Antinuclear

Australian news, and some related international items

Concern over New South Wales zurconium mine – also mining uranium and thorium

Kazzi Jai  Kazzi Jai  Fight To Stop Nuclear Waste Dump In Flinders Ranges SA, 11 Nov 18, 

when you can’t legally “produce” uranium and thorium BUT inadvertently “mine” it to get the rare earth elements zirconium, hafnium, niobium and yttrium?

That’s what’s happening at the Toongi mine, 25km south of Dubbo in NSW. Called the “Alkane Resource’s Dubbo Zirconia Project” its lease was granted in December 2015. Much closer to Sydney at 380km…. compared to Roxby Downs which is 565 km from Adelaide! And it turns out that the mine has between 10,000 and 100,000 tonnes of uranium according to Geoscience Australia!

And there’s more! Turns out that over the 20-year life of the project around 80,000 tonnes of “radioactive substance” – uranium and thorium – would need to be “diluted”, according to Alkane’s Environmental Impact Statement.

This “dilution” would require up to 50 million tonnes of other, non-radioactive, materials. Around 7 million tonnes of salt, 2.5 billion litres of ‘liquid residue’ and 2 million tonnes of ‘solid waste’ would remain at the mine site forever, alongside a 40-hectare “final void”.

Now, why isn’t this in our local papers do you think?  https://www.facebook.com/groups/344452605899556/

Advertisements

November 11, 2018 - Posted by | New South Wales, uranium

1 Comment »

  1. In the early days of Roxby (or Olympic Dam as they like to call it) part of the PR exercise was to constantly deny that it was a uranium mine, the uranium was just incidental. At the time it accounted for about 25% of the sales. Nowadays they like to trumpet that it is the world’s largest uranium deposit.

    Last Saturday’s Advertiser contained a multi-page insert that looked very much like an advertisement (but, as far as I could see, didn’t say so) praising every aspect of the project, whilst giving the briefest (or no) mention of the environmental problems, public opposition, spills, fires, leaks, etc, etc. The insert appeared to be co-authored by Advertiser and BHP staff. There were no articles that were in any way critical of the project. So much for balanced, objective reporting. Would be nice to know how much BHP paid for this slick piece of propaganda.

    Comment by Dennis Matthews | November 12, 2018 | Reply


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: