a mineral exploration company focused on the discovery of world-class uranium deposits. Pathfinder has the largest land position in Canada's Thelon Basin region, recognized as one of the most prospective areas for discovery of high-grade uranium deposits. The Company's other uranium interests include 88,000 acres in the Hermitage Uranium Belt of Newfoundland, and a partnership in a uranium syndicate formed to acquire prospective uranium properties in Central America.

Pitchstone Exploration Ltd - This is a public company exploring for uranium in Canada. Pitchstone began acquiring land in early 2003 in the heart of the eastern Athabasca Basin uranium district in proximity to the major, high-grade uranium producers. Currently the company owns 50 to 100% interest in the mineral rights to more than 200,000 hectares of land situated in the eastern Athabasca Basin, Saskatchewan and in the Hornby Bay Basin, Nunavut and Northwest Territories.

Quincy Gold Corp - The company has been staking claims for uranium-containing property in the Horse Creek area of Natrona County, Wyoming (an area formerly explored by Phillips Petroleum and Union Carbide) and in Sandoval County, New Mexico. Quincy Gold is also pursuing a controlling interest in the Hosta Butte deposit in New Mexico, the Hansen deposit in Colorado, and a property in the Churchrock area of New Mexico.

Rampart Ventures Ltd - The company has been acquiring uranium properties in the Thunder Bay area of northern Ontario, Canada.

Rodinia Minerals Inc - This Canadian company has entered into an option agreement with Cooper Minerals of Nevada, USA, to buy a 100% interest in the Workman Creek uranium deposit in Gilia County, Arizona.

Santoy Resources Ltd - This Canadian company has actively been acquiring strategically located uranium properties within four main geographic locations for uranium occurrences: the Athabasca Basin in Saskatchewan, Southeast British Columbia, the Central Mineral Belt of Labrador, and in the USA.

Solex Resources Corp - This Canadian company specializes in the acquisition and development of uranium and base metal- properties in Peru.

Solitaire Minerals Corp - The company has increased its uranium landholdings in the Riou Lake area of northern Saskatchewan, Canada.

Starfire Minerals Inc - The company has optioned the Capri uranium prospect near Gran Remous, Quebec, Canada.

Strathmore Minerals Corp - The company has uranium properties in the US, Canada, and Peru. It is evaluating the NoseRock area in New Mexico for a possible underground operation or in situ leach operation.

Summit Resources Ltd - The company is focussed on uranium,copper, gold and base metal exploration and mine development projects in the Mount Isa metals province in northwest Queensland, Australia.

Thelon Ventures Ltd - The company's portfolio includes uranium properties in the Athabasca Basin, Canada and Nevada's White River Valley, USA.

Titan Uranium Inc - The company is focused on the discovery of high grade uranium in Canada. It is currently exploring projects in the Thelon and Athabasca basins, Canada.

Trend Mining Co - The company has signed a letter of intent with Nuinsco Resources Ltd as 'a prelude to a joint venture agreement relating to Trend's Cree Lake/Diabase Peninsula Project in Saskatchewan'. Under these arrangements, Nuinsco will assume operating management and will explore for uranium mineralization on mining claims that Trend owns or holds under a purchase option in the Athabasca Basin, Canada.

Triex Minerals Corp - The company has entered into an agreement with Roughrider Uranium Corp to acquire a 51% interest in approximately 220,000 acres in the Athabasca Basin in Northeast Alberta, Canada, in an area known as the Old Fort Bay property. Triex and Roughrider have jointly acquired a 50% interest in 11,000 acres situated in the Maybelle River area with Strathmore Minerals Corp.

U3O8 Corp - This is a private Canadian junior exploration company which, through a 100% wholly-owned subsidiary, has been granted a reconnaissance permit to carry out geological and geophysical surveys for uranium over an area of 579,500 hectares in western Guyana, South America.

UEX Corp - The company was formed under an agreement between Cameco Corp and Pioneer Metals Corp and is an active explorer in the Athabasca Basin in northern Saskatchewan, Canada. UEX has a total of 13 projects either 100%-owned, joint ventured or under option totaling approximately 248,000 hectares located in the eastern, western and northern perimeters of the Athabasca Basin.

UGL Enterprises Ltd - In late December 2004, UGL announced that it had closed on its acquisition of a 100% interest in the Naidal uranium project located in northeast Mongolia for US$5,000 in cash and 100,000 shares of the company's stock. UGL said it also has several other uranium projects in Mongolia under review.

United Carina Resources Corp - This Canadian company owns the Hatchet Lake uranium prospect, consisting of 16,990 hectares of contiguous claims that have been subject to previous exploration for uranium. The properties are located approximately 18 miles north and northeast of Rabbit Lake, McLean Lake, Collins Bay and Eagle Point uranium deposits.

Universal Uranium Ltd - The company has negotiated an agreement to explore and develop the Lisbon Valley Property in Utah, USA. The Lisbon Valley was home to 16 previous producing uranium mines.

UNOR Inc - Formerly named Hornby Bay Exploration Ltd, the company is principally a mineral exploration company engaged in the exploration of its mineral properties, with uranium its primary focus. UNOR currently has mineral projects in Nunavut; Ontario; Manitoba; and British Columbia.

Uranium Energy Corp (UEC) - The company is engaged in the acquisition and development of uranium resources in the south western United States. UEC has 13 properties in 5 states, including one project in Texas, currently being permitted for ISL mining.

Uranium Power Corp (UPC) - This Vancouver, Canada, based company is engaged in the exploration and development of high- grade, low-cost uranium properties in the Athabasca Basin of northern Saskatchewan.

Uravan Minerals Inc - The company is planning to use the proceeds from the private placement of shares in the company to fund exploration at its Boomerang uranium and gold property in the southwest Thelon Basin of the Northwest Territories, Canada.

Vena Resources Inc - This Canadian company is dedicated to exploring and developing mineral properties in Peru. Vena has entered into joint venture and purchase options on a number of prospective properties and uranium initiatives.

Western Prospector Group Ltd - This Canadian company announced in December 2004 that it had acquired three additional uranium properties in the Saddle Hills uranium basin in northeastern Mongolia. The acquisition, the company said, brought Western Prospector's total holdings to 100,659 contiguous hectares in the Saddle Hills basin.

Yankee Hat Minerals Ltd - The company has signed a binding letter of intent to acquire a 50% interest in uranium on permits covering some 18-million acres in the North West Territories of Canada.

Blog Action Day: Protecting the Environment Protects Our Children

2007-10-15T13:10:00.000-07:00

Protecting the Environment Protects Our Children

One-man 'occupation' of Slim Buttes protests uranium

2007-09-29T07:28:00.001-07:00

Forest Service denies runoff sickening residents
By Bill Harlan, Journal staff

Harold One Feather is waging a one-man protest to spur the U.S. Forest Service into a quicker clean-up of an old uranium mine in the Slim Buttes in northwestern South Dakota.

“I’m a true environmentalist,” One Feather quipped in a static-plagued cell phone conversation from his remote campsite. “I’m actually out in the environment.”

One Feather, founder of the new Grand River Environmental Equality Network, said he was "occupying" the Slim Buttes, which are part of Custer National Forest.

One Feather said he had been mostly alone at his campsite since he arrived Sunday, but he is expecting more protesters from Standing Rock Indian Reservation.

The Grand River runs from Custer National Forest through several communities on the Standing Rock reservation, about 60 miles to the east.

One Feather and other Standing Rock residents say runoff from uranium mines may be making people on the reservation sick, though the Forest Service denies that charge.

"The answer to that is a proven 'no,'" Forest Service spokeswoman Laurie Walters-Clark said.

However, the Forest Service is investigating the extent of contamination caused by at least one a small uranium mine in the Slim Buttes. That investigation began last summer and should be complete by the end of this summer, Walters-Clark said. The investigation also includes several small exploration pits.

Walters-Clark is the Forest Service's on-scene coordinator for a $20 million Superfund clean-up of uranium mines set to begin this summer in the nearby Cave Hills, also in Custer National Forest.

A Forest Service study in 2005, and a study released this year by the South Dakota School of Mines &Technology, found higher than normal levels of uranium, molybdenum, arsenic and other metals on federal and private land near the mines.

The studies tested sediment, topsoil, groundwater and air. "Most of the health risks would be from ingesting materials," Walters-Clark said.

The clean-up on federal land in the Cave Hills will include re-grading and re-vegetating some ground. On land with the highest level of contamination, sediment and topsoil will be scraped off and removed to a clay-lined dump, Walters-Clark said.

Private land affected by run-off from federal land also will be cleaned up, Walters-Clark said.

Mines in the North Cave Hills unit of the national forest were operated by Kerr-McGee, now Tronox Inc. of Oklahoma City. Tronox is paying $15 million for the clean-up, which is regulated under the federal Superfund law.

The Forest Service is paying $5 million to clean up the site because original mine owners of the brief 1950s uranium boom are long gone, Walters-Clark said. "There were a lot of mom and pop operations," Walters-Clark said. "There were no responsible parties left."

Tronox expects to complete the Cave Hills cleanup in two or three years, Walters-Clark said.

There also were uranium mines in the South Cave Hills and at least one mine in the Slim Buttes, Walters-Clark said, but those operations were smaller. A clean-up there would be at least two years away.

Walters-Clark said the Forest Service had been studying the problem since the early 1990. "It's simply a long process," she acknowledged. "The Forest Service had to prove there was a hazard."

But Walters-Clark said contamination from uranium mines on the national forest did not threaten the health of people who live on the Grand River, which the state monitors. "There are state laws and regulations, and we're adhering to them," she said.

So far, the Forest Service has been unable to convince One Feather and other members of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe that the old uranium mines do not pose a threat to their communities downstream. "There's a lack of trust," Walters-Clark said.

The Forest Service has not responded to One Feather's one-man occupation of the Slim Buttes. "I saw him on the road," Walters-Clark said. "He's not doing anything illegal. He's just using his national forest."

Contact Bill Harlan at 394-8424 or bill.harlan@rapidcityjournal.com

WHAT? NRC's Feels 9-11 tragedy not a threat to NUKE PLANTS

2007-09-22T07:48:00.001-07:00

UPI.com: NRC: Airplane crash not nuke-plant concern

NRC: Airplane crash not nuke-plant concern
U.S. nuclear regulators approved a new rule to protect plants from terrorist attacks, though anti-nuclear groups say it should have included airplane crashes.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission approved Monday a final rule for security governing the design basis threat on U.S. nuclear plants.
"This rule is an important piece, but only one piece, of a broader effort to enhance nuclear power plant security," said Dale Klein, chairman of the NRC. "Overall we are taking a multi-faceted approach to security enhancements in this post 9/11 threat environment, and looking at how best to secure existing nuclear power plants and how to incorporate security enhancements into design features of new reactors that may be built in coming years."
The ruling, which the NRC says is the first of many, creates security criteria for new nuclear plants. Future rules may enhance security assessment requirements for new reactors and physical protection of reactors.
But groups have urged the NRC to use the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks as a model for protecting plants. They criticized the NRC for not requiring protection of a large ground force or large aircraft attack.
"Rather than requiring measures to prevent a plane crash from damaging vulnerable parts of a nuclear plant, which would be the smartest course, the government is relying on post-crash measures and evacuation plans to attempt to 'mitigate' the public's exposure to radiation," Michelle Boyd, legislative director of Public Citizen's energy program, said in a statement.
"Nuclear terrorism prevention is far more prudent than trying to reduce radiation exposures after the fact," she added.
An NRC statement said the commission rejected a "beamhenge" approach -- using steal beams and cables to prevent a plane from reaching a reactor -- and said the ruling "does not require protection against a deliberate hit by a large aircraft."
"The NRC has already required its licensees to take steps to mitigate the effects of large fires and explosions from any type of initiating event. The active protection against airborne threats is addressed by other federal organizations, including the military."
UPI

Astonishing tower collapse screams "No New Nukes!!"

2007-08-27T00:09:00.000-07:00

August 27, 2007

A cooling tower at the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power plant has collapsed.

A broken 54" pipe there has spewed 350,000 gallons per minute of contaminated, overheated water into the Earth. "The river water piping and the series of screens and supports failed," said a company spokesman. They "fell to the ground."

The public and media were barred from viewing the wreckage for three days. But when a Congressional Energy Bill conference committee takes up Senate-approved loan guarantees for building new nukes this fall, what will reactor backers say about this latest pile of radioactive rubble?

This kind of event can make even hardened nuke opponents pinch themselves and read the descriptions twice. Who could make this up?

Vermont Yankee has been in operation---more or less---since the early 1970s. Its owner is Entergy, a multi-reactor "McNuke" operator that last year got approval to up VY's output by 20%.

Required inspections revealed worrisome cracks and other structural problems. Entergy dismissed all that, but was forced to issue a "ratepayer protection policy" against incidents caused by the power increase. The guarantee expired earlier this month, not long before the collapse.

The tower came down amidst angry negotiations between Entergy and plant workers. A strike was barely averted, but VY's labor troubles are by no means over.

The reactor's output has now been slashed 50%. A public battle is raging over whether it can dump water even hotter than usual into the Connecticut River. Reactors in Alabama, France and elsewhere have been forced shut because the rivers that cool them have exceeded 90 degrees.

Yankee's cooling system, vintage 1972, centers on 22 (now 21) wood, fiberglass and metal towers that stretch for 300 feet, and are 50 feet high and 40 feet wide. The company calls this giant rig a "rain forest."

Operators admit to hearing "strange sounds" coming from its fans last week, but say Tuesday's collapse was unexpected.

Nuclear opponents who warned about such an event have been scorned by Entergy and its supporters. That something as apparently absurd as the spontaneous collapse of an entire cooling tower could actually occur underlines America's Keystone Kops reality of atomic operation and regulation. "We need to understand what happened," explains the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Diane Screnci.

So does Congress. A definitive Conference Committee battle will be fought after Labor Day over an Energy Bill that includes taxpayer guarantees for $50 billion and more to build new nukes.

