Alarm Spreads As Gold Mines Poison Rivers

JOHANNESBURG, South Africa, Dec 3, 2007, 2007 (IPS/GIN via COMTEX) — Gold-mining companies operating to the west of Johannesburg, South Africa, stand accused of contaminating a number of water sources with radioactive pollutants.

One case involves the Wonderfontein Spruit — a stream that runs 90 kilometers from the outskirts of Johannesburg to the southwest past the towns of Krugersdorp, Bekkersdal, Carletonville and Khutsong, before flowing into the Mooi River near Potchefstroom.

Mariette Liefferink, an environmental activist, blames the mines for the high concentrations of heavy metals such as arsenic, cadmium, copper, cobalt and zinc in the waters of the “spruit” (watercourse). She is particularly troubled by the levels of uranium, which gives off radioactive byproducts such as polonium and lead.

“The Wonderfontein Spruit is of major concern to us because every year the gold mines discharge 50 metric tons of uranium into the receiving watercourse. The Water Research Commission has found that there are approximately 1,100 milligrams per kilogram of uranium in the upper Wonderfontein Spruit and 900 milligrams per kilogram in the lower Wonderfontein Spruit area.”

Government bodies have commissioned several studies to ascertain the gravity of the water pollution in the Wonderfontein Spruit. The most recent study, known as the Brenk report, was commissioned by the National Nuclear Regulator — a governmental body set up to monitor and regulate the production and use of nuclear materials — and compiled under the direction of German physicist Rainer Barthel.

Initially the government was so embarrassed by the Brenk report that the National Nuclear Regulator refused to release it to the public. Barthel was due to present his findings to the Environmin 2007 conference July 24-25, so organizers of this event were told to withdraw his invitation.

When the Brenk Report was eventually made public in August, it resulted in a number of contradictory messages.

Harmony Gold — the world’s fifth largest gold producer, and one of the mines responsible for the uranium discharge — relayed to farmers on its lands a directive from the National Nuclear Regulator saying that livestock may not consume water from the Wonderfontein Spruit.

The report said water in the river had absorbed polonium and lead. Barthel also noted in the study that there was no natural water in the area that was safe for use by humans, animals or plants.

However, Water Affairs and Forestry Minister Lindiwe Hendricks said in a written response to a question posed in parliament that none of the 47 samples from the Wonderfontein Spruit exceeded the National Nuclear Regulator regulatory limit for public exposure. “The use of this water is therefore safe for drinking purposes, but it should be borne in mind that the water is raw or untreated river water that has not been treated to potable drinking water standards,” Hendricks said.

This assurance came despite her acknowledgement, in the same response, that “elevated levels of radioactive contamination have been detected in the sediments of dams and weirs along the river. This may pose potential problems should it be ingested by livestock churning up the sediments.”

The chief executive of the National Nuclear Regulator, Maurice Magugumela, has made an effort to quell public fears over this situation, saying that the poisoned water and sediments posed “no cause for concern.”

Source: http://angryscientist.wordpress.com/2006/08/24/mining-industry-malarkey/

Wonderfontein Radioactive Water, the Price of Gold

Steven Lang
Johannesburg
Source: http://www.ipsnews.net/africa/

Large gold-mining companies operating to the west of South Africa's commercial centre, Johannesburg, stand accused of contaminating a number of water sources with radioactive pollutants.

One case involves the Wonderfontein Spruit ("water course", in Afrikaans): a stream that runs 90 kilometres from the outskirts of Johannesburg to the south-west past the towns of Krugersdorp, Bekkersdal, Carletonville and Khutsong, before flowing into the Mooi River near Potchefstroom.

Mariette Liefferink, an environmental activist, blames the mines for the high concentrations of heavy metals such as arsenic, cadmium, copper cobalt and zinc in the waters of the spruit. She is particularly troubled by the levels of uranium, which gives off radioactive by-products such as polonium and lead.

"The Wonderfontein Spruit is of major concern to us because every year the gold mines discharge 50 tonnes of uranium into the receiving water course. The Water Research Commission (a parastatal research body) has found that there are approximately 1,100 milligrammes per kilogramme of uranium in the upper Wonderfontein Spruit, and 900 milligrammes per kilogramme in the lower Wonderfontein Spruit area."

Heavy metal concentrations are higher in the upper reaches of the river because a large percentage of the pollutants sink into the sediments as water flows downstream. This means that under normal circumstances water tests in lower areas do not cause great concern, and users may feel that they are not under threat from heavy metal contaminants.

If, however, the sediments are in any way disturbed -- by cattle, or children playing in the river, for example -- the uranium can easily be dislodged from the sediments and reabsorbed into the water.

Mixed messages

Government bodies have commissioned several studies to ascertain the gravity of the water pollution in the Wonderfontein Spruit. The most recent study, known as the Brenk report, was commissioned by the National Nuclear Regulator (NNR) -- a governmental body set up to monitor and regulate the production and use of nuclear materials -- and compiled under the direction of German physicist Rainer Barthel.

Initially government was so embarrassed by the Brenk report that the NNR refused to release it to the public, and as Barthel was due to present his findings to the Environmin 2007 conference on Jul. 24-25, organisers of this event were told to withdraw his invitation.

When the Brenk Report was eventually made public in August, it resulted in a number of contradictory messages.

Harmony Gold -- the world's fifth largest gold producer, and one of the mines responsible for the uranium discharge -- relayed to farmers on its lands a directive from the NNR saying that livestock may not consume water from the Wonderfontein Spruit.

