Nuclear Power: Promoting a Myth

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

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

RELATED LINKS

Read the letter detailing the NRC's secrecy policy with an East Tennessee nuclear facility

Federal regulators are reviewing a policy that has kept details on an East Tennessee nuclear facility — including a potentially deadly spill of highly enriched uranium last year — hidden from the public.

Since August 2004, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has designated most correspondence with Nuclear Fuel Services Inc. as “official use only,” which has prevented inspection reports and other materials on the nuclear fuel producer from being publicly released.

That policy kept a March 2006 uranium spill at the company’s Erwin, Tenn., plant out of public view for more than a year, until the incident was disclosed in May in a required annual report to Congress. Local authorities weren’t even informed of the spill.

The disclosure drew attention from a Congressional committee, prompting the NRC to re-examine the “official use only” tag, an administrative designation that allows the commission to withhold sensitive documents without technically classifying them.

NRC spokesman Roger Hannah said commission staffers were reviewing the designation for documents on Nuclear Fuel Services, and possibly other licensees as well.

“I would assume that’s something they’re looking at across the board,” Hannah said.

The March 2006 incident prompted a change to the company’s Special Nuclear Materials License, but the February order detailing the change was kept from the public, which would have had a right to request a hearing on the changes. Hannah said the NRC has decided to reissue the order publicly, possibly within the week.

“The changes were an affirmation that NFS should establish a program to create a more robust safety culture within the plant among its employees and supervisors,” said Nuclear Fuel Services spokesman Tony Treadway.

The spill last year involved about 35 liters of highly enriched uranium solution that leaked into a protected glovebox, then onto the floor in a facility where highly enriched uranium is “downblended” to a lower enrichment for use in commercial reactors, including TVA’s Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant in Alabama.

According to the NRC’s report, there were two chances for a “criticality” accident, where a nuclear chain reaction releases radiation. If such an incident occurred, “it is likely that at least one worker would have received an exposure high enough to cause acute health effects or death,” according to the report.

More information on the event came to light last week in a letter sent to the NRC by the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. The NRC had provided the committee with inspection reports on the Erwin facility, which have not been publicly released.

“NRC inspection reports suggest that it was merely a matter of luck that a criticality accident did not occur,” reads the letter, signed by U.S. Reps. John Dingell, the committee’s chair, and Bart Stupak, a subcommittee chair, both Michigan Democrats.

The letter revealed that the NRC implemented its “official use only” policy in August 2004 after a request from the Department of Energy’s Office of Naval Reactors, which was concerned that sensitive national security information could be found on the NRC’s public records system. The memo that established the policy was itself kept from the public.

“Thus, the public and Congress have been kept in the dark regarding NRC’s decision to withhold all documents regarding the NFS plant from public view,” the congressmen wrote.

The policy was supposed to cover only documents related to Nuclear Fuel Services’ and another contractor’s program to make nuclear fuel for Navy submarines. Treadway said last year’s spill was not related to the company’s production of naval fuel.

The NRC’s Hannah said he did not know why the spill was kept secret given the limited scope of the “official use only” policy.

“Unfortunately, we’re in a position in this case where it seems the public has been denied the right to know what’s going on there,” said Linda Modica, a Jonesborough resident who chairs the Sierra Club’s national radiation committee.

Modica said she lives downwind of the Erwin facility and drinks groundwater from the same watershed.

“We have no idea what, if anything, was released to the air or water at the time of that spill,” she said.

Yet the NRC has to walk a “delicate line” between giving citizens information about nuclear accidents and preventing terrorists from learning too much about bomb-grade materials, U.S. Rep David Davis said.

Davis, a Republican who hails from Unicoi County, said he has a personal stake in making sure his constituents are safe — his mother-in-law lives a half-mile from the Erwin facility.

“I want to make sure we use common sense on this issue,” Davis said. “We don’t want too much information out, but we don’t want to withhold information either.”

With about 715 employees, Nuclear Fuel Services, which celebrates its 50th anniversary this year, is the largest employer in Unicoi County. The private company has a history of fines and enforcement actions by the NRC, which regulates commercial reactors and other uses of nuclear materials.

Erwin Mayor Don Lewis worked at the Nuclear Fuel Services plant for 43 years before retiring in 2002.

Lewis said he had “heard rumors” about the spill but ultimately learned about it through media reports, the same way as the general public. But he said he had no concerns about the incident or the fact that local authorities were not notified after it happened.

“I didn’t have any complaint whatsoever with the way it was handled,” Lewis said. “We can always ‘what if’ this, or ‘what if’ that, but really you got to look at the facts about the thing.”

Treadway said the spill did not injure anyone or cause harm to the environment. He said Nuclear Fuel Services reported the incident promptly to the NRC’s two resident inspectors at the Erwin facility. The NRC later notified the state of the spill, but not local authorities.

“We would have gone against (NRC) regulations should we have shared it with the public,” Treadway said.

For Modica, that’s precisely the problem.

“How can you trust that your government is duking it out for the public with respect to these polluters if they don’t tell you what they’re doing?” Modica asked.

Business writer Andrew Eder may be reached at 865-342-6318.

© 2007, Knoxville News Sentinel Co.

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

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

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

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

"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

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

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.