Meanwhile Vermonters will pay for this latest pile of radioactive reactor rubble. Maybe a "fall foliage" field trip to the Green Mountain State would do the Congress some good.

--
Harvey Wasserman's SOLARTOPIA: OUR GREEN-POWERED EARTH, A.D. 2030, is available at www.solartopia.org. He is senior advisor to Greenpeace USA and the Nuclear Information & Resource Service, and senior editor of Freepress.org, where this article first appeared.

Vermont Yankee cooling tower catastrophic failure

2007-08-24T14:24:00.000-07:00

The Barre-Montpelier Times Argus
Ruling out sabotage, I wonder if the NRC and Homeland Security will consider Entergy to be managed by fools and termites lol

This is serious, nuclear catastrophic accidents shouldn't be left for hindsight...why aren't the regulatory authorities investigating the entire nuclear industry...because they rely on self-reporting by the nuclear industry...that is like asking the fox in the henhouse, how many chickens he ate...

My Personal Agenda Against South Dakota Abandoned Uranium Mines

2007-08-23T14:21:00.000-07:00

My Personal Mission against Uranium Mining and the Nuclear Industry

1. To demand the comprehensive and total clean up of abandoned uranium mines with the Slim Buttes and Cave Hills, and not just one at a time as the US Forest Service is stating it is doing.

2. To consider the negative health effects of low-dose ionizing radiation exposure through surface water, ground water and air transport; especially as this has been occurring to my community Rock Creek (Bullhead, SD). We feel that the US Forest Service's negligence of considering the Rock Creek communities concern that the uranium mines are causing extreme health crises within the community is tantamount to genocide and racism.

3. To revise the US Forest Service Sioux Oil and Gas Leasing Final Environmental Impact Statement to either start an Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement or start the EIS process anew to include tribal communities' extreme health concerns. This is our main point that the US Forest Service although hearing testimony from Rock Creek community members about their increasing rates of cancer, birth problems, and diabetes, they didn't include this in the FEIS and replied that the commenting period is over. They were told numerous times about what the sickness and deaths happening downstream, yet they purposefully ignore our concerns. This too is genocide and racism!

4. We demand that all current leases involving uranium, oil, gas as well as other mineral resources be outlawed in the Slim Buttes and Cave Hills and those existing outstanding leases be allowed to expire without renewal of these leases.

5. We demand that the name of the Custer National Forest be changed to Crazy Horse National Forest; this is upon the advice of the story told to LaDonna Brave Bull-Allard by Johnson Holy Rock and Elaine Quiver: that the Slim Buttes and Cave Hills was one of Crazy Horse's favorite places and is part of the Powder River basin that as a condition of his surrender would be his permanent reservation. For this he was murdered at Fort Robinson.

6. We demand that the Sioux Ranger District be renamed Paha Zizipila as this is its true Lakota name.

The Contest Begins in Earnest

2007-08-20T09:03:00.000-07:00

As we enter this new day in the Nuclear Renaissance in which a majority of the herd are hoping foolishly that nuclear energy will save us from the inevitable meltdown of our climate, I feel that more public involvement is needed from a more independent perspective, namely ours, the Native Americans, Indians or the People you stole land from where your precious uranium lies underneath.

Our legend has it that uranium is Iya (pronounced EYE--EEE-YAA); it is a black monster, a brother to Iktomi, the trickster. Since Iya eats people from the inside as does cancer, Inyan Hokshila (Stone Boy) buried deep under the earth to protect people from the black monster. Iya is an ancient spirit, also kin to the Unktehila (dinosaurs) and Unkcegila (cavemen), who also ate people. From our perspective, we feel that Inyan Hoksila walks with us and he does because he is me.

As one that has been fighting Iya for 11 years alone, gathering my resources for this day when they will be useful to all that need this; I have lost many precious people to Iya, to cancer. My parents passed on long ago, my relatives passed on long ago and I am alone.

These are my words, not parroted from some white person or copied from some arcane website...the nuclear industry has a weakness, it is us, the Native Americans. They need us to accept again as did the Navajo did long ago their wishes to rape and desecrate our Grandmother Earth through mining and deforestation, polluting our precious water, killing our future...they have sent many lackeys, including their token Injuns under the name NAEG (Native American Energy Group) and even sometimes those token Injuns don't know they are token Injuns (they know who they are).

In our community Rock Creek (Bullhead, South Dakota) on the Standing Rock Sioux Indian Reservation, we have chased down and booted out NAEG, chastising their lackeys for being anti-Native, exposing them for being nothing but bootlickers as they know themselves to be. NAEG offered wind power, solar power, oil wells and ISL uranium mining and each time our community shot them down, saying you are here to rip us off. Evidently NAEG thought the southern tribes of Pine Ridge and Rosebud would be ignorant but the moccasin trail beat them to those reservations and opposition has started against them; NAEG will fail!!!

As this relates to the nation-wide putsch in nuclear energy, the corporations are doing the same thing to the public, lying to them that nuclear energy will save us from global warming and catastrophic climate change! They even present animated maps showing the east coast underwater, glaciers melting, the polar ice caps disappearing. These are their lies they use and while it is true these natural events are happening, they have been happening because we are polluting our environment, killing our Grandmother Earth, not because we need nuclear energy!!!

The corporations are broke, they need government subsidies and loans to start building their nuclear reactors...most are heavily financed by debt and bonds. These bonds are coming due but they can't pay them since they don't have the cash! This is their weakness-if they don't get the loans and grants through GNEP (Global Nuclear Energy Partnership) and if they don't get the cheap sources of uranium from within this country...THEY WILL GO BANKRUPT!!!

We need to form a common ground in the anti-nuclear movement to cause this to happen...if we are successful and I know we will be; these corporations will lose control of their stranglehold over their customers and giving the power back to the people where it truly belongs through cooperative ownership of electrical power!!!

We need to bring all facets of this issue together: mining, weapons, reactors, and waste! We do this and they will concede defeat!!!!! And our environment will be safe, our Grandmother Earth will begin to heal herself!!!

BAN URANIUM MINING
STOP NEW REACTOR LICENSING
OPPOSE GNEP
SHUT DOWN ALL REACTOR UP FOR RELICENSING

SHUT DOWN INDIAN POINT!!!!!

Asheville NC - Southeast Convergence for Climate Action

2007-08-18T10:46:00.000-07:00

The convergence really rocked...gave me hope that, although the nuclear madness sickens me, that somewhere out there a group of young people are slamming down corporatism!!!

kudos to them!!!!

Maps and more maps - lost in a nuclear maze

2007-08-05T19:29:00.000-07:00

After looking at the following maps and what they signify, you'll coming to the conclusion that nuclear renaissance is a feint meant to distract the public from their true objectives which, in my opinion is storing nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain.

Most of the spent nuclear fuel is being stored mainly in the eastern half of the United States as shown the maps below. Then if you consider that this area is also where most of the nuclear reactors are located while the rest of the country only has a few reactors in their backyards. This squeeze play comes about after the Barnwell nuclear waste storage closes its door to all the states except for New Jersey, South Carolina and Connecticut.

Locations of Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations

Map of Power Reactor Sites

Locations of Uranium Milling Facilities

Nuclear Waste Transportation Routes

Finally this map reinforces my theory that the nuclear renaissance is another chic word like global warming. If you notice on a previous map the Southeast has the highest concentrations of nuclear reactors but on this map the Southeast is not pursuing clean energy as a goal. In other words they'd rather take the chance of a major catastrophic failure at one of their nuclear reactors than to contribute in reducing global warming and reduce the amount of nuclear waste.

Is this risk worth it?

Renewable Electricity Standards at Work in the States

Now to end this, I feel that in Congress the southeastern states are a self-serving voting bloc while the western, northeastern and midwest states are not as organized and therefore cannot win any major concessions on clean renewable energy and probably can't stop the upcoming federal subsidies and loan guarantees promoting the nuclear energy industry.

James Lovelock and the big bang

2007-08-05T04:32:00.001-07:00

Green Left - James Lovelock and the big bang

Jim Green
3 August 2007

British scientist James Lovelock, famous for his Gaia theory of the earth as a self-regulating organism, was in Adelaide on July 7-8, speaking at the Festival of Ideas. He has researched across a range of disciplines and has much of interest to say. But on the topic of nuclear power, Lovelock is inaccurate and irresponsible.

“Modern nuclear power stations are useless for making bombs”, Lovelock told the ABC’s Lateline program on May 30, 2006. That is in stark contrast to comments last year by former US Vice-President Al Gore, who said: “For eight years in the White House, every weapons’ proliferation problem we dealt with was connected to a civilian reactor program … if we ever got to the point where we wanted to use nuclear reactors to back out a lot of coal … then we’d have to put them in so many places we’d run that proliferation risk right off the reasonability scale.”

Which of these climate campaigners is right — Lovelock or Gore?

A typical nuclear power reactor produces about 300 kilograms of plutonium each year, sufficient for about 30 nuclear weapons. There is no dispute that this “reactor-grade” plutonium can be used in weapons, though the use of weapon-grade plutonium increases their reliability and destructive force.

Power reactors can also be used to produce weapon-grade plutonium, which is ideal for nuclear weapons. All that needs to be done is to shorten the amount of time that the nuclear fuel is irradiated in a reactor. This results in a higher percentage of plutonium-239 relative to other, unwanted, isotopes, such as plutonium-240, 241 and 242.

A typical power reactor can produce hundreds of kilograms of weapon-grade plutonium annually and just a few kilograms are required for one weapon as powerful as that dropped on Nagasaki.

The proliferation risks associated with nuclear power are not just hypothetical. India uses power reactors in its nuclear weapons program (although research reactors have been the main source of plutonium). Under a proposed nuclear agreement between India and the United States, India has announced that 14 of its power reactors will be subject to international safeguards inspections, but a further eight will not be safeguarded and can be used for weapons production.

North Korea’s nuclear bomb test last October used plutonium produced in a so-called “experimental power reactor”. The US uses a power reactor to produce tritium, which is used to increase the destructive force of nuclear weapons. The US has also published details of a successful weapon test in 1962 using reactor-grade plutonium.

Australia’s nuclear history also demonstrates the link between nuclear power and weapons. On several occasions in the 1950s and 1960s, federal cabinet received submissions arguing that one “advantage” of nuclear power reactors is that they inevitably produce plutonium that can be used in weapons.

From 1969 until his resignation in 1971, Liberal PM John Gorton pursued a plan to build a power reactor at Jervis Bay on the NSW coast. He later acknowledged that the reactor was to produce not just electricity but also plutonium for potential use in weapons. The Jervis Bay plan was scrapped by Gorton’s Liberal successor, Billy McMahon.

Nuclear power programs have indirectly supported a number of weapons programs by providing a rationale for acquiring uranium enrichment plants, research and training reactors, or reprocessing plants. Five of the 10 countries to have developed nuclear weapons did so under cover of a “civil” program: India and Israel use research reactors to produce plutonium for weapons; South Africa and Pakistan acquired enrichment technology and produced highly enriched uranium bombs; and North Korea used its “experimental power reactor” for plutonium production.

Iraq’s nuclear weapons program from the 1970s to 1991 illustrates the indirect links between power and weapons. Iraq never actually built power reactors, but its professed interest in nuclear power facilitated the acquisition of a vast amount of nuclear technology and expertise, which was put to use in the weapons program. It was later described in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists as a “shop-till-you-drop” weapons program, with much of the shopping done openly.

According to Khidhir Hamza, a senior nuclear scientist involved in Iraq’s weapons program: “Acquiring nuclear technology within the [International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA] safeguards system was the first step in establishing the infrastructure necessary to develop nuclear weapons. In 1973, we decided to acquire a 40-megawatt research reactor, a fuel manufacturing plant, and nuclear fuel reprocessing facilities, all under cover of acquiring the expertise needed to eventually build and operate nuclear power plants, and produce and recycle nuclear fuel. Our hidden agenda was to clandestinely develop the expertise and infrastructure needed to produce weapon-grade plutonium.”

Iraq’s nuclear weapons program continued until the 1991 Gulf War, yet the IAEA failed to detect it, or its use of “safeguarded” research reactors to produce materials used in tests of “dirty” radiation bombs. The Iraq debacle prompted efforts to tighten the safeguards system, but the current IAEA director-general, Dr Mohamed El Baradei, characterises those efforts as “half hearted”.

Nuclear power is the one and only energy source with a repeatedly demonstrated connection to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. To deny that connection — as James Lovelock does — is inaccurate, irresponsible and potentially dangerous.

[Dr Jim Green is an anti-nuclear campaigner with Friends of the Earth.]

Deep Ecology Renascence

2007-08-03T23:07:00.000-07:00

After finding this in Google search, I began understanding that the modern environmental movement sets itself contrapositive to protecting the earth; being just another fad for sedating its adherents into a false sense of being one with nature. By commercializing the modern environmental movement, the would-be environmentalist is lured into buying T-shirts, refrigerator magnets, bumper stickers, organic clothing, "natural" foods and conserving electricity, gasoline and water: this clearly isn't protecting the earth from harm, instead these acts only devalue the effects of the root cause: the rampant destruction of our environment. In essence, the more unscrupulous industrial movement whose sole purpose is to ruthlessly exploit the earth's natural resources in the name of profit and God has found another resource to exploit through greenwashing, the unwary environmentalist.

Therefore I have decided to include this in my blog, but reluctantly; I already consider myself a man with a deep understanding of our environment and humanity. Seeing that this could be another label that isn't necessarily a bad label, it is a label nonetheless. Perhaps I just need to see if I can find others that feel the same way about this deep ecology movement and share with them the insights into our world that I was given by others that have passed on into the next world.

DEEP ECOLOGY

1) The well-being and flourishing of human and nonhuman life on Earth have value in themselves (synonyms: inherent worth; intrinsic value; inherent value). These values are independent of the usefulness of the nonhuman world for human purposes.

