(December 6, 1991) "The Gulliver File" must be one of the longest running publication sagas in the history of the anti-nuclear movement.

(362-3.gulliver) WISE Amsterdam -

First advertized in the early 1980's, it was intended to be a short, sharp, survey of uranium mining companies around the world. Thanks to the investment and efforts of many people -- and above all WISE-Glen Alpin in Australia -- it expanded into a 1,000 page critique of the world mining industry (though still with special reference to uranium).

Covering 673 companies - many in profuse detail - with thousands of references, and a vast comphrehensive index of 60 pages linking company to company, and company to country, "The File" is without doubt one of the most important critical works about mining of the century.

"Gulliver" will be available by 1 March 1992. Cost, not including postage, is 25 (about US$42) for bonafide movement groups and 150 (about US$252)to all others. For an order form contact the publisher: Minewatch, 218 Liverpool Road, London, N1 1LE, England. Tel. 44-71-609-1852. Fax: 44-71-700-6189.

(362-3.editorial) WISE Amsterdam

(December 6, 1991) - In my opinion, globally as a whole, the commercial nuclear industry has an insecure future, except for waste management of course, where there are secure jobs for thousands of years to come.

Few new reactors are being built and those running will reach the end of their operating lifetimes within a couple of decades. The nuclear weapons industry is definitely going to be around for some time, as will the uranium mines, conversion, enrichment and reprocessing plants that supply it. However, many of these facilities must close once commercial reactors stop running. In contrast, the anti-nuclear movement, globally as a whole, has a secure future. The spirit of support for basic human rights, and resistance against destruction of the Earth is the basis of the anti-nuclear movement. This is not to say that I believe people against the nuclear industry are morally superior to people for the nuclear industry. But, I do believe there is a qualitative difference between the anti-nuclear and pro-nuclear movements. I do not say, "I'm better than thou." I just say, "I'm different than thou." I prefer a non-nuclear future. Now, having cleared that up, back to my point about security.

Both the wholes of the pro-nuclear and anti-nuclear movements are made up of many diverse parts that widely range in their likelihood of short-term survival. Both movements are weakening in one part of the world and strengthening in another. At the present time, the WISE News Communique is in a crisis situation. It's likelihood of survival is at an all-time low. The present situation will not and cannot continue. There is not enough money to pay an editor and volunteers are not knocking down the door.

The unfortunate reality is that the WISE News Communique is the only international newsletter specifically directed primarily towards the grassroots anti-nuclear movement. The News Communique functions as a news service and networking tool for grassroots activists all over the world. The importance of such a newsletter is clear. This is confirmed over and over again at almost every international event where anti-nuclear activists gather. The News Communiqueis important, but the international anti-nuclear movement is not dependent on it for survival. I for one will be very sorry to see the News Communique go. That is why I took on the unpaid job of editing this double issue. I did it not only to support the international anti-uranium movement, but also to keep the News Communique in print. A native English-language speaking editor is needed now, with a secure financial situation.

DO SOMETHING OR SAY GOODBYE TO THE NEWS COMMUNIQUE!

Guest Editor, Miles Goldstick

(December 6, 1991) Note: this list is far from comprehensive. WISE contacts are listed here.

(362-3.contact) WISE Amsterdam -

ARGENTINA

• Environmental Defence Foundation (FUNAM), Raul Montenegro, Casilla de Correo 83, Correo Central, 500 Cordoba. Tel. 54-51-226252.

AUSTRALIA

• Anti-Uranium Collective, Dave Sweeney, FoE (Fitzroy), 222 Brunswick St., Fitzroy, Victoria 3065. Tel. 61-3-419-8700. Roxby Downs. Also Ranger, Jabiluka, Koongarra, and Rudall River.
• Australian Nuclear Free Zones Secretariat, Melbourne Office, Town Hall, Melbourne, Victoria 300. Tel. 61-3-658-9800. Secretariat of delegates from all NFZ local councils.
• Conservation Council of South Australia Inc., Marcus Beresford, 102 Wakefield St., Adelaide, SA 500. Tel. 61-8-223-5155. Roxby Downs.
• Friends of the Earth (Sydney), 4th Floor, 56 Foster Street, Surry Hills 2010, N.S.W. Tel. 61-2-281-4070.
• Greenpeace Australia, Jean McSorley, Studio 14, 37 Nicholson St., E. Balmain, N.S.W. 2041. Tel. 61-2- 555-7044.
• Greenpeace Australia, Maggie Hine, Nuclear Issues Campaigner, 3/130 Carrington Street, Adelaide, S.A. Tel. 61-8-223-3133. Fax: 61-8-232-0174.
• Kokotha Peoples' Committee, Box 2085, Port Augusta, S.A. 5700. The Kokotha are the traditional owners of the area in which Roxby Downs is located, along with Nurrungar (U.S. defence facility), Woomera (missil testing range), and Maralinga (nuclear weapons testing site).
• Movement Against Uranium Mining, Box K133 Haymarket, N.S.W. 2000. Tel. 61-2-212-4538.
• Northern Lands Council, Box 39843, Winnellaie, N.T. 0321, Australia. Um-brella council for aboriginal groups in the Northern Territory where Ranger and other deposits are found.
• North Queensland Conservation Council, Andrea Porter, Box 364, Townsville, Q 4810. Tel. 61-77-716 226. Kakadu and Ben Lomond.
• Northern Territory Environmental Center, Sue Jackson, Box 2120, Darwin, N.T. 0801. Tel. 61-89- 811-984. Ranger and potential mines in the Northern Territory, eg. Jabiluka and Koongarra.
• Western Desert Puntukurnuparna (Land Council), Box 2358, S. Hedland, WA 6722. Tel. 61-91-723 299.