The report said that water in the river had absorbed polonium and lead. Barthel also noted in the study that there was no natural water in the whole area that was safe for use by humans, animals or plants.

However, Water Affairs and Forestry Minister Lindiwe Hendricks said in a written response to a question posed in parliament that none of the 47 samples from the Wonderfontein Spruit exceeded the NNR regulatory limit for public exposure. "The use of this water is therefore safe for drinking purposes, but it should be borne in mind that the water is raw or untreated river water that has not been treated to potable drinking water standards."

This assurance came despite her acknowledgement, in the same response, that "Elevated levels of radioactive contamination have been detected in the sediments of dams and weirs along the river. This may pose potential problems should it be ingested by live-stock churning up the sediments."

The chief executive of the NNR, Maurice Magugumela, has made an effort to quell public fears over this situation, saying that the poisoned water and sediments posed "no cause for concern."

In addition, the city council of Potchefstroom has gone to great lengths to assure its residents that the city's drinking water is safe. Potchefstroom sources much of its water from the Boskop dam which is partly fed by the Wonderfontein Spruit.

"Treated water from the Boskop and Potchefstroom dams are of high quality especially regarding its heavy metal and uranium content," said mayoral spokesman Kaizer Mohau, in a statement.

There is no reason to doubt Mohau's statement, which must certainly comfort city residents who drink tap water.

But it will do little for the estimated 150,000 people living in impoverished settlements along the Wonderfontein Spruit's banks. They may have no choice but to drink untreated water from the river.

Acid mine drainage

Gold mines are also finding themselves in the dock over acid mine drainage, another means by which heavy metals are being released into the environment.

Mining operations expose heavy metals and sulphur compounds that have been locked away in the ground. Rising ground water then leaches these compounds out of the exposed earth, resulting in acid mine drainage that can continue to pollute the environment decades after mines have been closed down.

In 2002, acidic water began decanting out of a disused mine on Randfontein Estates about 42 kilometres south-west of Johannesburg. The property belonged at that time to Harmony Gold. In terms of South Africa's National Water Act the owner of land is accountable for the quality of the water flowing out of that ground.

While some of this acidic water was produced by Harmony's own operations, a large proportion was generated by its competitors.

Mining companies extracting ore in the Witwatersrand area, to the east and west of Johannesburg, have created a 300 kilometre labyrinth of interlinking passages, according to the 'Water Wheel' magazine (Jan./Feb. 2007 issue).

The companies have to work together to make sure their respective operations are not flooded out; this means that in some cases even disused mines have to be pumped dry to ensure the viability of a neighbouring shaft.

Water coming out of the disused mine in Randfontein could not simply be channelled into the nearest river because it was far too acidic and could have had serious consequences for the environment.

As an emergency measure, Harmony fed the water into Robinson Lake, at that time a popular recreational area where fishing was a favourite pastime. Today the lake has very high levels of uranium and a pH level of 2.2, which makes it as acidic as lemon juice and completely incapable of sustaining any life forms.

The NNR measured in the water a uranium concentration of 16 milligrammes per litre, obliging it to declare Robinson Lake a radiation area.

Harmony Gold has spent more than 14 million dollars on capital and operational expenses over the last five years to treat the acidic water emerging from disused mines. An additional 200,000 dollars is spent every month to continue with the treatment processes: in its 'Sustainable Development Report 2007' the company claims that it ". . . treats the water to acceptable standards given the current treatment technologies available."

What Harmony Gold finds acceptable, however, may be less so to environmentalists.

Source: http://www.ipsnews.net/africa/

Enough of Uranium says Froneman

Enough was enough, says Froneman
Source: http://www.miningmx.com/energy/952794.htm
Allan Seccombe
Posted: Thu, 21 Feb 2008

[miningmx.com] -- IT was time to move on, and time for a change because a chief executive should only be in the position for five to seven years, said Neal Froneman, who suddenly and unexpectedly quit his position as the head of Uranium One on Thursday.

Froneman, who spent the five years building Uranium One from scratch, announced his resignation at the same time the company issued a second downward revision of uranium production targets in four months because of problems in South Africa and Kazakhstan.

Uranium One shares fell hard in South Africa on news of Froneman’s departure and the production revision, wiping out some R5.5bn in market capitalisation.

The latest reverse in fortunes for Uranium One played no role in his decision, Froneman said.

“Uranium One has moved into a very different phase. There’s going to be a lot more focus on operational issues in coming years and it is an opportune time for me to move on,” Froneman told Miningmx in an interview.

“I’ve had a very difficult, but exciting five years. It gets to a point where enough is enough," he said.

“I left of my own accord. I could have stayed on, but I’ve always said the appropriate tenure for a CEO is five to seven years,” he said, adding he has offered his services as a consultant to Uranium One, which had aspirations to challenge Cameco for the position as number one uranium producer.

Jean Nortier, a company stalwart who is filling the CEO position in the interim, suggested the ongoing problems at the Dominion mine in South Africa could have been one of the causes to prompt Froneman's departure.

"The issue of Dominion raised a lot of tensions internally and it's not nice when an operations doesn't function optimally. You not only have to deal with staff working longer hours, but you also have the difficulties of the promises you made to the market," Nortier told Miningmx.

"Neal's decision was very quick otherwise we would have put in place a proper succession plan. It was a pretty big surprise," he said. Asked whether his departure could have been better planned, leaving a succession strategy in place, Froneman said there was a lot of talent in the company. “I think there’s good succession in place in the company,” he said.