For me this means that if we decide to exit this world through some fantastic catastrophic self-extermination such as nuclear combat or biochemical warfare, then the world would still exist. In other words, contrary to religious belief, this world doesn't belong to us, we belong to this world. We are its children as are all other living and non-living beings sharing it with us. We are also only have a limited lifespan as individuals, temporally we existed as a species only for such a small moment in time; our future depends on us understanding the further deeper outlook that long after we have passed into the other world, our works in this life should reflect this understanding.

2) Richness and diversity of life forms contribute to the realization of these values and are also values in themselves.

Simply put, flowers are pretty, certain animals and fish are extremely beautiful. Our appreciation of these aesthetic qualities are also related to our understanding or misunderstanding of our earth. Each person, each individual has their own beliefs, emotions and insights into this, we hope that we share this same value.

3) Humans have no right to reduce this richness and diversity except to satisfy vital needs.

To waste the earth's natural resources, to pollute our air, land and water is contrary to furthering ourselves as species; we should take what we need, saving more for our future. The property ownership concept negates this thought, profit should not be held for only one, rather they must be shared by all.

4) Present human interference with the nonhuman world is excessive, and the situation is rapidly worsening.

Oceans, lakes, and the ground water are being polluted at a rate that exceeds understanding; we need water yet we poison it thinking that it is limitless, can one make water pure again using your own hands. This is bad, but it is overlooked since all one has to do is turn on the tap. The water pollution must stop now or tomorrow water will become the currency of existence and of life.

5) The flourishing of human life and cultures is compatible with a substantial decrease of the human population. The flourishing of nonhuman life requires such a decrease.

Although this seems contrary to the rights to reproduce in vast numbers, there is a limit to our reproduction as is seen in Africa and Asia where overpopulation is causing their societies to war, to destroy themselves.

6) Policies must therefore be changed. The changes in policies affect basic economic, technological structures. The resulting state of affairs will be deeply different from the present.

As the leading nation in the democratric principles our responsibility as an example to the rest of the world is becoming tarnished with acts contrary to freedom and ecological preservation. The environmental laws are routinely subsumed as mere hindrances to the laws of environmental exploitation. We have to change this for the better or our existence is threatened.

7) The ideological change is mainly that of appreciating life quality (dwelling in situations of inherent worth) rather than adhering to an increasingly higher standard of living. There will be a profound awareness of the difference between big and great.

For myself, living simply while living happy is my ultimate goal; society dictates otherwise, causing sadness and sorrow, the overbearing sense of hopelessness...I am not perfect, I am far from it, but every day I get closer to this understanding that imperfection is only seen from the eyes of the other. With others we have shared this ideology that if we share each other's lives, we are making each other that much more perfect, happy without sadness, sorrow and the sense of hopelessness.

8) Those who subscribe to the foregoing points have an obligation directly or indirectly to participate in the attempt to implement the necessary changes.

Once you understand what the foregoing tenets really mean, it is your responsibility to share them with others, hoping that out of the thousands there will be one that accepts these as their own. Many difficulties are there, but only in perseverance will you succeed. This doesn't meant that one becomes offensive in speech, this means that we walk together in this world.

- Arne Naess and George Sessions

The Convenient Solution

2007-08-01T05:48:00.001-07:00

http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/blog/climate/the-convenient-solution-20070718

A short film about climate change, energy and nuclear power. If you're confused about whether we need nuclear power to stop climate change, take nine minutes of your time to watch our new film. It doesn't just explain why nuclear power can't stop climate change - it also points the way to a better, cheaper, more convenient solution.

The mirage of nuclear power

2007-08-01T03:32:00.001-07:00

The mirage of nuclear power - Los Angeles Times

The industry has never proved that it can deliver on its far-fetched dreams.
By By Paul Josephson

July 30, 2007

The mirage of nuclear power
The industry has never proved that it can deliver on its far-fetched dreams.
By By Paul Josephson
July 30, 2007

In the last two weeks, the Chinese signed a deal with Westinghouse to build four nuclear power plants; a U.S. utility joined the French national nuclear juggernaut -- with 60 reactors under its belt -- to build stations throughout the United States; and the Russians neared the launch of the first of a dozen nuclear power stations that float on water, with sales promised to Morocco and Namibia. Two sworn opponents -- environmentalists and President Bush -- tout nuclear energy as a panacea for the nation's dependence on oil and a solution to global warming. They've been joined by all the presidential candidates from both parties, with the exception of John Edwards. And none of them is talking about the recent nuclear accident in Japan caused by an earthquake.

These surprising bedfellows base their sanguine assessment of nuclear power on an underestimation of its huge financial costs, on a failure to consider unresolved problems involving all nuclear power stations and on a willingness to overlook this industry's history of offering far-fetched dreams, failing to deliver and the occasional accident.

Since the 1950s, the nuclear industry has promised energy "too cheap to meter," inherently safe reactors and immediate clean-up and storage of hazardous waste. But nuclear power is hardly cheap -- and far more dangerous than wind, solar and other forms of power generation. Recent French experience shows a reactor will top $3 billion to build. Standard construction techniques have not stemmed rising costs or shortened lead time. Industry spokespeople insist they can erect components in assembly-line fashion a la Henry Ford to hold prices down. But the one effort to achieve this end, the Russian "Atommash" reactor factory, literally collapsed into the muck.

The industry has also underestimated how expensive it will be to operate stations safely against terrorist threat and accident. New reactors will require vast exclusion zones, doubly reinforced containment structures, the employment of large armed private security forces and fail-safe electronic safeguards. How will all of these and other costs be paid and by whom?

To ensure public safety, stations must be built far from population centers and electricity demand, which means higher transmission costs than the industry admits. In the past, regulators approved the siting of reactors near major cities based on the assumption that untested evacuation plans would work. Thankfully, after public protests, Washington did not approve Consolidated Edison's 1962 request to build a reactor in Queens, N.Y., three miles from the United Nations. But it subsequently approved licensing of units within 50 miles of New York, Boston, Chicago and Washington, D.C. New Orleans had three days of warning before Hurricane Katrina hit and was not successfully evacuated. A nuclear accident may give us only 20 minutes to respond; this indicates that reactors should be built only in sparsely populated regions.

Finally, what of the spent fuel and other nuclear waste? More than 70,000 tons of spent fuel at nuclear power stations are stored temporarily in basins of water or above ground in concrete casks. The Bush administration held back release of a 2005 National Research Council study, only excerpts of which have been published, because its findings, unsympathetic to nuclear power, indicated that this fuel remains an inviting target for terrorists.

And more than 150 million Americans live within 75 miles of nuclear waste, according to the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. A storage facility that was supposed to open at Yucca Mountain, Nev., in 1989 still faces legal and scientific hurdles. And if Yucca Mountain opens, how will we transport all of the waste safely to Nevada, and through whose towns and neighborhoods?

Industry representatives, government regulators and nuclear engineers now promise to secure the nation's energy independence through inherently safe reactors. This is the same industry that gave the world nuclear aircraft and satellites -- three of the 30 satellites launched have plummeted to Earth -- and Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and a series of lesser known accidents.

Let's see them solve the problems of exorbitant capital costs, safe disposition of nuclear waste, realistic measures to deal with the threats of terror, workable evacuation plans and siting far from population centers before they build one more station. In early July, President Bush spoke glowingly about nuclear power at an Alabama reactor recently brought out of moth balls; but it has shut down several times since it reopened because of operational glitches. What clearer indication do we need that nuclear power's time has not yet come?

Paul Josephson writes about nuclear power and teaches history at Colby College.

PPL creates nuclear post

2007-08-01T01:12:00.001-07:00

PPL creates nuclear post -- themorningcall.com
PPL creates nuclear post

By Sam Kennedy | Of The Morning Call
August 1, 2007

A month after announcing tentative plans to build Pennsylvania's first new nuclear reactor in a quarter-century, PPL Corp. has assigned a high-ranking executive to develop a comprehensive nuclear strategy.

The assignment of Bryce Shriver, who has served as president of PPL's generation operation for three years, was announced by the Allentown company on Tuesday.

''We believe that nuclear power will play a role in the effort to address global climate change while ensuring that the U.S. economy has the power it needs for continued prosperity,'' PPL Chief Operating Officer William Spence said in a press release. ''PPL has a very good track record in the nuclear power business, so it is natural for us to develop a strategy that takes advantage of our knowledge and on-the-ground experience.''

Oyster Creek N-plant still hopes to operate at 100 percent soon

2007-08-01T01:08:00.001-07:00

Oyster Creek N-plant still hopes to operate at 100 percent soon

Oyster Creek N-plant still hopes to operate at 100 percent soon
By DAVID BENSON Staff Writer, (609) 272-7206
Published: Wednesday, August 1, 2007
The Oyster Creek nuclear generating station is still operating at 70 percent of power, a company spokeswoman said Tuesday. But AmerGen hopes to be back at 100 percent in order to maximize profits in the developing heat wave, when consumers crank up the air conditioning.

The nuclear power plant had a forced shutdown about two weeks ago when an electrical glitch took out one of the reactor’s three feedwater pumps. While the Oyster Creek plant can operate with only two pumps, spokeswoman Leslie Cifelli said, losing one suddenly caused the plant to shut down.

Last week, workers managed to bring the nuclear plant back online, but the replacement pump vibrated. That meant they couldn’t take the facility to 100 percent power.

“Since then, they’ve been trying to get a third pump so they can get back up to full power,” said Neil Sheehan, a spokesman with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Entergy agrees to buy nuclear components

2007-08-01T01:05:00.001-07:00

Entergy agrees to buy nuclear components - NewsFlash - NOLA.com

Entergy agrees to buy nuclear components

7/31/2007, 1:22 p.m. CDT

By ALAN SAYRE
The Associated Press

NEW ORLEANS (AP)

— Still without a decision on whether to build a new nuclear generator in either Louisiana or Mississippi, the nuclear unit of Entergy Corp. said Tuesday that it had agreed on a major order for reactor components.

Terms of the agreement between Entergy Nuclear and GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy were not disclosed. Entergy Nuclear said the order would ensure that critical parts are delivered on time should the reactor be built.

Entergy has not decided whether to build a plant, but is looking at the sites of the current River Bend nuclear plant at St. Francisville, La., and the Grand Gulf nuclear plant at Port Gibson, Miss., as locations for its next nuclear generator.

Hunkpapa means HOSTILE

2007-07-28T05:55:00.000-07:00

Growing up as an orphan, I was told many stories about how our people, the Hunkpapa, came to be living in a concentrated cluster housing project. Asking my grandfather, where was our tipi and he started telling me the history of the Standing Rock Sioux Indian Reservation.

I am related to several families in Bullhead, South Dakota, collectively known as the Hunkpapa, loosely translated as the northern horn. The Hunkpapa are related to a larger group of families known as the Oceti Sakowin, the Seven Council Fires.

We are totally dispossessed and have been persecuted by others even our own tribal government since the day my relatives returned from political exile in Canada. The reason for our exile was the 1876 honorable defeat of General Custer and the 7th Cavalry at the Battle of the Little Big Horn. Afterwards my relatives, the Hunkpapa headed north into Canada where they stayed for nearly 5 years under starvation and exposure to the elements, yet they endured this hardship since they knew that returning to the US was to concede defeat and would become great suffering to our people.

In 1881 Sitting Bull returned to the US and was imprisoned but was released to the Standing Rock Sioux Indian Reservation. Although many say that he led the Ghost Dance, he really didn't have anything to do with it. In 1890 they assassinated Sitting Bull, causing an mass exodus south to the Pine Ridge Reservation where the Hunkpapa again sought political asylum under Chief Red Cloud. Rumors and the stories told me that he refused to help my relatives then and even refused to greet them before they rounded up and slaughtered in cold blood at Wounded Knee by the 7th Cavalry.

This caused my relatives still staying on Standing Rock to withdraw from the tribal and federal government, moving to the southwestern corner of Standing Rock. It was here that our ceremonies were held in secrecy.

During the following years, the massive cattle herds polluted the drinking water, causing my relatives to move further and further east to where they finally formed the Rock Creek community, formally known as Bullhead, South Dakota.

Prior to this, other than having bad drinking water, they were totally self-sufficient. They even opposed the 1924 Indian Citizenship Act and the 1934 Indian Reorganization Act as they knew these were against our human rights and were instruments of genocide.

In 1976, my relatives also opposed the Indian Self-Determination and Education Act for the same reasons which they knew to be contrary to self-sufficiency and would cause great harm and deaths to our small group of families.

It was during these times of great change, falling upon our people that I became aware of my duty, my sacred mission in life. The American Indian Movement was out there fighting for our rights but other than the 1974 International Treaty Council, their impact on improving our living conditions was barely felt. But they did help us in one way, they gave us back our spirit of resistance and showed us that we were very special since we never agreed to the selling of the Black Hills or the Allotment Act as well as the following Acts that are genocidal.

During 1985 while staying south on the Cheyenne River Sioux Indian Reservation with my friends that were teaching me the old ways and the ceremonies, I was given a copy of the Sioux Nation Black Hills Act. Immediately after reading it, I saw more acts of genocide and treachery within its highfalutin words. I returned the next day to Standing Rock where I showed my cousin who was on the tribal council what I had read. He replied that those sections weren't in the first readings and they were inserted after the tribes agreed to accept the money and the land to be returned. On the next day he introduced the motion to refuse the Sioux Nation Black Hills Settlement Act; like a strong wind the rest of the tribes also refused the act.

My point for this slight history of my past is to show you that one person can make changes that are right and just! Ever since that time, I was being taught our sovereign treaty rights, our superior water rights, our rights to have a safe and pure environment.

Then, in 1997, I was told about the uranium mine contamination out at the Cave Hills. Studying this mine has become a very dear fascination to me. I fully oppose all actions out there as they are a cover-up for the genocide being perpetuated against my relatives downstream who had no choice but to drink the radiologically contaminated water during the late 60's. We no longer have that many elders left in our community, they are all dying from cancer and diabetes. Our younger relatives are experiencing miscarriages, diabetes and cancer. Recently I was told by a federal employee that the reasons for this is that we drink, we smoke cigarettes, and we have a bad diet; little did that person know that I was already given this answer: that before the upstream mining in the 50's and 60's cancer, diabetes and miscarriages were totally unknown and they did drink, smoke and have a bad diet so that statement just reflects their prejudice, racism and further the genocide against my relatives.