BULGARIA

• Ecoglasnost, 39 Dondukov St., BG-1000 Sofia. Tel. 359-2-802 323.

CANADA

• Greenpeace Canada, Wayne Roberts, Nuclear Issues Coordinator, 121 Avenue Road, Toronto, Ontario M5R 3G3. Tel. 1-416-922-3011.
• Northern Anti-Uranium Coalition (NAUC), j Jack Hicks, Box 1197, Niagara-on-the-Lake, Ont. L0S 1J0.
• Northern Anti-Uranium Coalition, j Keewatin Inuit Assoc., Rankin Inlet, Northwest Territories X0C 0G0. Tel. 819-645-2800 or 645-3805.
• South Pacific Peoples' Foundation of Canada, 415 - 620 View St., Victoria, B.C. V8W 1J6. Tel. 604-381-4131.

SASKATCHEWAN, CANADA

• Big River Citizen's for Energy Alternatives, Carla Braidek, Box 516, Big River, Saskatchewan S0J 0E0. Tel. 1-306-469-4466.
• Community Health Services (Saska-toon) Assoc., 455 Second Ave. North, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7K 2C1. Tel. 1-306-652-0300.
• Inter-Church Uranium Committee Educational Co-operative, Box 7724, Saskatoon, Sask. S7K 4R4. Tel. 1- 306-934-3030.
• Pokebusters Citizen's Coalition, Box 7724, Saskatoon, Sask. S7K 4R4. Tel. 1-306-242-3138.
• Prince Albert Citizens for Energy Alternatives, Steve Lawrence, 3463 12th Ave East, Prince Albert, Sask. S6V 7G6. Tel. 1-306-922-1062.
• Saskatchewan Environmental Society and Saskatchewan Students for Environmental Action, Box 1372, Saskatoon, Sask. S7K 3N9. Tel. 1- 306-665-1915. Fax: 1-306-665-2128.
• Survival Office Saskatchewan (S.O.S.), Stephanie, Sydiaha, Box 9395, Sas-katoon, Sask. S7K 7E9. Tel. 1-306- 244-3138. Fax: j 1-306-652-8377.
• The International Uranium Congress, 2138 McIntyre St., Regina, Sask. S4P 2R7. Tel. 1-306-352-3195.
• The Northern Village of Green Lake, Rod Bishop, Mayor, Box 128, Green Lake, Sask. S0M 1B0. Tel. 1-306- 832-2131. Fax: 1-306-832-2124.
• Regina Environmental Group, 2222 Princess St., Regina, Sask. S4T 3Z8. Tel. 1-306-757-4344.
• The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Keewatin-Le Pas, Archbishop Peter Sutton, O.M.I., Box 270, 108-1st St. West, Le Pas, Manitoba R9A 1K4. Tel. 204-623-6152.

CHILE

• Comite Chileno por el Desarme y la Desnuclearization, Casilla 16774, Correo 9, Santiago.

CZECHO-SLOVAKIA

• Ecowatt, c/o Brontosaurus, Bubénska 6, CS-17000 Praha 7. Tel. 42-2-802 908. Fax: 42-2-802 906.
• ROSA, Karla IV.3, CS-37001 Ceské Budejovice. Tel. 42-38-36870.

FRANCE

• Action Environment - Info Uranium, 7 rue de l'Auvergne, F-12000 Rodez. Tel. 33-65-422 007.

GERMANY

• Akafrik (Working Group on Africa), Thomas Siepelmeyer, Albensloher Weg 27, W-4400 Münster. Tel. 49- 251-661 116.
• Bürgerinitiative gegen Uranabbau in Südschwarzwald (Citizen Committee Against Uranium Mining in the Southern Black Forest), Peter Diehl, Schulstr. 13, W-7881 Herrischried. Tel. and Fax: 49-7764-1034.
• Bürgerinitiative Oberrothenbach, Gerd Meyer, Gemeindeverwaltung, Alten-burger Str. 5, O-9501 Oberrothen-bach. Tel. 37-7494-2202.
• Gesellschaft für bedrohte Völker e. V. (Society for Endangered People), Günter Wippel, Oberau 63, W-7800 Freiburg. Tel. 49-761-31193.
• World Uranium Hearing, Praterinsel 3-4, W-8000 Munich 22. Tel. 49-89- 228 5924. Fax: 49-89-228 5340.
• Öko-Institut (Ecology Institute), Gerd Schmidt, Bunsenstr. 14, W-6100 Darmstadt. Tel. 49-6151-819 117.

INDIA

• Anumukti, Sampoorna Kranti Vidyalaya, Vedchhi Via Valod, District: Surat 394641.

NEW ZEALAND

• Pacific Concerns Resources Centre, Box 3148, Auckland CPO, AOTEAROA. Tel. 64-9-375-862.

PORTUGAL

• Amigos da Terra (FoE), Travessa da Laranjeira 1-A, P-1200 Lisbon. Tel. 351-1-347 0788. Fax: 351-1-347 3586.

RUMANIA

• Miscarea Ecologista Din Romania, Str. Olga Bancic No. 11, RO-Bukeresti 2. Tel. 40-0-112 943. Fax: 40-0-104 858.

U.K.