“It’s very difficult to prepare the market for a change,” he said, arguing that by telling the market in advance he was leaving it could have built up an overhang of shares. “Either I could have told the market well ahead of time that I was leaving, but that creates its own longer-lasting damage, or I could just get to the point and leave,” he said. “At executive level, you should just resign and move on.”

Froneman is going to take a break of month or more before devoting his attention to Aflease Gold, a company majority held by Uranium One and one which has long headed as CEO.

“There’s always sadness in leaving behind something you’ve worked so hard to build, but I’m very proud of what’s been achieved. I’ve mixed feelings. I’m happy to be getting into something new,” he said.

The first thing he’d like to do is take the company to an offshore listing, most likely to be on a North American bourse, before looking at mergers and acquisitions.

There needs to be more liquidity in Aflease Gold shares, and while he says he’s not expecting Uranium One to completely exit its holding, Froneman would like to see more Aflease Gold shares released for the retail market.

There are mounting challenges in operating a mining company in South Africa, with the power shortages and the government's approach to enforcing safer working conditions on mines being just two of these, he said.

“If you talk to any mining company in South Africa at the moment you will hear they are operating under ridiculous conditions. The power outages have having a bigger impact than is being realised in the market,” Froneman said.

The Department of Minerals and Energy’s approach of temporarily shutting down shafts when there’s a death on a mine is counterproductive, he said.

“People react very badly when they’re put under pressure from a safety point of view,” he said. “The big stick approach doesn’t work. It’s been tried before and didn’t work.”

Once he’s achieved what he wants to at Aflease Gold, most likely when its growth aspirations have been met, he will move on to something else. “I’m at that stage in my life where I’m looking at other options, but there’s nothing planned.”

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

Froneman says Dominion a solid asset as Uranium One continues its slide

Source: http://www.miningweekly.co.za/article.php?a_id=127674

By: Matthew Hill
Published: 22 Feb 08 - 16:44

While distressed uranium-miner Uranium One's stock continued its downward spiral on Friday, shedding a further 15%, questions had been raised about the legitimacy of its Dominion Reefs Uranium Mine, near Klerksdorp, after 2008 production forecasts were slashed by one-quarter.

However, Neal Froneman, who suddenly stepped down as Uranium One CEO on Thursday, said he continued to believe that the project was solid.

"I am still of the view that Dominion is a solid asset," he told Mining Weekly Online in a telephone interview.

Uranium One was trading 15% down at around R32 a share by 11:00 in Johannesburg, before regaining some ground to close at just more than 10% down for the day.

Consultancy firm SRK Consultants compiled the competent persons report on the project in 2006, and the author who signed it off said that the firm had done it in compliance with international standards.

Partner and corporate consultant Roger Dickson said that SRK had no reason to believe that its report was not 100% accurate.

A media report on Friday said that Anglo American had compiled a report on Dominion ten years earlier, which reported a recovered grade that was less one-half of what SRK cited.

Dickson said that he had not seen such a report, nor was aware of the existence of one.

He said he "found it quite hard to believe" that Anglo American would have spent R20-million on such a report, as the media report suggested.

Uranium faces continued bumpy ride

Uranium faces continued bumpy ride

Source and copyright: http://www.miningweekly.co.za/article.php?a_id=126044

By: Matthew Hill

Published: 4 Feb 08 - 18:26

The long-term fundamentals for the uranium price looked strong, with possible northward movement in the future, unless there was a worldwide recession, an expert on the nuclear fuel said on Monday.

The 2007 uranium spot price was plagued by volatility, shooting upward in the first half of the year to an all-time high of $138/lb, but then dropping nearly as quickly to trade at current levels of below $90/lb.

These prices would remain volatile until a clear picture of the future in supply and demand emerged, US consultancy firm Ux Consulting president Jeff Combs told his audience at the Mining Indaba, in Cape Town.

But, while the spot price might be dropping, long-term contracts were holding steady, at levels around $95/lb.

The factors affecting uranium's outlook included the number of nuclear reactors that countries around the world were building, and the fact that a large amount of the fuel used in these was produced by a few "megaprojects", which made supply susceptible to disruption, Combs said.

This was illustrated by flooding issues at mines like Canada's Cigar Lake project.

Some 50% of new uranium production would come out of Africa and Kazakhstan.

"There should be no problem if this production comes through to meet demand," Combs said.

However, he stated that these projects needed to be stepped up.

"The production response has been anaemic, except for Kazakhstan," Combs said.

On the demand side, there could be 86 countries producing nuclear electricity by 2050, which equated to 630 reactors that would need uranium to generate power.

China had a big appetite for the fuel, but Russia and India also had significant nuclear ambitions. There were also a number of European countries looking to boost their nuclear power generation capacities.

Egypt had also said that it would build its first nuclear reactor, with Turkey planning two to four of its own.

The Ukraine also had plans to build 15 000 MW of nuclear power capacity by 2030, Combs said.

The South African government had also declared nuclear energy to be a big part of its new power-generation capacity build programme, with 25 000 MW additional nuclear power-generation capacity to come on stream by 2025.

Source and copyright: http://www.miningweekly.co.za/article.php?a_id=126044

What to do with 'those dangerous uranium stones'

What to do with 'those dangerous uranium stones'
By Helena Kingwill, free-lance journalist and independent film-maker

Nuclear Energy is the government’s choice as “the cleaner, more eco-friendly” solution to South Africa’s increasing energy crisis. Industrialists promoting this technology use the argument that it is more environmentally friendly because in comparison to the monstrous CO2 emissions being pumped into our atmosphere by South Africa’s dinosaur coal powered power stations, the apparently slick, dinky high-tech Pebble Bed Modular reactors (PBMRs) look cleaner (in theory—they have not been built yet.) Even the controversial existing Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR) at Koeberg doesn’t look like it’s contributing to global warming at the rate of her smoke-bellowing coal counterparts. However there is much more to the process of creating nuclear energy than meets the eye. The mining and processing of nuclear fuel does in fact create CO2 emissions, but that is almost beside the point. Media reports about global warming, important as they are, have given the spin doctors for nuclear energy a way to use the public’s own fear to pull wool over their eyes. What about the nuclear waste?