In 2004 I approached the Defenders of the Black Hills while they were celebrating their success stopping the proposed shooting range that would have been built by Bear Butte. Giving them maps and documents, I left knowing that they'd help us get our genocide publicized in the mainstream media. Then I became one of their advocates and volunteers. My other purpose is to find lawyers and doctor sympathetic to us and our health crises so that our leaders can make better decisions on unbiased scientific studies at the Cave Hills. Just recently the US Forest Service and the potentially responsible party Tronox outsourced the reclamation of the Riley Pass abandoned uranium mine to two companies: ENSR; and Millenium Science and Engineering; which I feel only adds more controversy to our charge of racial genocide and environmental justice.

And now I am doing what I asked of the Defenders of the Black Hills and received their approval; this is to start approaching all the environmental movements involved in water pollution issues, radiation contamination, and air pollution, seeking to build bridges because the war against our environment, against the people, is still going on, even though the aggressors know that in the long run, they are on a path of suicide.

To add more to this conundrum, my tribe is lacking the technical capacity to truly make these decisions and are just fence sitting. I am not relying on them for this but they are also watching me with great curiosity.

Ending this I'll say that this is our cause, our duty, our self-sacrifice...it can't be compartmentalized into a radiation poisoning issue, or water contamination issue, or an air pollution issue; rather it is a total assault on every human being on this earth! Our earth is dying, we are killing her, we have to learn how to work with her or she will kill us! We are the hostiles!

Uranium mine clean-up underway

2007-07-27T19:15:00.000-07:00

Rapid City Journal Jul 26, 2007
Uranium mine clean-up underway

Journal staff

A minerals-reclamation company and an engineering company have nearly completed surface gamma surveys of five bluffs in Harding County as remediation work at the Riley Pass Site at North Cave Hills Abandoned Uranium Mines area continues.

The gamma surveys will allow the reclamation company, Tronox, and engineering company, ENSR, to determine the extent of excavation, re-grading and how much contaminated spoils, soils and sediment will be buried at the site. The clean-up criteria are based on surface readings. ENSR also will assess vegetation planted last year, which will help with this year's replanting efforts on site.

The engineering firm soon will conclude design work for an additional sediment pond needed at the site. The pond's planned location was originally on U.S. Forest Service lands, but Tronox has proposed moving the pond farther downstream onto private land. The new site provides more room for construction and will allow more sediment to be captured. Forest Service officials approved the new location, pending the landowner's approval.

Forest Service officials have awarded a contract to Millennium Science & Engineering of Salt Lake City to help with technical support on site. The engineering firm will perform quality control and quality-assurance oversight to the Forest Service, according to regulations of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, commonly known as the Superfund.

PR nuke flacks do the Kashiwazaki quake death spin

2007-07-22T23:26:00.000-07:00

Harvey Wasserman

PR nuke flacks do the Kashiwazaki quake death spin
July 23, 2007

As you read this, swarms of extremely well-paid PR flacks are spinning the Kashiwazaki nuke quake into an argument for building more reactors. They will deploy utter absurdities and personal attacks, followed by the sound of media-complicit silence.

But the news coming from Japan---and not being covered here---makes it clear the realities of this latest reactor disaster are beyond catastrophic. Seven reactors were put at direct risk, with four forced into emergency shut-downs while suffering numerous fires and emitting unknown quantities of radiation. Most importantly, the quake exceeded the design capabilities of all Japan's 55 reactors, and worse seismic shocks are expected.

To counter these inconvenient realities, expect to soon see more of Patrick Moore, the alleged ex-Greenpeace founder.

Moore has called the disaster at Three Mile Island a "success story." Moore claims to be a scientist. He's obviously not an accountant.

His face stays straight while calling the transformation of a $900 million asset into a $2 billion liability a "success story." It testifies to a mentality that never saw a polluter's check that couldn't be cashed.

On January 28, 1986, I debated a spokeswoman from Cleveland Electric Illuminating who termed the earthquake fault near the Perry Nuclear Plant a "geologic anomaly."

As we spoke, the Challenger space shuttle blew up because NASA "scientists" said warnings from their own staff about O-rings in cold weather were not "compelling." The shuttle was shot off to coincide with a planned presidential performance by Ronald Reagan. Seven astronauts died while the whole world watched in horror.

Three days later, a non-anomalous earthquake cracked pipes and pumps at Perry, knocking out roads and bridges. Apparently, neither the O-rings nor the fault line had read the industry's spin.

Today the nuke flacks say Kashiwazaki was a "success story" because four reactors SCRAMmed into emergency shutdown and three more were damaged, but no apocalypse resulted (yet).

Since this is only the world's largest nuke complex, with only seven reactors on site, and only several hundred barrels of nuke waste tipped over, and far fewer had their lids fly off, and the gas emissions the utility lied about were only tritium, which is less deadly than plutonium, the fact that all of Japan was not engulfed in a catastrophic radiation release (yet) will be used to sell more reactors.

Expect phrases like these:

"The reactors withstood the worst nature could throw at them."

"The SCRAMs went off perfectly."

"The shut-downs will be temporary."

"American reactors are far stronger than Japanese ones."

"This was a once-in-a-century fluke, and no one was hurt."

"Even so, we must have nuke power to fight global warming."

"The media has distorted the utility's good-faith attempts to inform the public."

"Those rad-waste barrels were tipped over by eco-terrorists."

"Tritium is good for you."

"Nuke power is a 'zero emissions' technology, therefore the reported leaks could not have occurred."

"Those anti-nuke so-called scientists have been discredited."

But most importantly, expect a tightly enforced media blackout.

It starts when all who question the industry are automatically "discredited."

Dr. John Gofman, universally acknowledged as one of the world's leading nuclear and medical researchers, was once in charge of health research for the old Atomic Energy Commission. When asked to determine how many people would be killed by radioactive emissions from "normal" reactor operations, he found it would be about 32,000 Americans per year.

The AEC demanded he revise his findings. Gofman refused. So he was forced out of the AEC and "discredited" despite credentials that continue to dwarf those who replaced him.

The list of physicists, engineers, medical researchers and others similarly purged for fact-based reporting is too tragic to reconstruct here.

But it even includes a park ranger at the Pt. Reyes National Seashore who noticed in the spring of 1986 that the number of live bird births had plummeted compared with the previous ten springs. The only logical link was to radioactive fallout from Chernobyl, brought down by a California rainstorm ten days after the explosion.

The ranger soon found himself out of a job.

On the other hand, the industry still falsely asserts that no one died at Three Mile Island. It even produced a "doctor" who traveled through Europe asserting that the enormous radiation releases spewed by the explosion at Chernobyl would ultimately save lives.

Predictably, the Kashiwazaki catastrophe has disappeared from the American media. But in Japan, the news has transcended the truly horrifying.

According to Leo Lewis in The Times, talk is rampant of a "Genpatsu-shinsai," defined by Japan's leading seismologist, Katsuhiko Shibashi, as "the combination of an earthquake and nuclear meltdown capable of destroying millions of lives and bringing a nation to its knees." Shibashi warns that the recent 6.8 magnitude shock exceeded the design capabilities of the Kashiwazaki nuke by a factor of three. A Kobe University research team is reported as saying that if the quake had been 10km further to the southwest, a "terrible, terrible disaster" would have resulted.

Prof. Mitsuhei Murata of Tokai Gakuen University is quoted as warning that a quake at the Hamaoka nuke could bring "24 million victims and the end for Japan." Japan's earthquake experts assume the probability of an 8.0 quake within the next 30 years to be 87 percent.

As in the US, Tokyo Electric has long denied that its seven Kashiwazaki reactors were sited atop a fault line, only to have it turn out to be true. As at Three Mile Island, vital data has already disappeared from the Kashiwazaki disaster, and the exact quantities of radiation released are unknown. Radiation at both sites escaped well after the reactors were shut down.

As in the United States, Japanese earthquake experts have warned since the 1960s about the dangers of reactor construction, only to be ignored and "discredited."

Undoubtedly the Japanese PR nuke spinsters will continue to attack and ignore them.

Here, 2400 central Pennsylvania families will still be denied a federal trial on the death, disease and mayhem spewed upon them by Three Mile Island nearly thirty years ago. And the seven dead Challenger astronauts are not available for comment on the "perfectly safe" O-rings that killed them just prior to the "non-credible" earthquake that struck the Perry nuke.

Any possible problems with a new generation of reactors are equally non-credible. Just ask a flack.

--
Harvey Wasserman's SOLARTOPIA! OUR GREEN-POWERED EARTH, A.D. 2030, is at http://www.solartopia.org/. He is senior advisor to Greenpeace USA and the Nuclear Information & Resource Service, and senior editor of http://www.freepress.org/, where this article first appeared.

Nuclear Fantasies, a delusion of omnipotence

2007-07-22T23:16:00.000-07:00

Cognitive Dissonance – Choosing today, tomorrow doesn't exist

Convincing the American public because of global warming, we need nuclear energy; how they go about doing this, borders on madness. The polar ice caps are melting, glaciers are melting, the bees are dying, seasons are changing, weather is becoming more violent, hurricanes are becoming more and more destructive, and the ocean temperature is rising, droughts, famine, crop failures and even wars: they have embraced all of these as their own philosophy; their own personal belief. Without a doubt these natural events are sometimes catastrophic, causing human suffering beyond measure, beyond grief, yet in hypocrisy, the nuclear industry regularly takes our suffering, using it as a stepping stone on towards their greater glory. They have also stepped on the environmentalists whom have been saying that pollution is the cause of our planet's climate change for years and years; they weren't listened to then and they aren't heard now.

The nuclear renaissance, as a publicity campaign for providing more electricity without adding to the CO2 emissions to our atmosphere, is a sham; it is an outright lie and goes against nature, goes against what people would consider as living in a safe, contaminant-free environment. Everyday this sham is being exposed by the environmentalists and the anti-nuclear movement, the costs are examined and balanced against the benefits, and are found to be environmentally unsafe and the lie becomes more and more apparent to even the ardent nuclear energy supporter. Yet rather than recant their belief and accept the truth of their fallacy, they cling to it tighter until it causes them to withdraw to some corner hoping to be forgotten and overlooked in their guilt, their backs striped with their complacency in promoting the dangerous nuclear industry against the human rights of the future.

The aftershocks are still continuing in Japan, soon more suffering from the lack of electricity will come to them; this unfortunate accident at the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear reactors must be considered by our government as more reason to re-evaluate our nuclear energy policy, to see if catastrophes such as what happened to the Japanese can be avoided in our country. All it will take is one major accident and the game is over. If one looks at the history of the nuclear energy industry, it is strewn with minor accidents and leaks of radiological materials into the air, water and land.

And to look with an unbiased perspective at the uranium mining, milling, enrichment and waste disposal phases of the nuclear fuels and weapons cycle, one can seen it as causing the deaths of many Native Americans, creating an unseen, overlooked health crises on many reservations. Is this the price Native Americans must pay for having our land illegally taken, then having the natural resources such as uranium and other minerals used to promote the greater prosperity of the mainstream American society without just compensation being paid for these thefts? These profits, then, should be just considered blood money being paid by the Native Americans to rent our poverty-stricken reservations and their blighted economies. Is this why our genocide is kept hidden from mainstream society; to hide the fact that the history of the Nuclear Renaissance is written with our blood!

Now where are the pro-nuclear factions and groups, clearly it is apparent to me that they are only promoting their support for nuclear energy because they are being paid to do so. They never consider the mining or waste issues in the nuclear renaissance hyperbole and this is wrong.

Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy

By declaring that nuclear energy is safe since there haven't been very many catastrophic failures is following this fallacy; nuclear energy is relatively new to humanity, and not enough data has been collected to make this judgment. Yet this position is a major selling point offered by the nuclear energy industry. As our nuclear reactor fleet ages, many maintenance have been appearing with extreme regularity, becoming an almost daily occurrences at some nuclear reactor sites. Rather than believing their one-sided opinions we should consider that most safety records collected by the NRC of the nuclear reactors clearly shows that there are many minor problems with leaking radionuclides into the surrounding environment. And that there have been several major catastrophic failures, Chernobyl, Three Miles Island, and Kashiwazaki-Kariwa , should be consider as reasons to state that nuclear energy is dangerous when it does decide to fail. Based on this, we should really not jump right onto the nuclear renaissance bandwagon without more unbiased qualitative research data; then factoring this information into the nuclear energy equation, we must also consider the distance to nearby communities, emergency preparedness action plans, locations to emergency support services and fire departments skilled in handling nuclear accidents, transport and logistics problems involving nuclear waste and fuel storage. Using the results from this equation, we can then say that sites such as Indian Point is a clear candidate for decommissioning.

And how this applies to the mining and waste issues is that most of the anti-nuclear and anti-mining community groups in the Midwest where the nuclear renaissance is quixotically called the uranium boom. The in situ leach/recovery uranium mining companies are taking advantage of the local communities' lack of informed consent and decision making. Very few communities have, as consultants, scientists or lawyers that can impartially provide sound scientific data that can be used by community leaders to make these important decisions. This too follows the Texas sharpshooter fallacy; not enough unbiased data on uranium issues is being given to the community leaders and without this data they usually accept the uranium mining companies into their communities, often because the uranium mining company pours money into local community coffers as a pseudo-bribe to improve the streets, roads, water supply and infrastructure. Then the uranium mining company goes to the next community and tells community leaders there that the other community accepts their actions and therefore they should also.