• Minewatch/PARTIZANS, 218 Liver-pool Road, London N1 1LE. Tel. 44-71-609-1852. Fax: 44-71-700-6189.
• Survival International (SI), Stephen Corry, 310 Edgware Road, London W2 1DY. Tel. 44-71-723-5535.
• Tibet Information Network, Robbie Barnett, 7 Beck Road, London E8 4RN. Tel. 44-81-533-5458.

U.S.A.

• Atoms and Waste, 2311-15 St. NW, #101, Washington, D.C. 20009. Tel. 1-202-328-0498.
• Center for Alternative Mining Development Policy, Al Gedicks, 210 Avon St. 9, La Crosse WI 54603. Tel. 1-608-784-4399.
• Lutheran Peace Fellowship, 4329 Tokay Boulevard, Madison WI, 53711 U.S.A. Tel. 1-608-238-8223.
• Nuclear Resource Service (NIRS), 1424-16th St. NW, Washington, D.C. 20036. U.S.A. Tel. 202-328-0002.
• Radioactive Waste Management Assoc., Marvin Resnikoff, 306 West 38 St., Room 1508, New York, NY 10018, U.S.A. Tel. 1-212-629-5612.
• Southwest Research and Information Center, Paul Robinson, Box 4524, Albuquerque NM 87106, U.S.A. Tel. 1-505-262-1862. Fax: 1-505-262-1864.
• Texas Energy Alliance, Box 50371, Austin, Texas 78763, U.S.A. Tel. 1-512-327-7739.
• The Global Forum of Spiritual and Parliamentary Leaders, 304 East 45th St., 4th floor, New York NY 10017.
• Western Colorado Congress, Box 472, Montrose, Colorado 81402, U.S.A. Tel. 1-303-249-1978.

---

(362-3.introduction) WISE Amsterdam

(December 6, 1991) - This double issue of the News Communiquedeals with uranium mining. No attempt has been made at being comprehensive. Information is included on Australia, Eastern and Western Europe, India, Japan, Canada, the U.S., and the U.S.S.R. It is with great regret that more regions are not included, particularly South America and China, and more aspects of the problem are not examined. The health effects on miners, for example, is a topic left out.

Uranium mines, both operating and closed, are wrecking havoc in many parts of the world. Resistance against uranium mining can be found locally almost everywhere mining is taking place. Of the many current protest campaigns against existing uranium mines, detailed profiles of only two are given. They have been chosen not only because of their importance but also because of their very different natures. The Rio Tinto Zinc (RTZ) divestiture/annual general meeting campaign can be described as a longterm, small scale project. The World Uranium Hearing (WUH) is more of a short-term, large scale project. The RTZ campaign does not give a high profile to mass media celebrities, whereas the WUH does. These different styles each have their place and need not compete with each other. In fact, there is great potential for cooperation. Every bit of resistance helps.

Resource and contact lists are also included here. Neither is comprehensive nor even extensive. Rather, resources and contacts relevant to the regional reports have been included, as well as recently produced written and audiovisual materials.

A global overview of the production status of mines is not included. For information on the current status of uranium mines, including those open, closed, and under construction, see "Uranium Demand, Supply And Prices: 1991-2000" by Greenpeace International and "World Nuclear Industry Handbook 1991" by Nuclear Engineering International (NEI) (both listed in the "Resources" section). NEI also lists most company addresses.

The waste management practices and health regulations at uranium mines in western countries could be a lot better, to put it mildly. The situation, however, in Eastern Europe, the third world, and the U.S.S.R. is shockingly worse. In Colorado, U.S.A., uranium mine tailings have been removed from urban sites to try and limit contamination. At Pribram, Czecho-Slovakia people live beside uranium mine tailings and no remedial action is being taken. In the Jaduguda uranium mining region of India, tailings are dumped into waterways bordering farms. In many Third World countries, not even the token settling pond systems used in the west are in place. In Canada, uranium mine workers have at least been paid and had the opportunity to organize in unions. In Poland, up until the late 1970's, military conscripts worked in uranium mines with minimal protective clothing and got token salaries.

Mining advocates often use the argument that old practices of dealing with uranium mine and mill waste were poor, but no longer used. The main difference is usually instead of directly dumping wastes into lakes and streams, part of the waste water is recycled and the rest, along with all the solid waste, is dumped into temporary holding ponds. The distance the wastes spread may be limited, but the wastes are produced nonetheless and some contamination occurs.

LEAVE URANIUM IN THE GROUND!

(362-3.profiles) WISE Amsterdam -

WORLD URANIUM HEARING

(December 6, 1991) The World Uranium Hearing (WUH) will take place from 13-19 September in Salzburg, Austria. It is a project founded in Munich, Germany by Claus Biegert in 1987 to spread information on the problems Indigenous people throughout the world have suffered because of uranium mining, nuclear weapons testing, and nuclear waste storage. The method is a week long series of speeches and cultural events by Indigenous people in front of an audience of prominent, well-known people and journalists (called "The Board of Listeners"). All the parti-cipants will try and attract attention of the world mass media, but that is not all. The goal is also to, "initiate a concrete advocacy effort to remedy and prevent both human rights viola-tions and environmental degradation affecting Indigenous peoples."

The city of Salzburg as well as the Salzburg State Government are the official hosts and will, together with private enterprises, take full financial responsibility for witnesses and listeners during the Hearing. These commitments were just made in November 1991, which primarily accounts for the delay in being able to confirm hearing participants. A travel fund for Indigenous peoples has been established. Interest in attending has been expressed from many parts of the world. Already many African writers have agreed to attend. Also, the Goethe Institute in San Francisco will have a satellite conference with the Hearing as well as a follow-up event.