If Eskom's nuclear plan goes ahead, tons of nuclear waste will be produced every year. A whole radioactive industry will be built around it, from the mining of uranium to the processing of the fuel, all of which produce forms of waste. Anything that comes into contact with radiation is regarded as nuclear waste. It all has to be transported along our roads to the SA’s main nuclear waste-dump – Vaalputs near Springbok, from the city highways to the slippery gravel tracks of Namaqualand, where it is very easy for trucks to overturn.

Components of spent nuclear fuel (High-Level Waste) remain toxic for millions of years. Although we have been making it for over 20 years, South Africa still has no official plan for the safe disposal of this waste. Billions of Rands have already been spent on developing the P.B.M.R. yet the safe disposal of the waste it will produce, not to mention the decommissioning of the actual plant, have not fully been accounted for. Obviously this is much longer than any company or government can account for.

If this waste is buried, it could leak into the underground water and poison the ecosystem around it, spreading radiation like a cancer. The earth is constantly moving and shifting. According to paleontologist Dr. John Anderson, “continents drift at the rate of the growth of your fingernails.” One drop of nuclear waste can cause cancer, so by planting nuclear waste in the earth, we could be said to be planting a malignant tumor in the earth’s skin. This is the central metaphor of my documentary: “Buried in Earthskin” which has been screened at the Earthnotes Festival.

The community who are the focus of the film, and which the film constantly returns to, is a group of Namakhoi women whose husbands are workers at the nuclear waste dump Vaalputs in Namaqualand. They live in a village (Nourivier) about 100 km away from the waste dump but are extremely worried about the effects of the radiation on their health. Their greatest concern is that the nuclear waste could be seeping into the underground water supply. They are disappointed by false promises made by the apartheid government who deceived them into believing that the place was going to be a game reserve. They are surprisingly well informed about radiation and its possible effects on the environment and their health.

The Namakhoi people of Nourivier live in grass-domed homes and follow many old ways in their lifestyle. They are aware of which plants to pick for medicine and are very close to the earth. The women bake bread once a week in wood fired ovens made of clay. According to the Namaqualand Recreation and Education Centre (NAMREC) based in Springbok, although white farmers were moved off land near the dump, many "coloured" communities were not taken into account when the nuclear waste storage facility, Vaalputs, was planned. All around the world, the earth’s first peoples have been the most scarred victims of nuclear technology. In South Africa nuclear workers have suffered health problems due to being exposed to radiation, but have not been compensated due to the fact that they have not been able to prove, nor been in a position to sue or prove that their health problems are due to being exposed to radiation. “The distances are too large and the politics too big,’ one worker told me. This particular character, an ex-Vaalputs worker living in Nourivier, confided that he was never given the results of blood-tests taken one day. He felt that his body was un-naturally worn down by his work at the waste dump. (He died within a year of the interview.)

In comparison to nuclear technology, the government has paid far less interest in researching sustainable renewable alternative technologies such as solar and wind power. The reason given for this is that they will not be as reliable for big industry as centralized power stations. If they were given a chance, researchers developing this technology could find ways to store the energy generated by solar and wind technologies. More focus should be put on ways to reduce our wasteful consumption of energy. (Recent loose screws at Koeberg plunged half the Cape into darkness last year and forced us into a new awareness regarding reducing our energy consumption.)

Respected economist author and academic Patrick Bond puts us in the picture about the history of government spending with regards to energy, with the figures he has at his fingertips: “The problem of priorities appears to be getting worse, not better.” He said “Expenditure on renewable energy was less than 0.5% of the DME budget in 2002/03…. Indeed, perhaps the greatest waste remains in the area of nuclear research and development.”
He explains that historically the nuclear industry has always consumed more than its share of the national energy budget. Ironically it was started during the apartheid era, when the National Party secretly built 6 nuclear bombs. (These were officially dissembled when the A.N.C. came into power. However this new surge of interest in the technology makes one wonder if there may be a second agenda.)

“First considered in the 1960s, South Africa’s nuclear industry began in 1974 with the construction of the Koeberg nuclear station“, Bond explains. “The plant was commissioned a decade later. Nuclear development consumed two-thirds of the DME’s annual budget but only generated about 3% of South Africa’s primary energy supply and 5% of electricity in 1997”, explains Bond. “Eskom has been working on the PBMR since 1993, and therefore has a strong financial interest in keeping the programme going”, he says.

If only the present Government in its position of power on this decision about the future of our country’s energy sources would remember Nelson Mandela’s words when he spoke at the opening to the 5th session of the World Commission on the Ocean: "Our policy must rest on the solid moral foundation of dedication to the primacy of people and their long-term well being. We have to be on guard against temptations of short-term benefits and pressures from powerful forces at the expense of long-term interests of all. We cannot afford to bargain away the birthright of future generations."

The fate of future generations hangs in the balance, especially those poverty stricken communities living near the places where they will be mining, processing, burning and burying the waste from those “dangerous uranium stones’’ as Namakhoi elder, Oom Japie Dekeurs, calls them. Why not invest in even cleaner solar and wind energy projects which could be run by the communities themselves, generating revenue by selling excess power into the grid when weather is favourable, and creating far less hazardous employment for locals? Such decentralized projects would really bring power to the people thus preventing the burning of the last few trees and cutting down on lung diseases such as TB agitated by smoke, not to mention the tragic runaway fires that we see too often. Why I wonder, are we so stuck in the nuclear rut?
For more information about Buried in Earthskin, please contact Helena Kingwill at hdkingwill @ polka.co.za

About Buried in Earthskin:
A young female journalist sets off on a road trip to Namaqualand to see where the nuclear waste is buried. She meets a group of Namakhoi women living near the nuclear dump. In an attempt to understand the government’s decision to invest in nuclear as apposed to renewable energy, Helena visits experts and Nuclear facilities all over South Africa in what becomes a spiritual as well as picturesque physical journey which takes place over two years.

Credits: Helena Kingwill 2004 South Africa 56min

SOURCE: http://www.dlist-benguela.org/Monthly_Newsletter/Newsletter_4/What_to_do_with_%27those_dangerous_uranium_stones%27/

Ireland rejects uranium prospecting applications

Ireland rejects uranium prospecting applications, signals 'wider policy decision'

SOURCE: http://www.miningweekly.co.za/article.php?a_id=122718
By: Liezel Hill
Published: 3 Dec 07 - 21:38

Ireland's Natural Resources Minister, Eamon Ryan, said on Monday that would not grant prospecting licenses to two companies which had applied for government permission to explore for uranium in the country.

The rejections signalled a "wider policy decision to prohibit such activity in Ireland", the Ministry said in a statement.

"I have decided...as Minister of Communcications, Energy & Natural Resources, I will not license any prospecting for uranium in Ireland."
Nuclear generation of electricity is outlawed in Ireland, and Ryan said that it would be "hypocritical" to allow the mining of uranium for use in other countries.

"A prospecting license is the first step in the mining process. Granting a license carries an implicit policy agreement permitting its extraction should a viable prospect be discovered," he said.

"There are also significant environmental and public health concerns surrounding uranium mining, including contamination of ground and surface water supplies and radiation levels."

Spot uranium prices reached a record high of $138/lb earlier this year, helped, in part, by setbacks at Cigar Lake, a big new mine under construction in Canada, as well as output constraints at several other mines around the world.

Prices have since retreated somewhat, but Neal Froneman, who heads TSX- and JSE-listed Uranium One, told Mining Weekly Online last month that he expected uranium spot prices to touch new highs in the next year to 18 months.

SOURCE: http://www.miningweekly.co.za/article.php?a_id=122718

Nuclear Emissions - Helen Caldicott

URANIUM MINING, MILLING, ENRICHING, ROUTINE RELEASES AND ACCIDENTAL RELEASES

In the last chapter we discussed the medical, physical and biological characteristics of radiation.

In this chapter we will deal with the toxic radioactive legacy of each step of the nuclear fuel chain and the ecological and health impacts that this legacy bequeaths for this and all future generations

As we proceed through this chapter it will become more than obvious that the steps necessary for the production of nuclear power are so medically dangerous that the production, dissemination and distribution of nuclear materials should be subject to the same stringent taxes and restrictions as those placed on the global production of carbon dioxide, or, more obviously perhaps this technology should be abandoned immediately. In fact it beggars the mind that we have benignly allowed the nuclear industry to get away with its severely polluting technology for so long.

As a physician I see the extraordinary efforts that I and my colleagues pursue to save the lives of our patients suffering from cancer and genetic diseases, let alone the amount of money allocated to find the cure to cancer. Yet here we have an industry that is actively promoting and incurring massive increases in these disastrous diseases, and society has not yet called their bluff. It is beyond time that we did.

Uranium Mining

Uranium mining began in Europe in the late part of the 19th century when Madam Curie was refining pitch blend from uranium ore and discovering the wonders of radiation. Large scale mining commenced 65 years ago specifically to provide fuel for nuclear weapons. Much of the uranium was located on Navajo and Pueblo tribal land. The mining continued unabated for many decades thereafter and large numbers of Native Americans were employed as below-ground and above-ground miners.

People who mine uranium below the ground are at great risk because they are exposed to a high concentration of radioactive gas called radon 220 which accumulates in the air of the mine. Radon is a daughter or decay product of uranium, and is a highly carcinogenic alpha emitter which if inhaled, deposits in the air passages of the lung irradiating cells which then become malignant. As a result, uranium miners have suffered from a very high incidence of lung cancer. One fifth to one half of the uranium miners in North America, many of whom were Native Americans, have died and are continuing to die of lung cancer. Records reveal that uranium miners in other countries including Germany, Namibia and Russia suffer a similar fate.

Another lethal uranium daughter is radium 226, which is an alpha emitter with a half life of 1600 years. This radioactive element is notorious in the medical literature. In the early part of the 20th century women painted numbers on watch dials with radium enriched paint, so that the numbers glowed in the dark with radioactivity. To make the figures precise, they licked the tips of the paint brushes thereby swallowing large amounts of radium. Because radium is a calcium analogue it deposited in their bones. Many of these women subsequently died of osteogenic sarcoma – a highly malignant bone cancer, affecting their facial bones while others succumbed to leukemia, because white blood cells which were mutated are manufactured in the bone marrow. Uranium miners are exposed to a similar risk because radium is an integral component of uranium dust in the mine. When they swallow the dust, radium is absorbed from the gut and deposits in their bones.

Uranium ore also emits gamma radiation which emanates from the ore face, so the miners are also exposed to a constant whole-body radiation exposure (like X-rays) emitted by other uranium daughters, which irradiates their bodies and continuously exposes their testicles.

As the uranium ore is mined, and the uranium is extracted, large quantities of radioactive dirt and soil are discarded and left lying in huge heaps adjacent to the mine exposed to the air and the rain. This material is called tailings. Most tailings in North America are situated on indigenous tribal land of the Navajo nation and the Laguna Pueblo in New Mexico, and on the Serpent River First Nation in Ontario, Canada. Millions of tons of radioactive dirt constantly leak radon 220 into the air exposing the indigenous populations who live nearby in their pueblos and settlements. As they inhale the radon, many of these people have and are developing lung cancer.

Rain also leaches soluble radium 226 through the tailings piles into the underground water which often is the source of drinking water for these people. When radium enters streams and rivers it bio-concentrates thousands of times at each step in the food chain of the aquatic life and terrestrial plants. Because it is tasteless and odourless, people in these contaminated populations cannot tell whether they are drinking radioactive water, breathing radioactive air or eating fish or food containing radium 226 which induces bone cancer or leukemia.

Hundreds of mines and tailings heaps lie exposed to the air and wind on Navajo land. Thousands of Navajos are still affected by uranium induced cancers, and will continue to be so for thousands of years unless remediation takes place. In total 265 million tons of uranium tailings pollute the American South West.


Ecological Racism

There has never been any attempt by the government or the nuclear industry to clean up this massive radioactive pollution which contaminates tribal land. It would be hard to imagine that the nuclear industry would be permitted to leave millions of tons of radioactive tailings lying adjacent to the well-heeled town of New Canaan Connecticut or near the Rockefeller estate in the Adirondacks.

Uranium Milling

The US federal government covers the cost of milling uranium. The ore is crushed and chemically treated at the milling plant in the American South West where it is converted to yellow cake. As in the mining process, the waste ore is discarded on the ground. These mill tailings contain radium and a dangerous radioactive element called thorium – a uranium daughter and a high energy gamma emitter with a half life of 80,000 years. Thorium is used in colour television sets. Over the last 40 years over 100 million tons of mill tailings have accumulated in the American South West

Human cost is again important in the energy discussion. To illustrate the dangers of loose unguarded nuclear material, in the mid 1960s, local contractors at Grand Junction in Colorado discovered acres of discarded mill tailings. Not knowing they were radioactive they used them for cheap landfill and concrete mix. Schools, hospitals, private homes roads, an airport and shopping mall were constructed from this material. In 1970, local pediatricians noticed an increased incidence of cleft lip, palate and other congenital anomalies amongst newborn babies born to parents who lived in these radioactive structures, which continually emitted gamma radiation and radon gas.

The EPA allocated monies to the University of Colorado Medial Center to study the correlation between the birth defects and the radioactive dwellings. However one year into the study, funds were abolished because, the government said, it had to save money for budgetary purposes.

Uranium Enrichment

As described in the second chapter, the uranium 235 isotope is enriched from a low concentration of 0.7% to 3% for fuel in nuclear power plants. If uranium 235 is enriched above a concentration of 50% it can be used as nuclear weapons fuel.

Workers at all stages of the enrichment process are exposed to whole body gamma radiation from daughters in the uranium. But the most serious aspect of enrichment is the material that is discarded, and that is uranium 238. This is called “depleted uranium” (DU) because it has been depleted of its uranium 235. But it is not depleted radioactively.

DU is lying around in hundreds of thousands of leaking disintegrating barrels at the enrichment facilities in Paducah Kentucky, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, and Portsmouth Ohio. At Padacah alone, some 38,000 cylinders of DU await disposal. DU has contaminated the ground water, forcing the government to provide alternative drinking water for the local residents.

But the Pentagon, in its wisdom has found a nifty use for this radioactive waste. Because uranium 238 is 1.7 times more dense than lead it has been found to be the ideal antitank weapon. When shot out of a cannon at great speed its ten pound mass develops great momentum, so the solid uranium antitank shell cuts through the steel on the other fellow’s tank like a hot knife through butter.

But DU has several unfortunate properties. It is pyrophoric which means that it bursts into flame upon impact and up to 80% disintegrates into finely powdered aerosol which is distributed to the four winds. It is radioactive, and it has a half life of 4.5 billion years

Nevertheless, the Pentagon is very keen about this weapon. In the 1991 Gulf war invasion they used 360 tons of it in the form of antitank shells. In the 2002 invasion they already have deployed well over 2000 tons, in cities such as Baghdad where half the population of five million people is children who play in the burned out tanks and on the sandy dusty ground. Children are ten to twenty times more susceptible to the carcinogenic effects of radiation than adults. My pediatric colleagues in Basra where this ordinance was used in 1991 report a seven fold increase in childhood cancer and a seven fold increase in gross congenital abnormalities.

Uranium is a heavy metal. It enters the body via inhalation into the lung or via ingestion into the GI tract. It is excreted by the kidney where, if the dose is high enough, it can induce renal failure. It can induce kidney cancer. As a calcium analogue, it lodges in bones where like plutonium, it causes bone cancer and leukemia. Last but not least it is excreted in the semen where it mutates genes in the sperm. This may be one of the causes of the huge increase in congenital disease reported in Basra.

Because of the infinitely long half-life of uranium 238, the food, the air and the water in the cradle of civilization have been forever contaminated. T

In summary, the two gulf wars have been nuclear wars and people, particularly children are condemned to die of malignancy and congenital disease for ever more.

Other countries involved in uranium enrichment include Britain, China, Russia, Israel, Japan, Germany, Argentina, France, North Korea, Iran, Pakistan, Brazil and India. Any of these countries if they so desired could make nuclear weapons if they decided to enrich their uranium beyond 50%. America set the example and the world follows.

Fuel Fabrication.

After milling, the uranium fuel is made into cylindrical ceramic pellets the size of a cigarette filter and placed in zirconium fuel rods, half and inch thick and twelve to fourteen feet long. Each rod contains at least 250 pellets. About 50,000 of these rods are then packed into the core of a thousand megawatt reactor within a cylindrical space, fourteen feet high and twenty feet in diameter. Fuel fabrication workers are once again exposed to gamma radiation emanating from the uranium as well as to radium radon gas and uranium dust.

It Does Not Take An Accident

Routine Releases

Once the fuel in a nuclear reactor reaches critical mass, the high radiation ambiance causes uranium fuel to swell over time, pinhole breaks appear in the zirconium cladding and some faulty welds rupture in the fuel rods themselves releasing radioactive isotopes into the cooling water. In addition, the radiation emitted through the wall of the fuel rods activates water molecules and impurities in the water itself. For example, neutrons emitted from the fuel rods interact with water molecules to form tritium – a radioactive isotope of hydrogen. The primary coolant - water which cools the reactor core thus becomes intensely radioactive.

This thermally hot primary coolant is piped through a steam generator to heat the secondary cooling system. This secondary water is converted to steam which turns the generators to produce the electricity. The primary coolant is not supposed to mix with the secondary coolant but of course it does, allowing radiation to be released to the environment from this secondary system.

Because of these factors and many more to be described, a nuclear power plant cannot operate without routinely releasing radioactivity into the air and water.

Radioactive gases which leak from fuel rods are routinely released or “vented” into the atmosphere at every nuclear reactor. Before release they are temporarily stored to allow the short lived isotopes to decay and then released to the atmosphere through engineered holes in the reactor roof and from the steam generators. This process is called “venting”. About 100 cubic feet of radioactive gases are also released hourly from the condensers at the reactor. Planned ventings increase in frequency when the reactor shuts down due to mechanical malfunctions. Accidental ventings are not infrequent.

Planned “purges” when radioactive gases are actively flushed into the atmosphere by a fan, are officially permitted by the NRC so that utility operators can decrease the intensely radioactive environment into which maintenance workers must enter. Older reactors are allowed 22 purges per year during routine operation and 2 purges per year during cold shut-down. (Cold shut occurs when the fission reaction is stopped at the reactor and 30 tons of very radioactive fuel is removed and replaced by new fuel).

Some of the more dangerous gases such as iodine 131 are usually trapped by filters, but not always. After the radioactive iodine is filtered, noble gases are routinely released. The nuclear industry argues that noble gases are chemically inert and therefore not capable of reacting biochemically in the body but they actually decay to daughter isotopes which themselves are chemically very reactive.

Noble gases have names that remind me of superman - xenon, argon, krypton. There are many varieties of these elements, some of which I will describe below. They are inhaled into the lung, particularly on a day when a meteorological inversion system causes the plume of radioactive gases to cling to the ground in a concentrated form.

Noble gases are high energy gamma emitters and they are readily absorbed from the lung, and enter the blood stream. Because they are very fat soluble, they tend to locate in the abdominal fat pad and upper thighs, adjacent to the testicles and ovaries. There, they can induce significant mutations in the eggs and sperm of the people living adjacent to a reactor.

There have never been any epidemiological studies performed on the effects of exposure to the noble gases xenon and krypton. This is a grave deficit in the study of radiation biology because these gases are so ubiquitous around nuclear reactors, and are released with irresponsible impunity.

But many noble gases decay to other more dangerous isotopes, all of which have different metabolic pathways in the body. I will describe several of the more dangerous.

Xenon 137 with a half life of 3.9 minutes converts almost immediately to the notoriously dangerous cesium 137 with a half life of 30 years.
Krypton 90 , half life of 33 seconds, decays to rubidium 90, half life of 2.9 minutes, then to the medically toxic strontium 90, half life 28 of years.
Xenon 135 decays to cesium 135 with an incredibly long half life of 3 million years. Large amounts of xenon 133 are released at operating reactors, and although it has a relatively short half life of 5.3 days, it remains radioactive for 106 days.
Krypton 85 which has a half life of 10.4 years is a powerful gamma emitter.
Argon 39 has a 265 year half life.

Other dangerous noble gases include xenon 141, 143 and 144 which decay to cerium 141, 143 and 144. According to the National Council on Radiation protection (NCRP Report No 60) these three cerium isotopes which are beta emitters, are abundant products of nuclear fission reactions and have moderately long half lives. They bio-concentrate in the food chain and they irradiate the lung, liver, skeleton and gastrointestinal tract where they act as potent carcinogens.

A very important and little discussed isotope that is routinely emitted in large quantities into the air and waste water from nuclear power plants is tritium, (H3) a radioactive isotope of hydrogen which is composed of one proton and two neutrons. Tritium has a half life of 12.4 years and as such is radioactive for 248 years. H3 combines readily with oxygen to form tritiated water (H3O).

Because it is impossible to remove tritium gas or tritiated water via filters, it is released continuously from reactors into the air and into lakes, rivers or seas – depending upon the reactor location. At least 1360 curies of tritium are released annually from each reactor.

Tritium gas is an interesting radioactive material which is utilized extensively in exit signs, runway signs at airports and on watch faces. But it is very reactive and tends to chemically bind with any material in which it is enclosed.

Tritiated water in particular is scary material. If one is immersed in a cloud of tritiated water on a foggy day near a reactor it is absorbed straight through the skin. It is also readily absorbed through the lungs and the GI tract.

Because tritium is a soft energy beta emitter, all the radiation it gives off is readily absorbed by the surrounding cells, hence it is biologically very mutagenic.

There is a vast literature on the biological effects of tritium demonstrating that it is highly mutagenic and causes chromosomal breaks and aberrations. In animal experiments it has been shown to induce a five fold increase in ovarian tumours in offspring of exposed parents while also causing testicular atrophy and shrinkage of the ovaries. It causes decreased brain weight in the exposed offspring and mental retardation with an increased incidence of brain tumours in some animals. Increased perinatal mortality was observed in these experiments as well as a high incidence of stunted and deformed foetuses.

These effects were observed with surprisingly low concentrations of tritium, becoming three times more dangerous biologically at very low doses.

Tritium is also more dangerous when it becomes organically bound in molecules of food. As such it is incorporated into molecules including DNA within bodily cells. Chronic exposure to contaminated food causes 10% of the tritium to become organically bound within the body where it has a biological half life of 21 to 550 days - meaning that it can reside in the body from one year to twenty five years.

When tritium is released to the environment it is taken up by plants and trees, partially incorporating into the ecosystem. Trees constantly transpire water vapour into the air it has been found that higher concentrations of tritium occur at night at breathing height in a forest that has incorporated tritium from a nearby reactor.

Let’s look again at the reactor.

The primary coolant water becomes extremely radioactive over time because the fuel rods leak. But to add fuel to the fire, the NRC is now allowing nuclear operators to retain uranium fuel in reactors for six years instead of three, lengthening the “burnup” time and substantially increasing the radiation levels in the fuel. As well the NRC is allowing a concentration of 4.5% uranium enrichment in the fuel instead of the previously approved maximum of 3.5%. This policy will also substantially increase the amount of radioactivity produced in the fuel rods.

The longer the time that the zirconium fuel cladding is exposed to high levels of radiation, and the higher the radiation levels, the greater the damage to the cladding subsequent leakage of radioactive materials into the primary coolant.

Radioactive corrosion or activation products not the result of uranium fission are produced as neutrons bombard the metal piping and the reactor containment. These elements which are powerfully radioactive include cobolt 60, iron 55, nickel 63, radioactive manganese, niobium, zinc and chromium. These materials slough off from the pipes into the primary coolant. Officially called CRUD (Chalk River Unidentified Deposits), this material is so intensely radioactive that it poses a severe hazard to maintenance workers and inspectors in certain areas of the reactor.

According to David Lochbaum, a nuclear engineer at the Union of Concerned Scientists, during shutdowns of reactors, the utilities not uncommonly flush out pipes, heat exchangers etc to remove highly radioactive CRUD build-up. Some of the CRUD is sent to radioactive waste dumps while some is released to the river, lake or sea on which the reactor is located.

The utilities admit that about 12 gallons of intensely radioactive primary coolant leaks daily into the secondary coolant via the steam generator through breaks in the pipes which is then released to the air. Some of these emissions are not even monitored. Likewise about 4,000 gallons of primary coolant water are intentionally released to the environment on a daily basis while some just leaks out unplanned. Many other emissions are simply not monitored.

In summary, radioactive gases, radioactive water, and CRUD particulates are intentionally released in daily batches, some in continuous streams and some during accidents.

Very radioactive primary coolant filters which frequently contain often contain intensely carcinogenic plutonium 238, 239, 241, americium and curium are shipped to nuclear waste facilities. Other dangerous elements in the filters include technetium 99 with a 211,100 year half life, iodine 129 with 15,700,000 year half life, carbon 14 with a 5700 year half life, nickel with a 100.1 year half life, and plutonium 241 with a 14.29 year half life.

Almost certainly these extraordinarily dangerous materials which are present in the primary coolant are escaping also in small quantities via the gaseous or liquid effluents into the environment at the nuclear power plant where they will bio-concentrate in the food chain, there to enter human bodies!

It is instructive to note that most of the data of radiation releases are not real measurements but are only estimates made by computerized mathematical models based on data generated from operational reactors, field and laboratory tests and plant specific design calculations.

Hence the nuclear industry is consistently guessing about its radioactive releases and has no real idea what specific isotopes are escaping from its radioactive mausoleums. They even admit that when their operating data is non existent, information that was confabulated – made up and drawn from laboratory and field tests and from engineering judgement! The reference for this material is dated 1985, the last such document published by the NRC available for the public scrutiny. Also note that this last document was published when reactors were relatively young and plagued with fewer corrosion and maintenance problems.

In other words, all the releases are done in secret, they are at best guesstimates, and the general public is kept in the dark.

Reports indicating gaseous and liquid radioactive releases vary enormously. For instance, the Millstone One reactor in Connecticut alone released a remarkable 2.97 million curies of noble gases in 1975, while Nine Mile Point One released 1.3 million curies in 1975. In 1974, the total release from all reactors in the US was 6.48 million curies while in 1993 it ranged between 96,600 curies to 214,000 curies.

Some years the nuclear industry is collectively releasing millions of curies annually. But remember that the nuclear industry claims it is “emission” free and they are gearing up to build a new generation of nuclear power plants!

Lesson? Do not live near a nuclear power plant, otherwise you will never know what you are breathing, eating and drinking.