All across the Midwest are examples of these glowing lies, there are more than a 1,000 abandoned uranium mines and prospects in Colorado, South Dakota, North Dakota and Wyoming, and several abandoned toxic uranium mills. Communities nearby these sites have experienced extremely high cancer rates, health-related deaths and other illnesses such as diabetes, a key indicator of low-dose radiation exposure. Does this matter to the proponents to the nuclear renaissance? It is an issue that they know crumbles their nuclear cookie, and wastes into dust their fallacies that nuclear energy is safe.

Conclusion

I must emphasize this even further; I was born and raised in one of the radiologically contaminated Indian reservations in South Dakota, I have seen my parents die young, I have seen our elders die young, I have seen our children with strange illnesses. After telling the federal agencies this many times I was told by one of them that the reason we are dying is that "we drink alcohol, we smoke cigarettes, and we eat a bad diet." This statement strikes me as the most racist statement I have ever heard since they didn't even consider that I have experienced the deaths and illnesses first hand; they are my parents, my relatives and my community. Asking my elders about the cancers before they passed on, they said that before the 60's they had never heard of diabetes or cancer, that many of the elders were also veterans of the Custer Battle. And now in this day, they are gone, our community is dying from diabetes and cancer; and what can the federal agencies offer a response to this, except the words, "Don't worry about it, we have scientists that say there isn't a problem." Where are our scientists, our lawyers?

I don't support nuclear energy and weapons, I never will! The nuclear renaissance is a myth, an outright lie; nuclear energy has absolutely nothing to do with global warming.

For more information
Defenders of the Black Hills
http://www.defendblackhills.org
The Silkwood Project
http://www.silkwoodproject.com
Environmental Nightmares
http://environmentalnightmares.blogspot.com

The Earthquake that Screamed "NO NUKES!!!"

2007-07-19T06:13:00.000-07:00

By Harvey Wasserman

The massive earthquake that shook Japan this week nearly killed millions in a nuclear apocalypse.

It also produced one of the most terrifying sentences ever buried in a newspaper. As reported deep in the New York Times, the Tokyo Electric Company has admitted that "the force of the shaking caused by the earthquake had exceeded the design limits of the reactors, suggesting that the plant's builders had underestimated the strength of possible earthquakes in the region."

There are 55 reactors in Japan. Virtually all of them are on or near major earthquake faults. Kashiwazaki alone hosts seven, four of which were forced into the dangerous SCRAM mode to narrowly avoid meltdowns. At least 50 separate serious problems have been so far identified, including fire and the spillage of barrels filled with radioactive wastes.

There are four active reactors in California on or near major earthquake faults, as are the two at Indian Point north of New York City. On January 31, 1986, an earthquake struck the Perry reactor east of Cleveland, knocking out roads and bridges, as well as pipes within the plant, which (thankfully) was not operating at the time. The governor of Ohio, then Richard Celeste, sued to keep Perry shut, but lost in federal court.

The fault that hit Perry is an off-shoot of the powerful New Madrid line that runs through the Mississippi River Valley, threatening numerous reactors. The Beyond Nuclear Project reports that in August, 2004, a quake hit the Dresden reactor in Illinois, resulting in a leak of radioactive tritium. Nevada's Yucca Mountain, slated as the nation's high-level radioactive waste dump, has a visible fault line running through it.

More than 400 atomic reactors are on-line worldwide. How many are vulnerable to seismic shocks we can only shudder to guess. But one-eighth of them sit in one of the world's richest, most technologically advanced, most densely populated industrial nations, which has now admitted its reactor designs cannot match the power an earthquake that has just happened.

In whatever language it's said, that translates into the unmistakable warning that the world's atomic reactors constitute a multiple, ticking seismic time bomb. Talk of building more can only be classified as suicidal irresponsibility.

Tokyo Electric's behavior since the quake defines the industry's credibility. For three consecutive days (with more undoubtedly to come) the utility has been forced to issue public apologies for erroneous statements about the severity of the damage done to the reactors, the size and lethality of radioactive spills into the air and water, the on-going danger to the public, and much more.

Once again, the only thing reactor owners can be trusted to do is to lie.

Prior to the March 28, 1979 disaster at Three Mile Island, the industry for years assured the public that the kind of accident that did happen was "impossible. "

Then the utility repeatedly assured the public there had been no melt-down of fuel and no danger of further catastrophe. Nine years later a robotic camera showed that nearly all the fuel had melted, and that avoiding a full-blown catastrophe was little short of a miracle.

The industry continues to say no one was killed at TMI. But it does not know how much radiation was released, where it went or who it might have harmed. Since 1979 its allies in the courts have denied 2400 central Pennsylvania families the right to test their belief that they and their loved ones have been killed and maimed en masse.

Prior to its April 26, 1986, explosion, Soviet Life Magazine ran a major feature extolling the virtually "accident-proof design" of Chernobyl Unit Four.

Then the former Soviet Union of Mikhail Gorbachev kept secret the gargantuan radiation releases that have killed thousands and yielded a horrific plague of cancers, leukemia, birth defects and more throughout the region, and among the more than 800,000 drafted "jumpers" who were forced to run through the plant to clean it up.

Since the terror attacks of September 11, 2001, the industry has claimed its reactors can withstand the effects of a jet crash, and are immune to sabotage. The claims are as patently absurd as the lies about TMI and Chernobyl.

So, too, the endless, dogged assurances from Japan that no earthquake could do to Kashiwazaki what has just happened.

Yet today and into the future, expensive ads will flood the US and global airwaves, full of nonsense about the "need" for new nukes.

There is only one thing we know for certain about this advertising: it is a lie.

Atomic reactors contribute to global warming rather than abating it. In construction, in the mining, milling and enriching of the fuel, in on-going "normal" releases of heat and radioactivity, in dismantling and decommissioning, in managing radioactive wastes, in future terror attacks, in proliferation of nuke weapons, and much much more, atomic energy is an unmitigated eco-disaster.

To this list we must now add additional tangible evidence that reactors allegedly built to withstand "worst case" earthquakes in fact cannot. And when they go down, the investment is lost, and power shortages arise (as is now happening in Japan) that are filled by the burning of fossil fuels.

It costs up to ten times as much to produce energy from a nuke as to save it with efficiency. Advances in wind, solar and other green "Solartopian" technologies mean atomic energy simply cannot compete without massive subsidies, loan guarantees and government insurance to protect it from catastrophes to come.

This latest "impossible" earthquake has not merely shattered the alleged safeguards of Japan's reactor fleet. It has blown apart---yet again---any possible argument for building more reactors anywhere on this beleaguered Earth.

Harvey Wasserman's SOLARTOPIA! OUR GREEN-POWERED EARTH, A.D. 2030, is at http://www.solartopia.org/. He is senior advisor to Greenpeace USA and the Nuclear Information & Resource Service, and senior editor of http://www.freepress.org/, where this piece originally appeared. In 1975 he spoke near the Kashiwazaki complex, urging its shut down.

Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuke accident, a US model of ineptitude

2007-07-18T13:45:00.000-07:00

Company: Japan Radioactive Leak Bigger - Forbes.com

The malfunctions and a delay in reporting them fueled concerns about the safety of Japan's 55 nuclear reactors, which have suffered a string of accidents and cover-ups. Nuclear power plants around Japan were ordered to conduct inspections.Adding to the urgency of any investigation was new data from quake aftershocks that suggested a fault line may run underneath the mammoth power plant.The Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant, located 135 miles northwest of Tokyo, has been plagued with mishaps. In 2001, a radioactive leak was found in the turbine room of one reactor. It is the world's largest nuclear plant in power output capacity. '

As an excellent illustration of safety systems failures, this nuclear accident is easily the finest, although very tragic, example of what could happen in the future to any of our 103 aging nuclear reactors. We need to close Indian Point, not only because it is ancient and outdated, but for its proximity to the very densely populated New York City. Its evacuation plan is not widely distributed, nor do most of the local area residents know of this plans existence.

Several days ago problems surfaced with the early warning system's sirens; they accidentally started sounding for hours. Causing undue fear and nuisance, Entergy turned off this system and is asking for more time to fix them; surely this is another sign that the reactor is dangerous to the public. Without this warning system, how will the public know that an excursion or catastrophe occurred at the reactor; when they hear about the accident from someone in South Dakota!

Entergy and its supporters should quit looking at the Japanese situation as a fluke or an act of God; rather they should see this as an excellent opportunity to truly serve their customers by offering to shut down Indian Point voluntarily. It takes a great man to admit he is wrong, but when he does, he shows that he is truly great.

Radiation Warning Signs Placed on Cheyenne River

2007-07-16T23:02:00.000-07:00

Notice to the Press

July 16, 2007

“Radiation Warning Signs Placed on Cheyenne River”

Red Shirt Village -- Some of the residents of Red Shirt village on the northwest corner of the Pine Ridge Reservation will be unveiling signs warning people of the high nuclear radiation levels found in the Cheyenne River.

Residents of the tiny community of Red Shirt on the south side of the Cheyenne River occupy a village site that is thousands of years old to the Oglala Tetuwan (Sioux) people. Many have lived here all of their lives, growing gardens with water taken from the Cheyenne River and fishing for catfish, bass, and turtles. In the summer months, the River is used for swimming and other recreational pursuits.

Several weeks ago, in preparation for the summer months, Everitt Poor Thunder asked Defenders of the Black Hills, an environmental organization, whether the Cheyenne River water could be used to irrigate a community garden. A local well could not be used as it was found to be radioactive and warning signs surround that structure.

A water sample was taken, sent to a laboratory, and the results were found to be above the Environmental Protection Agency’s Maximum Contaminant Level for alpha radiation.

As alpha radiation causes harm when ingested, the warning signs are being placed to warn people of the dangers of nuclear radiation in the water. The event is to begin at 10:00 AM on Wednesday, July 18, 2007, on the south side of the bridge spanning the River.

Red Shirt village is located about 25 miles southeast of Hermosa, SD, on SD Highway 40.

For more information contact Charmaine White Face, Coordinator for Defenders of the Black Hills at 399-1868.

King CONG (Coal, Oil, Nuclear, and Gas)

2007-07-16T22:47:00.000-07:00

Several days ago while randomly surfing for nuclear articles I found this gem amidst the rubble pile.

Solartopia

At first I couldn't believe that other than the anti-nuclear movement groups with which I am familiar; this would is actually combining slogans from the "Green Movement" to come up with a fresh feel and outlook towards the whole pollution issue.

A little more digging and then feeling this change, this hope growing inside of me, giving me more courage to continue the anti-nuclear, anti-Earth fight against big business and strange politics. BRAVO!!! I am now a SOLARTOPIAN!

To save the Earth, are YOU a Solartopian?

In the global campaign to save the Earth, a shared vision is vital.

" Solartopia" foresees a democratic, green-powered 21st Century civilization. Our economic and ecological survival depend on it.

Technologically, the vision rests on four simple pillars:

1. Total renunciation of all fossil and nuclear fuels. In a sustainable, survivable future, they are a 20th Century pox, neither green nor clean.

2. All-out conversion to renewable energy, led by the "Solartopian Trinity" of wind, solar and bio-fuels. Mother Earth gives us the natural power we need.

3. Complete commitment to maximum efficiency, including revived and solarized mass transit and passenger rail systems. Our automotive "love affair" is a hoax.

4. Zero tolerance for production of anything that cannot be re-used or recycled, including chemical-based food. Solartopia is an organic, post-pollution world.

Along with wind, solar and bio-fuels, Solartopian energy comes from the waves, currents, rivers and tides; from the geothermal heat beneath the earth's crust; from the interplay of solar-heated water at the oceans' surface and the frigid deep.

Hydrogen and electricity are the chief power carriers, but they are always produced by clean Solartopian means.

The efficiency revolution drives Solartopian energy consumption levels ever downward. Compact fluorescent bulbs are transcended by Light Emitting Diodes. An evolving armada of efficiency devices, many invented in backyards and garages, spreads at warp-speed through a hyper-linked global community.

Advanced methods of organic food production get us past the "silent spring" of chemical pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers and genetically modified crops.

The ever-evolving Internet fuels a geek-driven torrent of Solartopian innovation---and the raging e-network of green grassroots democracy (http://solartopia.org/Links.php).

In our 21st Century global economy, renewable technologies are already on the whole more profitable than the obsolete King CONG "alternatives" of coal, oil, nukes and gas.

But from bio-fuels to wind, from hyper-efficiency to organic farming, no green technology is without costs and limitations. All demand vigilance, limitation, regulation and innovation to stay clean, current and useful.

When done right, the Solartopian revolution spawns the decentralized wealth, full employment, and community-based economic power of a prosperous, socially democratized society.

Homes, buildings, communities and farms control their own energy. Power and prosperity are widespread, not concentrated in the hands of King CONG and its corporate minions.

Indeed, Solartopia can't happen without transcending some primary barriers:

5. Corporations can no longer enjoy human rights without human responsibilities. Revised corporate charters must break the grip these giant economic organizations have held on our political, economic and ecological systems.

6. Population is the province of women, who in Solartopia are empowered, educated and equally paid. In synch with Mother Earth, they bring us the number of children She wishes to accommodate.

7. Where everyone has a right to the basic necessities of life, including free education, nobody starves. The Solartopian rich may be plentiful, but no civilization thrives unless all have access to sustenance and dignity.

8. Big Money is barred from the campaign process. Free and fair elections and referenda power non-violent community-based evolution. The universal right to ballots on recycled paper means accurate vote counts and recounts for all.

Solartopia demands that business serve society and the planet, rather than vice versa. Capitalism may be one thing, but Enron cannibalism is quite another. Balancing competition and the profit motive with human and ecological need, the Solartopian vision demands accountability, efficiency, service and justice.

The switch to renewables defunds global terrorism. Atomic reactors are pre-deployed weapons of radioactive mass destruction. Shutting them ends the fear of apocalyptic disaster by both terror and error. Transcending coal and cars cures much of global warming.

But everywhere we turn, the King CONG corporations build barriers. They use government subsidies and media disinformation to prolong their failed investments in obsolete technologies and the fossil/nuke fuels that run them.