The WUH has gotten endorsements and statements of support from an impressive group of people. A few are quoted below. Others include: Chingiz Aitmatov, Soviet Ambassador to Luxemburg and writer; Willy Brandt, German statesman; Julie Christie, actor; Richie Havens, musician; Hazel Henderson, economist; Petra Kelly, founder, The International Green Party; Amory Lovins, Rocky Mountain Institute; Pete Seeger, musician; Olzhas Suleimenov, President Nevada-Semipalatinsk Movement; Jakob von Uexküll, philantropist, founder of the Right Livilihood Award (Alternative Nobel Prize); and Joe Vallentine, Western Australian Senator.

"In their eagerness to create nuclear weapons and then to exploit the potential resources of nuclear energy, scientists and politicians have under-estimated or overlooked the longterm harmful effects both to [hu]mankind and the environment... With regard to the effects of uranium, we are not only concerned with the rights of many defenseless people living in various parts of the world but also of future generations... I am therefore happy to give my support to the World Uranium Hearing and its worthy goals." His Holiness, The Dali Lama.

"The Australian Conservation Foundation will help to publicize the World Uranium Hearing." Peter Garrett, President A.C.F. and musician.

"I would like to be a listener." Robert Redford, actor.

The Hearing will certainly be a gathering of a character that has never happened before. There have been many international gatherings where Indigenous people have eloquently spoken out about their problems, but never with such a combination of celebrities and concentrated effort to attract authors, lawyers, and the mass media.

WUH literature reads,

"The Board of Listeners will be made up of international personalities from the cultural, political, academic, and economic communities as well as prominent representatives of the world's religions. Within the Board of Listeners, two councils -- one of scientists, one of jurists -- will play a vital role: The expertise of the 'Council of Scientists' will cover the disciplines of medicine, biology, physics, ethnology, chemistry, geology, geography, archeology, meteorology, and anthropology, as well as history and the science of religions.

"The 'Council of Jurists' will consist of scholars with commitment and exper-tise in human rights and environ-mental law at the international and national levels, as well as lawyers who have worked to promote sustainable development to protect the interest of Indigenous peoples, and to protect the public from nuclear risks.

"Worldwide publicity is the first step. The second step will be a legal one: an energy policy and technology which violates human rights and destroys life daily must be condemned in court.

"The jurists will begin the work of collecting the evidence and testimony needed to petition an International Environmental Court (when consti-tuted) for an injunction against further suffering, death and destruction from nuclear technology... Given the rapid development of international environmental law and the global nature of numerous environmental threats, the formation of such a court appears essential and certain.

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) in Washington, D.C., has agreed to assist in preparing legal documentation for the cases presented at the Hearing. CIEL will also assist in selecting jurists for the "Council of Jurists". CIEL has also offered to oversee the assistance given to Indigenous peoples after the Hearing.

 

The serpent at the Upper Yule River, Australia: Long before the first white man set foot on the continent, this cliff painting of the Njamal in northwest Australia was created. According to Aboriginal mythology, the Rainbow Serpent, asleep in the earth, guards over those elemental powers which lie outside of [hu]mankind's control. Any attempt to seize these underworld elements will disturb the sleep of the serpent, provoking its vengeance: a terrible deluge of destruction and death. Source: World Uranium Hearing leaflet.

 

(362-3.region) WISE Amsterdam -

AUSTRALIA

 

(December 6, 1991) In the fall of 1991 there were two producing uranium mines in Australia: Ranger and Roxby Downs. The Mary Kathleen mine closed in 1982 and Nabarlek was mined out in 1981, but continued to deliver until about 1988. There is an active debate about opening new mines.

On 27 June 1991 the governing Labour Party rejected proposals to open new uranium mines and begin uranium enrichment, but only by default. The issue was not given a full debate. Existing policy means that two mines can operate, and there is the posibility of another opening.

 

---

Promises, Promises, Promises

The Promise

The environmental impact statement for the Roxby Downs uranium-gold-copper mine in South Australia predicted in 1982 that once the mine reached full production there would be 10,000 jobs, A$18-20 million (US$13.5-15 million) in royalties paid to the state, and a boost in state exports by 32 to 43%. In 1989 the mine reached its full production capacity.

The Reality

Exports increased 4%, A$3 mil-lion (US$2.15 million) were paid to the state, and 800 jobs created. The A$3 million falls well short of the interest the government has to pay on the A$50 million (US$37.5 million) it borrowed to build schools, roads and other community facilities for the mining town of Olympic Dam.

 

BRAZIL - Request for support

 

In spring of 1991, a letter was circulated among German anti-uranium groups requesting support in a campaign to stop a new uranium mining and milling project in Brazil. The project's sponsors propose to exploit a uranium deposit located near Caetite in the Brazilian state of Bahia. The project is to be directed by the state government of Bahia. Funding is to come from West Germany's government and private banks. The uranium deposit contains approxi-mately 85,000 tonnes of uranium and hopeful investors expect to realize a total of US$800 million through processing it into some 900 tonnes of yellowcake annually.

The authors of the letter are lay and religious volunteers who form the Bishop's Health Commission for the two-state North East Region of Bahia and Sergipe. Besides being concerned about health hazards to the regional population, they are also concerned about the posibility of the uranium ending up in nuclear weapons. They were informed that Brazil expects to keep 25% of the yellowcake produced and export the other 75%.

