Key environmental concerns over BHP Billiton’s Roxby Downs uranium mine
CHRISTOPHER RUSSELL, BUSINESS EDITOR, and GREG KELTON, WASHINGTONAugust 24, 2009
KEY environmental concerns about the multibillion-dollar expansion of the Olympic Dam mine must be fixed by BHP Billiton before the mine proceeds. Continue reading
Jo Vallentine: there should be no expansion of Olympic Dam uranium mine
Submission to the South Australian Government, by Jo Valentine
Tony Serve Blogs 5 August 09
On behalf of the Anti-Nuclear Alliance of Western Australia, I make this submission: there should be no expansion of the uranium mining operations of BHP Billiton at Olympic Dam…………….There are four parts to my argument: 1. Warming 2. Waste 3. Water 4. Weapons
1. WARMING: Since around 2003 -4 the global nuclear industry has positioned itself as part of the solution to climate change. In what has been an unprecedented attempt to fool governments and the public about its merits, and to minimise its dangers, the nuclear industry has been cavalier with the truth, to say the very least.It claims that it is greenhouse friendly, and therefore should be a sought-after energy source for the future. The only part of the nuclear industry’s operations which is not a heavy greenhouse gas emitter is the boiling of the water in the reactor. At every other stage in the chain, from uranium mining, to milling, to transport, to enrichment, to construction of reactors, to re-processing, to storage of waste (probably requiring more transport), to making of weapons, to de-commissioning of reactors, greenhouse gases are emitted. Just take the reactor construction and deconstruction as an example of what is never referred to by the industry’s proponents…………………..Far from being any part of the answer to global warming, I submit that the nuclear industry is a major contributor to greenhouse emissions. As Storm van Leewen argues: “The Nuclear Industry should commit itself to publish a thorough analysis of the emissions of carbon dioxide and all other greenhouses gases in all processes of the fuel chain before claiming that nuclear energy is carbon free or greenhouse gas free.”
2. Wastes This is a shameful legacy to be leaving future generations – they will have to deal with the folly of this twentieth century failed experiment.
The problem of nuclear waste begins with the uranium mining process……………….
At Olympic Dam, it’s a problem (usually) of high winds sending the tailings blowing in the wind. The proposed expansion would add a further mountain of tailings, which could not be guaranteed against leakages, seepages, windstorms…………….
the storage proposed would cover an area of up to 44 square kms. to a height of up to 65 metres. This toxic mountain will probably leak as all tailings dams/pits do, for the duration of the open pit mine’s life,………..
3. WATER
In the driest state of the driest continent on earth, it is unwise, to put it mildly, to consider expanding the Olympic Dam operations……….
The fact that the water currently taken from GAB is free of charge, adds insult to the injury of water wastage. BHP Billiton plans to increase that water usage to at least 42 million litres per day – this must be rejected outright. ANAWA calls on the S.A. Government to phase out all water extraction from the GAB’s Borefield A as soon as possible.
The nuclear industry generally is a heavy water user. As Tim Flannery says “Coal fired power plants have large water requirements for cooling and steam generation, but these are dwarfed by the water needs of nuclear power.”
………….We believe that the grab for uranium by BHP Billiton and other uranium mining companies is a cynical grab for the grubby dollar while there is some vestige of hope for this ailing industry. It must be seen in light of the fact that this is a declining industry, with less nuclear power being generated each year (mostly due to ageing reactors being de-commissioned, or reactors with major problems being shut down “temporarily”) and the fact that more reactors are shutting down each year than opening, despite all the industry hype. The industry’s projections look rosy, but the new generation IV reactors are still only promises and the facts reveal that, on the other hand, renewable energies are growing at exponential rates, and would be proceeding even faster, if more research and development dollars were put their way, instead of propping up a filthy, failing industry.