Inseparable from those fuels are authoritarian power structures that produce wars for oil, financial imbalance and social chaos, leading to biological extinction.

By contrast, Solartopia is the diverse, democratic, organic place we go to survive and thrive.
Born of hyper-linked grassroots non-violence, empowered by post-pollution prosperity in synch with Mother Earth and all her children, Solartopia is the 21st Century vision of our necessary future.

Are YOU a Solartopian?

Now to continue spreading the word about this exciting new website and then they will come and join us.

"Are you Oglala or Wasicu?"

2007-07-16T14:54:00.000-07:00

By Charmaine White Face

The question was raised at a recent meeting called by Oglala Sioux Tribal President John Yellow Bird Steele about the idea of mining uranium on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, "Are you Oglala or Wasicu?"

If a person is Oglala, or Anishinabeg, or Dine, or from any other Indigenous nation that is trying desperately to retain their Indigenous values, the answer to the possibility of mining uranium is a simple and resounding "No!" The answer "yes" to the question of mining uranium reflects the values of the wasicu, or the white man, and the Lakota word wasicu literally means "takes the fat" for a reason.

All of the Indigneous nations understood what uranium was in their own terms and their own cultures. The Dine (Navajo) called it "the yellow monster." An Oglala holy man spoke of only those who had a dream and were protected could go into areas where uranium was naturally occurring. The understanding is entirely different than viewing uranium according to the wasicus as an energy source, or natural resource. Mitochondria in the cell is also a source of energy that wasicu scientists still do not understand, and their study of the cell is a lot older than the study of uranium.

John Yellow Bird Steele, as the president of one of the poorest tribes on the North American continent, is in the unenviable position of trying to improve the economic conditions on the reservation while at the same time trying to stay within the cultural, traditional values of the Oglala people. With the price of uranium soon to be reaching the $200 per pound category, and with uranium located all over the region, he called a meeting to discuss an offer made to the previous tribal president, Cecilia Fire Thunder. As the new Tribal President, he has been asked to sign a Memorandum of Agreement with the mining entity, Native American Energy Group (NAEG).

The slick handout from NAEG has a quote from Leonard Peltier on its front cover which states:

"I heard about your company and all the good things you are doing for Native Americans. Our people are good and deserve a chance to live a better life. Too many companies say they want to help, but in the end they only help themselves to our resources and give us barely enough to survive. I knew in my heart that someday a company like yours would come, a company that does not take advantage of us and truly wants to help. I heave heard about your "Tribal Empowerment Program", and I wish to be a member and supporter. My supporters and followers also pledge their complete support for your company as well."

A woman at the meeting said she was going to contact Leonard to see if he really did say these things, and to let him know what NAEG is planning for the Pine Ridge Reservation.

The handout further stated: "Native American Energy Group is an energy company that was originally founded in 2001 to develop energy resources on Native American reservations in the United States. Upon inception, the founders of the Company initiated its current philosophy of commitment and dedication to create opportunities for an emerging group of American Indian Nations with abundant natural resources, to become producing nations which explore, produce and control their own natural resources."

Again, we have an entity planning to come into the last Oglala territory and impose their philosophy in typical colonizing fashion. If NAEG was truly cognizant of Oglala philosophy and values, they would know in the first place not to call Ina Makoce "natural resources." If they understood the vast difference in philosophy between the Oglalas and the Wasicus, they would have known better than to even try to recommend destroying and hurting her by mining.

Even more unconscionable is the idea of waving the possibility of multimillion dollars in front of tribal presidents responsible for the economic development of a reservation that is slated for poverty by design. It is not just the epitome of colonialism, but is the equivalent of the guard of this prisoner of war camp opening the gate and telling the prison leader he will be free. Upon running, the prisoner will be shot for escaping, only in this case the bullet will be the unseen, unsmelled, untasted form of nuclear radiation.

OST President John Steele is right to gather more heads together than just the OST Executive Committee, his own group of advisors, or even the entire Tribal Council when trying to decide what to do about something as dangerous as uranium mining. Along with the current tribal ban on mining on the reservation, President Steele needs to arm himself with as much information and advice as he can muster to fend off the other uranium mining companies that are sure to come knocking on the door soon.

The Task Force he established was originally called the Uranium Mining Task Force but after the presentations and discussions, concluding with the question of "Are we Oglala or Wasicu?" the group changed the name to the Natural Resources Protection Task Force. The new name fits according to wasicu philosophy and understanding. If it were totally according to Oglala understanding, there would be no need for any Task Force as we would all know that we must always protect Ina Makoce (Mother Earth) and we would never talk about mining. But the colonization and forced cultural genocide has succeeded so well that we must continue to learn all we can according to the wasicu philosophy and understanding, then discuss with each other and remind ourselves of what it is in Oglala terms and values.

The front line helping President Steele is the young, educated, and culturally aware staff that currently comprises the Oglala Sioux Tribe Environmental Protection Office and Natural Resources Regulatory Agency. If politics and corruption don't interfere and they are allowed to do their jobs, the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation may be one of the last places left in the Upper Midwest that is not completely polluted by nuclear radiation.

####

Charmaine White Face, whose Lakota name is Zumila Wobaga, is Oglala Tetuwan Oceti Sakowin (Oglala Lakota from the Great Sioux Nation). She is a Biologist, Physical Scientist, former educator, writer and the founder and Coordinator for Defenders of the Black Hills. Ms.
White Face may be reached at bhdefenders@msn.com

The Nuclear Renaissance, a step backwards into the Dark Ages

2007-07-14T02:15:00.000-07:00

My point here in my blog is not denigrate the global warming theory, but to show you that it is being used to further concentrate political power in the hands of the certain nuclear energy companies. I firmly believe that this is illegal and contrary to the US Constitution. The names of the key players in this lawless game are: Exelon, Entergy, Dominion, Constellation, Uranez, Uranium Resources, Hydro Resources, Cameco, Strathmore, Westinghouse, Fluor and several other lesser known nuclear-related companies.

The Propaganda

As the nuclear renaissance in allegiance with the global warming buffs continues its onward march through the history as one of the most controversial and concentrated political movements, using outright media fabrication of an decade's old problem, formerly known as pollution, now as global warming to foster a society-wide delusion that we need more nuclear power plants, that we need more sources of uranium, that we need more nuclear waste repositories and that nuclear energy is inherently safe. Being associated with global warming must indicate to the unknowing earning their well-meant support.

Supporting the nuclear renaissance is the mass media, owned by only a few individuals and corporations, who are, in turn, responsible to others with just as nefarious ties to unlawful and illegal trusts, syndicates, front companies, and outright mafioso mobs.

This propaganda, at first, confused all the environmental groups and anti-nuclear groups but as certain contradictions within it are becoming more apparent, this propaganda is being attacked by all sides as a gross lie. Although the dividing lines in the sand have been drawn with several fence sitters being knocked off their fence into the wrong pasture, this propaganda serves only to illustrate the level and number of front groups that covertly sponsor nuclear energy as an alternative to coal and other power generation industries. On the other hand, this dividing line is providing intelligent decision making possibilities for investment to those groups that are truly for protecting and preserving the environment.

Advanced Burner Reactors (ABR) is most often used in the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) as its poster child of hope. Advanced Burner Reactors are still in the design stages expecting to come on line in nearly 20 years as stated by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). This type of reactor recycles spent uranium, converting it to plutonium to be used again in the fuel cycle. Instead of decreasing the safety risks, these types of reactors actually increase the danger. But again nothing says that they can't spend research funds studying the ABR technologies. Also after reading the GNEP, I can't help but feel a sense of irony since it reminds me of a pipe dream and doesn't consider any potential accidents or disasters.

The Conspiracy

As our society's economy is based on the exploitation of our earth's natural resources, then adding value to this through taxation and tariffs, stocks, bonds and dividends, corporations and political parties. Given this, we were told that the name of this diffuse organization is the military industrial complex, named as such duing the Viet Nam War. Owned by forces unseen, our economy is being driven in directions that are environmentally dangerous; all in the name of profit. Yet what can one individual do to resist this control; you can't stop purchasing their products especially food, gas, medicine and others, that would be suicide. And as they know that we can't stop using electricity, so again the conspiracy emerges, are they promoting this nuclear renaissance to promote coal-fired power plants although these contribute significantly to the problem?

A very illustrative example of the conspiratorial nature of this issue is the United States Enrichment Corporation (USEC) and its Megatons to Megawatts program. This program buys from Russia uranium that formerly in nuclear warheads. As of April 2007, more than 12,000 nuclear warhead material has been sold to the US. This uranium is then converted to fuel for the 103 reactors spread across this country. The implications herein cause me great consternation in terms of world peace and stability.

The Mining

The nuclear renaissance has also increased the demand for the uranium, causing a boom in the in situ leach uranium mining industry. But sadly it has not caused increase attention to the abandoned uranium mines located in and around Native American communities.

In the Midwest in states such as Wyoming, ISL uranium mining is growing rapidly with former uranium strip mines being reopened for extraction. Nunn County in Colorado is one of the few places that the ISL operation where the community is actively opposing the mining operation over concerns about the effects on drinking water. In Goliad, TX community residents are wondering why they fell for the lies that the ISL uranium mining could return water quality to pre-mining levels. In South Dakota, abandoned uranium mines and current attempts by an ISL uranium mining operation are very major concerns in terms of water quality and current health crises in the downstream reservation communities.

These concerns are not heeded, only the desire for profit stands tall.

The fact is that most mining companies that are now producing uranium are capitalized by banks and financial investment corporations which I presume are owned by foreign countries who have long realized that control of the interest rates is more important than owing physical assets such as manufacturing industries, mineral extraction industries and energy corporations. Controlling interest rates does major significance in the common day lives of our society. Financing the nuclear renaissance is debt or government subsidies. And without the source materials for enrichment, the nuclear renaissance is supposedly going to be held to a standstill but not necessarily, there are other mining locations in this world other than in the US.

The Hypothesis

Therefore herein I state my new hypothesis; the nuclear renaissance is meant mainly for the Asian countries as they are in the construction phases of many new reactors using US technology and companies. The uranium demand is needed for these Asian reactors, not US reactors.

I agree with global warming but I know for a fact that nuclear energy will not be the solution to it. Only conserving what we have now is the only way to preventing future climate disasters, educating ourselves about the nature of the nuclear renaissance helps in this regard.

Nuclear Power: Promoting a Myth

2007-07-13T19:19:00.000-07:00

Russell Lowes talks about how nuclear power is being promoted by the nuclear industry again as cheap, clean and efficient. They hope to foist another round of reactors on the U.S. at the expense of the environment and of the American economy. This was shot at Access Tucson on My Commentary.

Erwin uranium spill cloaked in secrecy

2007-07-11T12:19:00.000-07:00

Erwin uranium spill cloaked in secrecy

http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2007/jul/11/erwin-uranium-spill-cloaked-in-secrecy/

Federal regulators looking into NRC policy that kept details from being public

By Andrew Eder
Wednesday, July 11, 2007

Department of Energy Awards Over $10 Million for GNEP Siting Grants

2007-07-11T11:13:00.000-07:00

What fascinates me most about this is that two of the grant recipients and locations immediately drew my attention since they were involved in some very interesting business deals in the past; now they are coming back on-line again under community reinvestment/economic revitalization project under the US EPA Brownfields program. interesting

http://www.gnep.energy.gov/gnepPRs/gnepPR013007.html

January 30, 2007

Department of Energy Awards Over $10 Million for GNEP Siting Grants

WASHINGTON, DC – The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) today announced that over $10 million will be used for 11 commercial and public consortia selected to conduct detailed siting studies for integrated spent fuel recycling facilities under President Bush’s Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP).

“These facilities will enable us to effectively recycle spent nuclear fuel in a safe and proliferation-resistant manner. They will set the technological standard and allow us to influence energy policy abroad while increasing energy security here at home,” DOE Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy Dennis Spurgeon said. “With the negotiations complete, we are ready to proceed from an initial phase to one where actual studies can explore sites for GNEP-related facilities.”

Award recipients, announced in November 2006, will carry out siting studies to determine the possibility of hosting an advanced nuclear fuel recycling center and/or an advanced recycling reactor. Beginning today, recipients will conduct detailed site characterization studies of the sites which were proposed in their Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) responses. Recipients will have 90-days to complete these studies and submit a Site Characterization Report to DOE on May 1, 2007.

Of the 11 sites, six are currently owned and operated by DOE. Sites, lead award recipients, and award amounts are as follows:

Proposed Site Location Teaming Consortia Award Amounts

1. Atomic City, ID; EnergySolutions, LLC; $915,448

2. Barnwell, SC; EnergySolutions, LLC; $963,151

3. Hanford Site, WA; Tri-City Industrial Development Council/Columbia Basin Consulting Group; $1,020,000

4. Hobbs, NM; Eddy Lea Energy Alliance; $1,590,016

5. Idaho National Laboratory, ID; Regional Development Alliance, Inc; $648,745

6. Morris, IL; General Electric Company; $1,484,875

7. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, TN; Community Reuse Organization of East Tennessee; $894,704

8. Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant, KY; Paducah Uranium Plant Asset Utilization, Inc.; $664,600

9. Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant, OH; Piketon Initiative for Nuclear Independence, LLC; $673,761

10. Roswell, NM; EnergySolutions, LLC; $1,134,522

11. Savannah River National Laboratory, SC; Economic Development Partnership of Aiken and Edgefield Counties; $468,420

TOTAL: $10,458,242

Information generated from the detailed siting studies of non-DOE sites is expected to address a variety of site-related matters, including site and nearby land uses; demographics; ecological and habitat assessment; threatened or endangered species; historical, archaeological and cultural resources; geology and seismology; weather and climate; and regulatory and permitting requirements. Information requirements for the DOE sites are more limited due to the availability of previous studies.

Such information may also be used in preparing the draft programmatic environmental impact statement (PEIS) – a process that began in early January (http://www.energy.gov/news/4560.htm) – which will evaluate the potential environmental impacts from each proposed GNEP facility.