After learning of the project, commis-sion members met with an agricultural technician who works with the people in the rural area where the uranium was found. The technician, Paulo Cesar of the Center for Studies and Social Action (CEA), spent several hours clarifying the situation. He also played them a video tape showing the consequences such a project would have for the region, presenting a very different picture than that shown by the production firm Uranio do Brasil when it presented the project to the Caetite city council. The company's presentation concentrated on "develop-ment and employment" opportunities. A company employee held up a bottle of yellowcake and gave the impression that it was completely harmless. The video, however, points out that many people will become ill. It also included an interview with nuclear physicist Richard Tadeu Lopes who reported the fact that 3.8 hours of exposure registers the maximum limits on the meter that the mine technicians wear. The technicians leave the areas periodically; the other workers don't have that possibility.

The commission members want to create pressure to see that the uranium is neither mined nor milled. Other groups are already working on this as well, but commission members say they have extremely limited finan-cial and technical resources available to either examine the situation or inform the region's inhabitants. They do have a bit of time to gather the resources and information they need, however, as ideological differences existing at this moment between the federal and military governing levels has meant that the project has been put temporarily on hold.

At this point, the commissioners say in their letter, little information is available. They note that already a simple Geiger counter registers maximum radiation on some of the surface rocks in the populated area -- even before mining has begun. How-ever, there is no access to more sophisticated monitoring equipment to measure the present levels of radia-tion. Even "...specific information of health hazards in short, medium and long range in this stage are not yet available to us. To make adequate provisions for the people who live and may work in the area it is essential to have more accurate information that can be documented...Apparently... there are many studies made of the effects of uranium from the yellowcake stage on. But we do not have information of studies and effects on vegetable and human life previous to this stage." Then, too, they say, hazards created during transportation of the rocks from the mines to the mill must be evaluated.

There are several ways that support can be given to the local people in their struggle for information and quality of life, say commissioners. "The general population is unfamiliar with even basic information that you'd take for granted about uranium and radiation. To provide information, we need to be informed." Suggestions they give for helping include:

1. Sending technical information of studies and effects of uranium in its natural state and up until the yellowcake stage.
2. Providing technical self-financed support for investigating locally the potential hazards and necessary precautions.
3. Providing more sophisticted monitoring devices.
4. Providing financial support for printing material to inform the population.
5. Informing other groups that may be able to help.
6. Working on an international level to limit the trade in uranium.
7. Insisting on adequate safety measures in all phases of the project, as well as adequate monitoring during all phases, if the project is approved.

Commission members also request that letters of protest be sent to:

• Senador Nelson Carneiro, Presidente do Congresso Nacional, Brasilia, DF, Brasil.
• Presidente: Exmo. Fernando Collor de Mello, Palacio da Alvorada, Brasilia, Brasil.
• Presidente Conselho Estadual Meio Ambiente, Secretaria de Planejamento, Av. Luis Viana Filho 27N CAB, Slavador, Bahia, Brasil.

Information, questions or donations can be sent through: Dona Christina, Comissao de Saude NE 111 (health commission), Conferencia dos Bispos do Brasil (CNBB), Rua Augusto Franca, 35 2 dejulho, 40000 Slavador, Bahia, Brasil. Sr. Paulo Cesar, Center for Studies and Social Action, Rua Aristides Novis, 101, Federaçao, 40210 Salvador, Bahia, Brasil.

BULGARIA

 

Detailed investigations have been carried out on the effects of uranium mining in Bulgaria. For example, Todor Dimtchev, physics Professor at the Geology and Mining University in Sofia has written, in French, a 21 page detailed report with monitoring data and maps.

Deposits originally discovered by German geologists started to be mined by a Russia/Bulgarian company in the fall of 1944. The grade of the ore ranges from an average of 0.01% to 0.1%. The highest grade ore was sent to the U.S.S.R.

Wastes have been dumped in old river beds and, during rainy periods, are carried downstream to villages. In villages near a uranium mining area near Sofia, dose rates have been measured of up to 1,000 micro-roentgens per hour, about 100 times the background level. Radium-226 levels in soil have been found up to 10,700 Bq/kg, more than 350 times normal. Such levels have been found in sludge from the uranium mill near Boukhovo, which received ore transported from several areas. The most contaminated land has been expropriated and access restricted.

Source: "Proceedings -- Meeting of Anti-uranium Citizens Committees in Europe, at Zwickau/Saxony 1-3 August 1991," six page English summary, pp.3-4.

CANADA

 

URANIUM BOOM CONTINUES IN NORTHERN SASKATCHEWAN

The uranium mining boom in northern Saskatchewan is continuing, despite the general decline of the industry worldwide. The three uranium mills in northern Saskatchewan (Key Lake, Cluff Lake, and Rabbit Lake) together produce more uranium than anywhere else in the world, and the licensing procedure for eight new mines and four new mills is underway. The World Nuclear Industry Handbook 1991 lists total 1989 uranium produc-tion at the three mills as 7,745 tonnes and total capacity as 10,700 tonnes per year. The 1989 production for each mill is given as 875 tonnes at Cluff Lake (capacity 1,500 tonnes/year), 5,100 tonnes at Key Lake (capacity 4,600 tonnes/year), and 1,770 at Rabbit Lake (capacity 4,600 tonnes/year).

The reasons for the continuing boom in Saskatchewan are clear. It is due to the combination of high grade ore, often near the surface; low population density of predominantly Indigenous people in the area of the deposits; and the pro-mining policies of the provincial and federal governments. This last factor could change. A new provincial government was elected at the end of October 1991, putting the New Democratic Party (NDP) in power. There is currently vigorous debate on their uranium mining policy, which is a stop on opening new mines and a phase-out of existing ones when new jobs are created for the mine workers. Needless to say, the uranium industry is applying all the pressure it can to reverse the policy. The industry has already gotten assurance that the eight new mines and four new mills currently going through the licensing procedure are not "new" according to the policy definition. The NDP leadership favors a more pro-mining policy, but the grassroots has affirmed the phase-out. It will be a hot topic at next year,s NDP convention.

The grade of the ore in northern Saskatchewan is commonly between one and four percent, with pockets measured in tens of percent, but in the rest of the world ore grade is normally measured in tenths or hundredths of a percent. The vast majority of the local Indigenous people, numbering about 25,000, are against mining, but have no decision-making power over the land their ancestors have used since time immemorial. However, increasing sympathy for Indian rights, and growing opposition to the whole nuclear fuel chain in the south, is a factor politicians have to face. It is clear that Indian led protests are a main reason why two government inquiries into uranium mining in Saskatchewan were just established.

The provincial and federal govern-ments have divided the eight new mine and four new mill proposals into two groups, and for each implemented a formal examination procedure called an "Environmental Assessment Review Process" (EARP), determined primarily by the Federal Environmental Assessment Review Office (FEARO). For each review panel the governments have selected a handpicked committee (called a panel), given them a terms of reference, a general time frame, and a budget. Both panels have been given a mandate to "review the environ-mental, health, safety, and socio-economic impacts." A summary of key information on each panel is included below. Division of responsibilities between the two levels of government, coupled with the two having different policies, often makes it difficult to understand why and how decisions get made. One thing is certain though, there would be no review at all if it wasn't for pressure from public opposition groups.

An example of this is the situation with the Cigar Lake project. Its over 100 million kg of uranium at an average grade of 15%, pockets as high as 60%, and an estimated further 50 million kg at an average grade of 4.7%, make it the most significant deposit ever discovered anywhere. The mine has already reached the initial stage of mining (called "test" mining) without any public review at all. It is owned partly by the federal and Saskatchewan governments, who now, after a huge investment, have established an inquiry to determine if the mine should be allowed to proceed or not! Such action can only be due to political pressure.

A further indication of the political power struggles going on is the lack of provincial participation in the Rabbit Lake panel, and division of all the proposed projects into two groups. The Rabbit Lake panel is federally run, but the other is managed cooperatively between the federal and Saskatchewan governments. The Saskatchewan government already at the end of 1987 approved construction of the three new mines planned under and on the edge of Wollaston Lake, near the Rabbit Lake mill. Even before this approval, much work beyond the exploration stage had been carried out on the three mines. Further, approval was given despite the fact that the Rabbit Lake mill, ever since it began operating, has consistently exceeded the dumping limits for heavy metals and radionuclides specified in its licence.

Of greater political sensitivity is the fact that Indian people of the Wollaston Lake region have spoken against uranium mining since it started in the late 1970's. In 1985, local Indian people, together with a small group of Southern supporters, blocked the road into the Rabbit Lake mill for four days. One of the Indian peoples' requests at that time was an inquiry examining effects of all the mines together. At least three of the five mines under examination by the federal/provincial panel are within the Wollaston Lake drainage basin. To determine the effects of mining on Wollaston Lake, the cumulative effect of all the proposed mines within its drainage basin must be examined together, not separately. The reluc-tance of some government bureaucrats to invite Wollaston residents to another public hearing on uranium mining is a sign of the government trying to back away from a fight. Agreement by the Saskatchewan government to participate in the federal/provincial panel can be seen as a compromise between an examination of all the mines together and no examination at all.

Cameco corporation, formed in 1988, is the world's single greatest uranium producer. The company is owned 61.5% by the federal government of Canada and 38.5% by the province of Saskatchewan. It should be no surprise then that the public review process is set up in a way that allows only token public participation. Some obvious examples are:

• there was no public participation in making the terms of reference or choice of the panel members;
• only people who have not been "politically active" were eligible to be panel members (clearly a bias towards acceptance of the status quo -- mining);
• there is no moratorium on mine development during the review process; no limits are put on the mining companys' ground disturbing activity;
• the time frame for submitting participant funding applications and for critical examination of the EIS's is short, even for the highly educated; and
• important documents are not translated into Cree and Chipeweyan, the Native languages of the region.

Even with these inadequacies, the government reviews are better than nothing. The small amount of money available for participant funding, and all the media attention, provide much greater opportunities to spread critical information than without the review panels, even when the mining advocates have vastly greater resources (much of it public money) to mobilize. Further, it is important to recognize that not all government bureaucrats agree with the official pro-mining, anti-public participation policy.

The decisions of the panels are not binding. However, both have been asked to determine whether or not mining should be allowed to proceed. A couple million dollars does not need to be spent to reach a conclusion.

The impacts of mining are not always black and white, but there are three main aspects that are:

1. Uranium mining in Saskatchewan is a colonial activity. It has been forced upon the people of the North. The Indian people whose ancestors have always lived in the mining areas do not have decision-making authority over industrial activity in their ancestral home. If they could decide, those Indians that would choose mining are without a doubt an extremely small minority. Further, many Natives feel that mining is a contravention of the Treaties signed in good faith by their ancestors. It was understood that their lifestyle would not be threatened.
2. Uranium cannot be mined without producing huge quantities of liquid and solid waste at the mining and milling sites. These wastes contaminate a certain amount of land with heavy metals, radionuclides, and process chemicals. There is no debate over whether or not such contami-nation exists, but rather, how big an area it covers.
3. Most of the raw material, yellowcake, ultimately becomes spent nuclear reactor fuel, one of the most dangerous materials on Earth, and may be used to make nuclear weapons.