Uranium Mining Poisoning WA ’s Groundwater Forever
Uranium Mining Poisoning WA ’s Groundwater Forever
Dare to care, Dawn Jecks, 25 july 09
“…………..Described by Minister Garrett as being ‘world’s best practice’, the American owned Beverley Four Mile Uranium mine will use the controversial in-situ leach mining technique which involves deliberately pumping sulphuric acid into a public owned water aquifer to dissolve the uranium ore. Once the uranium is extracted from the surface the radioactive liquid waste from this process is then dumped into the aquifer. Given that the environmental regulators in the US refuse to allow this practice on their own soil, and the fact that aquifers in Eastern Europe have been heavily polluted by this practice why is our Federal government allowing it in Australia?Although Minister Garrett has talked about ’strict’ monitoring requirements ‘well after this South Australian mine ceases’, a long-term problem will undoubtedly arise from the fact that concentrated radioactive materials survive for thousands of years. How can the uranium mining company have ’strict’ monitoring for that length of time? Another WA proposal to mine uranium at the Yeelirie deposit some 550 kms east of Geraldton, will also be dependant on Minister Garrett’s approval.
As with all uranium mines enormous quantities of water are going to be needed to mine the Yeelirie uranium deposit…………………..
With more than one hundred uranium mining companies currently exploring in WA it is interestingly to note that the WA State Water Resources Minister Graham Jacobs has been urging WA householders to reduce their water consumption and to conserve our precious water resources through household sprinkler bans.Is polluting our groundwater aquifers with sulphuric acid on the one hand, and then asking householders to turn off their sprinklers, the Barnett Governments idea of being ‘water wise? I urge all West Australians to become acquainted with all the facts surrounding uranium mining before we find ourselves with a toxic legacy that never, ever goes away and the website for the Antinuclear Alliance of WA (ANAWA) is a good place to start.
Uranium Mining Poisoning WA ’s Groundwater Forever « Dare To Care – Dawn Jecks
Australia’s threatened water resources, and the uranium mining risk
(for more Australian news, go to
What impact is uranium mining having on our water?
The Advertiser, by Jim Green, 25 july 09
ENVIRONMENT Minister Peter Garrett buttressed his decision last week to approve in situ leach (ISL) uranium mining at Beverley Four Mile with the claim that he is “certain this operation poses no credible risk to the environment”.
Thus Mr Garrett adds another chapter to the history of spin surrounding ISL mining.
Environmental debates typically revolve around differing assessments of the possibility of environmental contamination.
But with ISL mining, environmental pollution – specifically contamination of groundwater with radionuclides, heavy metals and acid – is a certainty.
ISL mining involves pumping an acidic solution into an aquifer, dissolving the uranium ore and other heavy metals and pumping the solution back to the surface.
After the uranium has been separated, liquid radioactive waste is simply dumped in the aquifer. Isolation and containment of the pollutants would not be difficult or expensive, but the mining companies will take the cheaper option of polluting groundwater for as long as the politicians let them……………………
A 2003 Senate References and Legislation Committee report recommended banning the discharge of radioactive liquid mine waste to groundwater. ISL uranium mining is used at the Beverley uranium mine and it is the mining method proposed for Beverley Four Mile, Oban and Honeymoon.
The future of this mining technique is plain to see: short-lived mines leaving SA with a legacy of polluted aquifers.
Spills and leaks are common at ISL mines. The SA Department of Primary Industry and Resources lists 59 spills at Beverley from 1998 to 2007.
Serious questions must be raised as to BHP Billiton’s capacity to safely manage radioactive tailings at Olympic Dam if, as planned, tailings production increases sevenfold to 68 million tonnes annually and water consumption increases to more than 250 million litres daily.
BHP Billiton pays nothing for its massive water take for the Olympic Dam mine, despite recording a $17.7 billion profit in 2007-8. That arrangement is enshrined in the Roxby Downs Indenture Act 1982………
……… The Indenture Act provides a raft of exemptions and overrides from the SA Natural Resources Act 2004, the Environment Protection Act 1993, the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1988 and even the Freedom of Information Act 1991.
BHP Billiton and the Rann Government are currently engaged in secret discussions over the future of the Indenture Act.
1 This month
Help Aunty Sue Protect Her Land and Sacred Sites From Destructive Rocket Testing.
.
Australians deserve the truth
about
AUKUS – https://aukuspublicinquiry.com/
PETITION – To: Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and the Australian Labor Government
of the week – Australians for War Powers Reform (AWPR)
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