An advanced nuclear fuel recycling center contains facilities where usable uranium and transuranics are separated from spent light water reactor fuel then produced into new fuel (or “transmutation fuel”) which then could be reused in an advanced recycling reactor. This advanced recycling reactor is a fast reactor that would demonstrate the ability to reuse and consume materials recovered from spent nuclear fuel, including long-lived elements that would otherwise be disposed of in a geologic repository.

GNEP is a part of President Bush's Advanced Energy Initiative, which seeks to reduce our reliance in imported oil by changing the way we power our cars, homes and business. For more information on GNEP, visit: http://www.gnep.gov/. Additional information on the DOE’s nuclear energy program may be found on http://www.nuclear.energy.gov/.

NEWS MEDIA CONTACT:
Craig Stevens, (202) 586-4940

Ten Reasons Why We Don’t Need To Build More Nuclear Power Plants

2007-07-09T13:32:00.000-07:00

Ten Reasons Why We Don’t Need To Build More Nuclear Power Plants

To Address Climate Change…..

…..Reject the Nuclear Option

Ten Reasons Why We Don’t Need To Build More Nuclear Power Plants

* Nuclear reactors are pre-deployed weapons of mass destruction and pose an unacceptable risk. We need to eliminate, not proliferate them. An attack could render a city like Manhattan a sacrifice zone and kill hundreds of thousands within weeks.
* More reactors can’t halt climate change in time. We would need 300 in the U.S. and 1,500 worldwide just to make a dent in greenhouse gas (ghg) emissions. One reactor takes seven to ten years to build.
* Devoting scarce resources to shore up nuclear takes away from the real climate change solutions – conservation, energy efficiency and renewables like wind and solar.
* Building enough reactors to offset climate change is cost prohibitive. Reactors cost $4 billion or more each a decade ago and the price hasn’t gone down.
* Nuclear reactor proliferation means more waste with no place to put it. A new Yucca Mountain-style dump every four years would be needed if 1,500 new reactors were built.
* Nuclear power is not emissions-free. From uranium mining, milling and enrichment to construction and waste storage, nuclear uses fossil fuels.
* Even nuclear industry executives aren’t convinced. One described nuclear expansion as “comatose” and an option that would give his chief financial officer and Standard and Poors “a heart attack.”
* More reactors sends the wrong message abroad. The peaceful atom is a myth already exposed by the weapons programs of Indian, Pakistan, Israel, North Korea and Iran.
* Reactors at the beginning and the end of their lifespans are at their most dangerous, prone to breakdown and accident. Most of the 103 operating now are nearing the end of their cycles. Adding new ones doubles the risk of accident.
* Electricity is not the biggest problem. It’s fossil fuel-powered vehicles. Adding nuclear won’t address this or reduce these major ghg emitters.

Born Again Environmental Spiritualist

2007-06-25T08:53:00.000-07:00

While waiting for my ride to the Sundance ceremony, I couldn't help but write this for you, discussing several major concerns I have about the Nuclear Power Craze.

First of all, I think the Nuclear Boom caught most environmentalists with their pants down, being totally unprepared for this explosion on their psyches and environment, and then being borgified into believing that Nuclear Power is the "solution" to the global warming theory after watching the film "An Inconvenient Truth," depicting Al Gore as the proletarian superhero who'll save us from our ecologically destructive mass consumptive society. Frankly most environmentalists I feel have almost lost sight of their objective as a result of their borgification into this false belief: to protect the environment.

I come from South Dakota, a state rich in mineral resources such as gold and uranium; it is also a state with a very poor environmental record. Most of the river have been contaminated with mining wastes; in the north in the Slim Buttes and Cave Hills areas on the Custer National Forest, uranium mine tailings waste, agricultural chemical wastes, while in the south, the rivers and Black Hills are polluted with gold mining tailings wastes. To me, protecting our rivers and the Black Hills have become a major focus of my life, being a fisherman and an avid outdoorsman. As an ardent and somewhat vocal supporter of environmentalism, I feel that eventually if we yell loud enough, someone will hear us and come to help us in our fight against all of the mining companies in our state.

After reading much of material on the Internet about environmentalism, I also feel that most of these groups have got to become more active in terms of proposing legislation and actual improvements, rather than just having an outdoor meeting just to meet other men and women for dating; this is what MySpace is for. I am not sniping at any group in particular, but specifically all of these environmental groups have got to take one unified stand against the destroyers, rather than fall to the "Divide and Conquer" tactic used on Native Americans for hundreds of years. We have got to remember we all have our parts in this grand play, and at the show's end, the main actor that should take the applause is our planet Earth.

Judge denies Stay: Drilling to continue

2007-06-25T08:17:00.000-07:00

"Judge denies Stay"
"Drilling to continue"

PRESS RELEASE

June 20, 2007

Rapid City, SD -- South Dakota Circuit Court Judge John Delaney denied a motion for a stay to stop any further drilling by a Uranium mining company near Edgemont. Opposing parties considering state Supreme Court appeal.

Powertech, a Canadian mining company, began drilling uranium exploratory wells in the Dewey Burdock area northwest of Edgemont a few weeks despite the approval of their permit being appealed in court. Two environmental organizations, Defenders of the Black Hills and ACTion for the Environment are appealing the decision made by the South Dakota Board of Mining and Environment. Cindy Gillis, lead counsel for the two groups had previously sought a preliminary injunction and a restraining order. Judge Delaney denied those requests and said a "stay" was the proper procedure, and one was filed on April 30. A hearing was held on June 19, 2007, in the Pennington County Courthouse and the Judge denied the stay stating there was not enough environmental information to show harm to the plaintiffs.

Charmaine White Face, Coordinator for Defenders, said, "This appeal is about the violation of our Constitutional rights. Our concerns about the environment were not even considered by the Board during the first hearing in January," she said. "That's why we appealed their decision in the first place. We are not even to the environmental questions yet."

Attorney Gillis raised the point in court that Powertech will have all their exploratory wells finished before the hearing on the permit can occur. Judge Delaney stated that even though a number of procedural violations were committed by the Board and the State Department of Environment and Natural Resources, he now had the authority to make the decisions and this was his decision.

The Board's Hearing Chair, Lee McCahren, on Jan. 17, 2007, signed the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order that were prepared by Max Main, the attorney for Powertech. This was prior to the Board hearing the oral objections on Jan. 18 at which no court reporter was present. The process also allowed for written objections to be submitted within 30 days after the Hearing. The two groups submitted their written objections, and their objections should have been addressed by the Board in a Final Decision. The Board never sent a Final Decision. In order to participate in an appeal of the decision, the groups filed their appeal in State Court based on the Order sent out by Powertech.

Without the Board following their own procedures, the objections raised by the two groups then become an admission of fact. "Failure to answer an allegation in a petition constitutes and admission of that fact." according to South Dakota Compiled Law, 74:09:01:03. The two groups raise the contamination of the water and watersheds in their objections, as well as the health risks to all living things.

The permit that is being appealed allows Powertech to drill 155 more exploratory wells at depths of 500-600 feet in the southwestern Black Hills. They already have 4,000 uncapped, and unmarked uranium exploratory wells drilled in the past. The mining company plans on doing In Situ Recovery (ISR) of uranium from the Lakota and Fall River aquifers. In Situ Recovery was formerly known as In Situ Leach (ISL)mining.

During the ISR process, a solution to dissolve the uranium is poured down the wells and the dissolved uranium brought back up to the surface. The uranium is separated from the rest of the radioactive waste solution. The radioactive waste solution is then put back into the aquifer after being held in waste ponds on the surface. The procedure contaminates aquifers and cannot be controlled underground. In case of sudden rainstorms, the radioactive waste ponds often overflow and contaminate the surface ground and nearby watersheds as well.

According to Powertech's application, each exploratory drill hole "will have a small excavated mud pit that will be approximately 12 feet by 5 feet" and 10 feet deep. Among the concerns of the environmental groups are the possibility of overflow from the mud pits with the sudden rain showers that occur in the Black Hills. One of the aquifers empties directly into the Cheyenne River and is used by many ranchers to water their livestock. Among the deeper aquifers of concern is the Madison which provides water for many western South Dakota communities.

The two groups are considering appealing the request for a stay to the state Supreme Court. They continue to state that Powertech does not have a valid permit to drill until after the appeal of the granting of the permit is finished.

For more information call Charmaine White Face, Coordinator, at (605) 399-1868.

Uranium Mining Boom

2007-06-23T15:34:00.000-07:00

Below is a list of the exploratory uranium prospecting actions by the various uranium mining companies. I wonder if anyone will notice that once a mining company decides to prospect, it eventually will begin mining; and again either leaving an environmental mess for Superfund in the case of an abandoned toxic surface or leave for someone else to worry about, groundwater contamination issues as in an In Situ Leach uranium extraction operation.

Just amazes me that most environmentalist have become pro-nuclear. Probably because they don't realize that during mining booms, all concern for the environment is lost to the madness for profits as in "gold fever."

Uranium Exploration Projects
Northern Miner, Query 6/8/07

State Organization Status Property Name

AK Full Metal Minerals Ltd Exploration McCarthy Marsh
AK Full Metal Minerals Ltd Exploration Boulder Creek Property

AZ Denison Mines Corp Exploration Arizona Strip Property

AZ Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Anderson

AZ Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Colorado Property

AZ Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Rose Property

AZ Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Wate

AZ Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Arizona Strip Resources Joint Venture, LLC

AZ Golden Patriot Corporation Exploration Lucky Boy Project

AZ Liberty Star Gold Corp Exploration North Pipes Project

AZ Quaterra Resources Inc Exploration Arizona Stip Project

AZ Rodinia Minerals Inc Exploration Workman Creek Property

AZ Rodinia Minerals Inc Exploration Lucky Bay Project

AZ Rodinia Minerals Inc Exploration Mormon Lake Property

AZ Rodinia Minerals Inc Exploration Red Bluff Property

AZ Rodinia Minerals Inc Exploration Middleton Mountain Property

AZ Rodinia Minerals Inc Exploration Buckaroo Flats Property

AZ Rodinia Minerals Inc Exploration Pendleton Mesa Property

AZ Tournigan Gold Corporation Exploration

AZ Universal Uranium Ltd Exploration Artillery Peak Property

AZ Uranium Energy Corp Exploration

AZ Uranium Star Corp Exploration Arizona Project

CA Kilgore Minerals Ltd Exploration

CO Anglo-Canadian Uranium Corp Exploration Spider Rock Property

CO Denison Mines Corp Exploration Sunday Mine Complex

CO Energy Fuels Inc Exploration Whirlwind Property

CO Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Hanson Creek Property

CO Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Maybell Project

CO Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Skull Creek Project

CO Powertech Uranium Corp Exploration Centennial Project

CO Universal Uranium Ltd Exploration Marshall Pass Property

CO Universal Uranium Ltd Exploration Jamestown Property

CO Uranium Energy Corp Exploration

CO Laramide Resources Ltd Exploration Los Ochos Property

ID Magnum Uranium Corp Exploration Stanley Property

MT Kilgore Minerals Ltd Exploration

NV Duran Ventures Inc Exploration Smokey Valley Property

NV Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Auto Property

NV Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Babbit Property

NV Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Blackbox Property

NV Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Clearwater Property

NV Energy Metals Corporation Exploration New Year Property

NV Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Shale Property

NV Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Findlay Tank Property

NV Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Grama Property

NV Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Little Robinson Property

NV Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Lost Calf Property

NV Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Rim Property

NV Energy Metals Corporation Exploration White River Valley Property

NV International Arimex Resources Exploration California Creek Property

NV Kilgore Minerals Ltd Exploration

NV Northern Canadian Minerals Inc Exploration Carol R Mine Claims

NV Thelon Ventures Ltd Exploration White River Valley Project

NV Western Uranium Corporation Exploration Kings Valley Property

NM Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Crownpoint Property

NM Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Hosta Butte Property

NM Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Nose Rock Project

NM Laramide Resources Ltd Exploration La Jara Mesa Project

NM MAX Resource Corp Exploration C de Baca Project

NM Strathmore Minerals Corp Exploration Church Rock Property

NM Strathmore Minerals Corp Exploration Roca Honda Property

NM Uranium Resources, Inc Exploration Churchrock Project

NM Uranium Resources, Inc Exploration Crownpoint Property

NM Uranium Resources, Inc Exploration Rocha Honda Property

NM Uranium Resources, Inc Exploration West Largo Property

NM Western Uranium Corporation Exploration Treeline Project

NM Laramide Resources Ltd Exploration Melrich Property

OR Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Aurora Property

SD Energy Metals Corporation Exploration

SD Energy Metals Corporation Exploration

SD Northern Canadian Minerals Inc Exploration

SD Powertech Uranium Corp Exploration Dewey-Burdock Property

SD Strathmore Minerals Corp Exploration Chord Property

SD Tournigan Gold Corporation Exploration

SD Trans America Industries Ltd Exploration Edgemount Project

TX Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Chevron Project

TX Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Hobson Facility

TX Energy Metals Corporation Exploration La Palangana Project

TX Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Swinney Switch Project

TX Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Cadena Property

TX Uranium Energy Corp Exploration

UT Anglo-Canadian Uranium Corp Exploration East Canyon Wash Property

UT Denison Mines Corp Exploration Henry Mountains Complex

UT Denison Mines Corp Exploration Deer Creek Complex

UT Denison Mines Corp Exploration Rim Mine

UT Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Congress Property

UT Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Frank M Property

UT Energy Metals Corporation Exploration San Rafael Property

UT Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Velvet Property

UT Energy Metals Corporation Exploration

UT Glen Hawk Minerals Ltd Exploration San Rafael Property

UT Global Uranium Corporation Exploration Lisbon Valley Property

UT Global Uranium Corporation Exploration Pine Ridge Property

UT Global Uranium Corporation Exploration Harts Point Property

UT Global Uranium Corporation Exploration Fry Canyon Property

UT Global Uranium Corporation Exploration San Rafael Property

UT Global Uranium Corporation Exploration Dome Plateau Property

UT Laramide Resources Ltd Exploration La Sal Project

UT MAX Resource Corp Exploration PPCO Property

UT Magnum Uranium Corp Exploration Little Egypt Property

UT Magnum Uranium Corp Exploration Big Muddy Property

UT Magnum Uranium Corp Exploration Cedar Mountain Property

UT Mesa Uranium Corp Exploration Lisbon Valley Property

UT Mill Bay Ventures Inc Exploration BP Claims

UT Quaterra Resources Inc Exploration

UT Trigon Uranium Corp Exploration Henry Mountains Project

UT Trigon Uranium Corp Exploration Marysvale Property

UT U.S. Energy Corp Exploration Velvet Mine

UT Universal Uranium Ltd Exploration Lisbon Valley Property

UT Uranium Energy Corp Exploration

UT Uranium Power Corp Exploration Sahara Mine

WA International Arimex Resources Exploration

WA Magnum Uranium Corp Exploration Bond Property

WA Magnum Uranium Corp Exploration Nancy Creek Property

WY Cameco Corporation Exploration Gas Hills-Peach Property

WY Cameco Corporation Exploration Ruby Ranch Property

WY Canyon Resources Corporation Exploration Converse Jt Vent

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration AC Block

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Antelope Property

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Battle Spring Property

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration BL Block

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration CD Block

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Cyclone Property

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration DW Block

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration EC Block

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Horse Creek Property

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration JAB Property

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration JK Block

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration KM & KME Blocks

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Laramie Project

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Midway Property

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Moore Ranch Property

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Moss Agate Property

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Nine Mile Lake Property

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration OZ Block

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Peterson Property

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration PN Block

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Red Rim Property

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Rocky Draw Property

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration RM Block

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration South Powder River Basin Property