Out of respect to fellow human beings, the panel members have to be given the opportunity to make their own conclusions. They should be given the benefit of the doubt. After all, the details are complex. It should be assumed that they really haven't made up their minds whether uranium mining is good or bad. Among the members of each of the panels is a mining engineer and a northern Native person. But, having mining engineering as an occupation doesn't necessarily mean one is pro-uranium mining, nor does being a Native person mean that one is automatically against uranium mining. However, once the hearings are held and the investigations carried out, no panel member will be able to dispute that a decision on uranium mining in Saskatchewan is also a decision on colonialism and the production of *nuclear waste (be it mine tailings or spent fuel).

The past three government reviews of proposed uranium mines in Saskatchewan (Cluff Lake, Key Lake, and Collin's Bay "B" Zone) have all endorsed mining, and contributed much free engineering help to the companies. Other reviews, outside of Saskatchewan have, however, con-cluded that the projects in question should not go ahead. Separate federal environmental assessment panels have rejected construction of uranium refineries near Saskatoon, Saskatchewan in 1978 (at Warman), and in 1980 at Port Granby, Ontario. Also, in May 1990, the review panel examining the Kiggavik uranium mine proposal near Baker Lake in the Northwest Territories, concluded that the environmental impact statement (EIS) was inadequate and that the company must provide more information. The German owned company, Urangesellschaft Canada Ltd., has not yet resubmitted it's EIS.

Further, some of the planned uranium mines may not be able to meet new radiation exposure guidelines proposed by Canada's nuclear regulatory agency, the Atomic Energy Control Board. Adequate radiological protection in high-grade, underground mines, like Cigar Lake and Eagle Point, may be too expensive. The technology required to mine these deposits safely has not been proven anywhere. The industry has admitted it is unclear whether the new operations can proceed under the proposed limits.

There is some hope. Perhaps the panel members won't let themselves be used as token expressions of public participation. Perhaps some panel members will show respect for Indian land rights and point out the illegality of the Treaties. Perhaps one or two will make dissenting reports and declare that mining should not proceed. Perhaps a single panel member will listen to the beat of the Earth, not the beat of the dollar.

Sources:

1. Shuttle, Paul. 1991. "Speaking Out About Uranium Mining: How to participate in the joint federal/provincial environmental assessment of the proposed uranium mine developments in northern Saskatchewan." 7 pp. Available from Inter-Church Uranium Committee Educational Co-operative (ICUC).
2. Goldstick, Miles. 1987. "Voices From Wollaston Lake, Resistance Against Uranium Mining And Genocide In Northern Saskatchewan." 316 pp. European edition by Earth Embassy and WISE. ISBN: 90-70702-08-8. Canadian edition under the title "Wollaston, People Resisting Genocide," published by Black Rose Books, 3981 Boulevard St. Laurent 4th flr., Montreal, Quebec, Canada. H2W 1Y5; ISBN: 0-920057-94-2 (bound), ISBN: 0-920057-95-0 (pbk.).
3. Saskatoon Star-Pheonix, 15 October 1991, page A-8; 16 October 1991, page D-1; and 18 November 1991, page A-3.

COALITION FORMED

On the initiative of the Inter-Church Uranium Committee Educational Co-operative (ICUC), a coalition of anti-uranium mining groups through-out Saskatchewan was formed to make joint applications for intervener funding for the two panels.

For initial administration costs, ICUC received a CDN$500 grant from the Lutheran Peace Fellowship (LPF) in the United States. Technical support in writing the application was given by Radioactive Waste Management Associates in New York City. Research priority was put on the longterm environmental impacts of tailings from existing mines, and projections for new mines.

The coalition includes:

• The Inter-Church Uranium Committee Educational Co-operative,
• The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Keewatin-Le Pas, * The Northern Village of Green Lake, * The International Uranium Congress (Regina),
• Community Health Services (Saskatoon) Assoc.,
• Big River Citizen's for Energy Alternatives,
• Pokebusters Citizen's Coalition, and
• The Regina Environmental Group.

The addresses of these groups are included in the international contact list.

ICUC has made new contacts in Northern Canada. Encouraging news is that the five Northern Canadian Roman Catholic Diocese's have decided to cooperate on social justice issues. Those contacted by ICUC asked to be kept informed.

 

---

CANADIAN URANIUM FILM
 

The premiere of a new National Film Board Of Canada (NFB) documentary film called "Uranium" was held in Edmonton, Alberta on 12 October 1990 (international day of solidarity with Indigenous people). It immediately caused an uproar in the uranium industry, some members of which had urged the NFB to stop production of the film and tried to have it banned. The NFB knew the film would be controversial. Lawyers and scientists carefully examined every detail, which accounted for a long production delay.

The focus of "Uranium" is the perspective of Indigenous people effected by mining. Several native people are interviewed from the uranium mining areas of Ontario, Saskatchewan and Northwest Territories (NWT). The film is narrated by the Saskatchewan born singer Buffy St. Marie.

Janet Feitz, an elderly Cree trapper from La Ronge, Saskatchewan says in the film, "I guess they don't see us as people. Maybe they see us as another stick of wood standing there, or something. They don't seem to care. What would they feel if some-one went over there to where they live and destroyed their livelihood..."