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Twin Buttes Property

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Western Sheep Mountain Property

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration VR Property

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Allemand-Ross Project

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration North Platte Property

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration North Platte Extension and Herma Property

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Le Bar-Hall Property

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration East Douglas Property (Sand Creek Joint Venture)

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Reno Creek Property

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Ruby Ranch Property

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Red Desert Property

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Gas Hills

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration Sweet Claims

WY Energy Metals Corporation Exploration QC Claims

WY Kilgore Minerals Ltd Exploration

WY Magnum Uranium Corp Exploration Lye Property

WY Malapai Resources Company Exploration

WY Northern Canadian Minerals Inc Exploration

WY Pathfinder Mines Corporation Exploration

WY Powertech Uranium Corp Exploration Dewey Terrace Property

WY Powertech Uranium Corp Exploration Aladdin Project

WY Quaterra Resources Inc Exploration

WY Strathmore Minerals Corp Exploration

WY Strathmore Minerals Corp Exploration Cedar Rim

WY Tournigan Gold Corporation Exploration

WY Trans America Industries Ltd Exploration

WY Trans America Industries Ltd Exploration Sundance Project

WY U.S. Energy Corp Exploration Sheep Mountain Property

WY Ur-Energy Inc Exploration Great Divide Basin Project

WY Ur-Energy Inc Exploration Shirley Basin Project

WY Ur-Energy Inc Exploration Kaycee Project

WY Ur-Energy Inc Exploration Shamrock Project

WY Uranerz Energy Corporation Exploration

WY Uranerz Energy Corporation Exploration

WY Uranium Energy Corp Exploration

WY Uranium Power Corp Exploration Sheep Mountain

Laramide Resources Ltd Exploration Sioux Project

South Dakota Radioactive Wastelands: A Case Study in Genocide

2007-04-08T13:47:00.000-07:00

Coming from a reservation in South Dakota, with a bare minimal understanding of environmental regulation and nuclear science, and foolishly thinking that there is a honest, unbiased, non-ethnocentric perspective, shared by many people, in protecting the future generations from our "avarice" and wanton wastefulness today; what a rude awakening! Not only was I wrong about the Internet as being a great place to seek more public support for our challenges against the 88 toxic abandoned uranium mines in the Custer National Forest (http://www.fs.fed.us/r1/custer/), the in situ leach uranium mining by PowerTech Uranium (http://www.powertechuranium.com/s/Home.asp) and other uranium mining companies, and the Black Hills National Forest abandoned uranium mines; I was totally incorrect in believing that the environmental and Native American groups would help us, the Defenders of the Black Hills (http://www.defendblackhills.org), in our challenge against their genocide against our tribes. Maybe I am not educated enough to know the difference between what is right and wrong, or maybe I just don't have the words to explain our challenge properly.

From what I am studying about this abandoned and in situ leach uranium mining issues, I feel that our community (Rock Creek, SD) and others Native communities on the Navajo Reservation are being used as guinea pigs to study the health effects of low-dose ionizing radiation. This depresses me.

But again, hope dawned, giving me solace that at least one person on the Internet would help us in our challenge who established the following website, the Silkwood Project and featured many of our stories in Heyoka Magazine. Educating people about the dangers of uranium poisoning has proven to be an extreme challenge but not one that will prove to be impossible, for instance, on MySpace I established a group for the Defenders of the Black Hills since there are millions of members that also have the environmental consciousness; this too increases awareness of our genocide. And after a short time, we also attracted the assistance of the Western Mining Action Network, Southwest Research and Information Center and Indigenous Environmental Network who provided us with valuable technical advice and supported our Uranium Summit which was held in Rapid City in March 2007.

Many nights I have felt sorrow, knowing that most people in my community of Rock Creek, SD (Bullhead, SD) on the Standing Rock Sioux Indian Reservation face the possibility of getting cancer and other uranium-induced illnesses. What saddens me is that it seems like the endangered species affected by uranium mining have more rights than we do even though we are becoming just as extinct. Then, as I think of the future, I can see only increasing doom because our regulatory agencies are not really considering anything else except their money.

I have included the following links to Microsoft Terraserver aerial photographs of the Lakota communities on the Cheyenne River and Standing Rock reservations being affected by the runoff from the abandoned uranium mines.

Standing Rock
1. Bullhead
2. Little Eagle
3. Wakpala

Cheyenne River
1. Iron Lightning
2. Thunder Butte
3. Green Grass
4. White Horse
5. Blackfoot

The Lakota are becoming extinct!

The truth is that most regulatory authorities established for environmental protection are pro-mining, not pro-earth, and even seem, at times, anti-people! More importantly after reading through many different environmental activists websites, I see that they are actually in league with the mining, energy and logging companies, holding the same view that if they follow certain mandated regulations purportedly enacted to protect the environment, the water and human health, then the ecological unbalancing should be allowed or permitted under certain specified conditions. But what bothers me most about evil synergy between the "environmentalists" and the "exploiters" is that they think that paying reclamation bonds, creating economic and employment opportunities, and mitigating sacred site issues gives them suitable justification to destroy our earth!

But to truly understand this self-destructiveness, we must understand that each of us also indirectly or directly contributes to this profane endeavor through our consumption of electricity, gasoline, heating, air conditioning, agriculture and livestock products and the other plethora of commercial products! The conundrum of the commons at its finest hour, debuting us as its woe-begotten audience, captivating us by its magical taste of invincibility while knowing we are also causing the desolation of our lebensraum-what a bad taste that must be and of course, perhaps many reconcile this eventuality with their own lust of power or powerlessness and sense of futility.

Then, from an economic and survivability standpoint, given the demand for a scarce natural resource, the supply must at least equal this demand for it to remain economically viable; if not, its demand rises to point of near fanatical rush to exploit this resource through whatever means necessary; this, to me, resembles a blood thirsty vampire seeking new prey. What is even more puzzling is: if a natural resource in its natural state is relatively harmless, then at that point where we alter it, making it highly toxic to the environment and to people, does this decrease its demand: I think not?

From my perspective, with respect to in situ leach (ISL)/in situ recovery (ISR) uranium mining, it seems in this instance that all concern goes out the window and in its place is this extreme thirst for profit from exploiting of these toxic uranium poisons: all in the name of being environmentally friendly and solving the GLOBAL WARMING craze. At $113 per pound with input/investment costs at around $1, greed is forcing people to forget that they also drink water and their children and children's children must also drink water; the question is then whether that water will be safe or pure enough for them to drink at all and whether that $112 profit mined today is worth the lives of their children. This occurs regardless of the proven facts that ISL/ISR uranium mining does in fact poison the groundwater as it did in Texas (see for example, "If Only We'd Known," and "Uranium Mining Polluting near the King Ranch").

Too many times have I heard people recommending various course of action, some realistic, some totally inappropriate for this challenge. Although our future looks bleak, there remains learning what other affected Native tribes in this country have did in situations such as ours to oppose these mining companies. Additionally there are other alternatives that I feel that these mining companies fail to see as being impossible for us to do; this underestimation will be their undoing. Furthermore, the state judicial proceedings that have occurred as a result of certain discrepancies in the ISL exploratory permit may have allowed them to begin drilling 155 more holes in our sacred Grandmother Earth, adding more insult to the already 4,000 other exploratory holes out in the Black Hills. Yet I am a firm believer that they will not succeed in establishing their ISL operation, seeing that they have forgotten one issue: that is that once the public becomes educated about the dangers and hazards of groundwater contamination from uranium activities such as has happened in the Custer National Forest, they will not allow more natural resources damages in this state.

There are only a few of us that are ardently opposing this sickness in our state, and even fewer realize that once they inject their poisons into our sacred Grandmother Earth, they will also kill those of us living on her surface, all of us, Tetuwan (Seven Council Fires) and white.

Report on Uranium Project

2006-05-26T23:32:00.000-07:00

by Harold J. One Feather
May 27, 2006

First of all, I am a volunteer for the Defenders of the Black Hills and am honored to be one.

My report will be short and will describe to you my goals, objectives and accomplishments as this relates to the Custer National Forest abandoned uranium mines and the extreme health crises in Rock Creek (Bullhead, SD) on the Standing Rock Sioux Indian Reservation.

I call your attention to the issue of extreme genocide and racism against our people occurring in northern South Dakota resulting from the radioactively contaminated abandoned uranium mines in the Custer National Forest. I have been involved in this issue for nearly ten years beginning in 1997 and have conducted an intensive examination of the facts relating to this critical issue.

In the Rock Creek community, there is an increasing rate of health problems: cancer and cancer deaths, miscarriages and ectopic pregnancies, diabetes and kidney diseases, and, sadly, birth defects. I have lost my mother to cancer, my father died of a heart disease, two of my aunts died of cancer, my niece has had two miscarriages and an ectotopic pregnancy; this is my testimony to you, others in the Rock Creek community have the same health problems. That there is an extreme health emergency on the Standing Rock Sioux Indian Reservation is not the question, I ask what can we do about this, for our future generations, for those that have lost our relatives?

As one man with limited resources, I could do nothing, my pleas were routinely ignored although I presented the facts to our tribal leadership, and to my community. Feeling a sense of hopelessness, I almost gave up and would have left my reservation with a guilty conscience knowing that our people are dying needlessly.

I have then asked in 2004 for the,help of'the Defenders of the Black Hills to deliver this message to concerned individuals and to governmental officials: Our people are dying and are getting sick from the abandoned uranium mines.

To date, the Defenders and I have attended several crucial meetings with the US Forest Service relating to their CERCLA/Superfund remediation actions. I like to think that because of our insistence, they received the $22 million reclamation grant from the US EPA and hopefully will reclaim the mines in the near future. Our next step should be to cause the US Forest Service to consider the extreme health crises on the Standing Rock Sioux Indian Reservation under the CERCLA/Superfund. This will cause the US Forest Service to speed up the Riley Pass abandoned uranium mine reclamation action as well as reclaim the other mines at the South Cave Hills and Slim Buttes. And hopefully this will cause the US EPA to give technical assistance grants to the affected communities and to the Defenders of the Black Hills to have CERCLA/Superfund explained in layman's terms. This way the rights of the people to have a safe environment will assured for future generations of our people.

We must also never forget to make those atomic bombs and nuclear power plants, they, the mining companies, have poisoned our environment and hurt our people, and they must be held accountable for their radioactively contaminated toxic mines. Tronox, formerly Kerr-McGee, must not be allowed any leniency since they have did a very unexcusable crime against our people.

We have also caused the State of South Dakota to initiate their surface water quality monitoring program for the western river basins except for the Bad River and will sample the water for radionuclide contamination. The Defenders must establish their proposed water quality monitoring project to compare these results with the States' results. To do properly implement the project, we will need funds and a budget, a sampling plan, sampling kits and supplies, intensive research on water issues, a quality assurance and assessment policy manual, and maps.

As some of you know I have volunteered to lead the MySpace group "Defenders of the Black Hills" (http://groups.myspace.com/defendblackhills) and have gained the support for several key MySpacers. I have placed four videos on the group main page: 1.) Destruction of the Black Hills; 2.) Riley Pass Mining Spoils; 3.) Picnic Springs; and, 4.) Riley Pass Mine. I have also included many important links to the uranium issues in our area including several key photographs of the Riley Pass uranium mine. In my photoblog at MSN Spaces (http://spaces.msn.com/uraniummine) I have many more photos and links to this areas newspaper story about the uranium issue. We have 124 members who are very interested in our activities concerning the Riley Pass mine and the others in the Custer National Forest. We have also all worked on a letter that we should all send to the State governor and to our Congress persons.

With the help of John LeKay (http://www.heyokamagazine.com), we have also established the Silkwood Project (http://www.silkwoodproject.com) which has interviews from myself, Dr. Helen Caldicott, world-renown nuclear activist; Timothy Benally, Navajo nuclear activist; Doug Brugge, Tufts University nuclear activist; Diane Stearns, Northern Arizona University biochemist, and William Under Baggage, Indigenous Nations Network environmentalist. The site is full of interesting and scary articles about uranium issues. I would highly recommend that everyone read these articles, John is very thorough in his writing and is extremely intelligent; we are very fortunate that he is helping the Defenders by publicizing our fight for environmental protection and for the uranium issue