The 48 minute color production is available in 16 mm and video format. North American format VHS video copies cost about CDN$30. European format VHS video copies cost approximately CDN$300 (yes that's "$300" not "$30"), and can be ordered from Jane Taylor, NFB representative at the Canadian Embassy in London, England (tel. 44-71-629-9492; fax: 44-71-491-3968). A four page leaflet and collection of newspaper clippings are available from the Edmonton NFB address below. The leaflet includes five photos and a map of uranium mining areas in Canada. On the front page Dr. Helen Caldicott is quoted as saying, "'Uranium' is one of the most powerful recent films that I have seen. I'm appalled, in the light of the medical knowledge of both nuclear power and nuclear war, that Canadian uranium mining continues."

Source and contact: Muriel Stanley Venne, Marketing Officer, Community Program, NFB, 120-2 Canada Place, 9700 Jasper Avenue, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. T5J 4C3. Tel. 1-403-495-3012. Fax: 1-403-495-6412.

 

---

Key Information on the Saskatchewan Uranium Review Panels

Uranium Development Panel (five mines and four mills)

• Government involvement: federal and province of Saskatchewan.
• Part of terms of reference showing narrowness:
  "The Panel is not expected to interpret its mandate so as to duplicate the work of other public inquiries and policy processes or to focus on national or international issues which are not directly related to the impacts of the proposals. "However, concerns may be raised by the public which extend beyond the impacts of direct concern to the Panel, and in such cases the Panel will ensure that the public is provided a reasonable opportunity to express these concerns."
• Mines examined (EIS's already submitted for the first three): * Dominique-Janine Extension at Cluff Lake (Amok Ltd.) * McClean Lake Project (Minatco Ltd.), including a new mill, * Midwest Joint Venture at South McMahon Lake (Denison Mines Ltd.), including a new mill, * McArthur River Joint Venture (Cameco Corp.), including a new mill, and * Cigar Lake Project (Cigar Lake Mining Corp.), including a new mill.
• Budget: about CDN$1.5 million.
• Time frame: to be completed in two to four years, or 18 months after receipt of all the EIS's (two are not yet submitted); final reports for the first three proposals are expected by December 1992; public hearings are expected to begin in the summer of 1992; the deadline for participant funding applications was 17 October 1991.
• Participant funding: CDN$350,000, of which $200,000 is for reviewing the first three EIS's and public meetings for the other two projects. The remaining $150,000 is for review of the final two EIS's.
• Stages of review: Submission of EIS's by the companies for the first three projects (already completed); public review and written comment of the three EIS's (expected to begin in early December 1991); and public hearings (locations not yet announced) on the three proposals. In parallel with the above for the other two projects: public hearings (locations not yet announced); issuing guidelines for preparation of EIS's; submission of EIS's by the companies; public review and written comment of the EIS's.
• Panel members: * Chair: Dr. Donald Lee organic chemist and Chairman of the Chemistry Department, University of Regina, * John Dantouze, member of the Hatchet Lake Band, Wollaston Lake (in northern Saskatchewan), and Athabasca Bands Community Planning Advisor for the Prince Albert Tribal Council, * Dr. James Archibald, mining engineer and Associate Professor, Mining Engineering Department, Queen's University, * Dr. Annalee Yassi, epidemiologist and community medicine and occupational health specialist, University of Manitoba, and * Dr. B. Richard Neal, Professor of Biology specializing in population ecology, University of Saskatchewan.
• Contact addresses (collect calls accepted): Ghislaine Kerry, Participant Funding Program Coordinator, FEARO, 13th Floor, Fontaine Building, 200 Sacre-Coeur Blvd., Hull, Quebec K1A 0H3. Tel. 1-819-953-0179/997-1000. Fax: 1-819-994-1469.
  Gail Anderson, Project Coordinator, Saskatchewan Environment and Public Safety, 3085 Albert St., Regina, Saskatchewan S4S 0B1. Tel. 1-306-787-0785. Fax: 1-306-787-0930.

Rabbit Lake Panel (three mines)

• Government involvement: federal.
• Part of terms of reference showing narrowness:
  "The mandate of the panel does not include a review of the relative merits of the various means of generating electricity or the policies of the governments of Canada or Saskatchewan concerning uranium mining, uranium exports and nuclear proliferation."
• Mines examined: * Eagle Point Mine, and * Collin's Bay "A" and "D" Zones.
• Budget: about CDN$0.5 million.
• Time frame: to be completed by summer 1992; deadline for participant funding applications is 3 January 1992.
• Participant funding: CDN$125,000.
• Stages of review: public review and written comment of the EIS's; possible request of additional information from the companies; and public hearing (locations not yet announced).
• Panel members: * Chair: Dr. Kenneth W. Hindmarsh, Assistant Dean of the College of Pharmacy, University of Saskatchewan, * Mr. Charles W. Pelley, Assistant Professor, Department of Mining Engineering, Queen's University; he has extensive experience in the mining industry and has held a number of senior positions with Canadian mining companies, * Dr. Dennis Lehmkuhl, Professor of Biology, Department of Biology, University of Saskatchewan, and * Dr. Ronald Martin, member of the Fond-du-lac Band (in northern Saskatchewan), dentist, actively providing dental care to Native people.
• Contact address (collect calls accepted): Ghislaine Kerry, Participant Funding Program Coordinator, FEARO, 13th Floor, Fontaine Building, 200 Sacre-Coeur Blvd., Hull, Quebec K1A 0H3. Tel. 1-819-953-0179/997-1000. Fax: 1-819-994-1469.

 

---

SASKATCHEWAN: CALL FOR HELP

ICUC urges groups outside of Canada to can get involved in the Saskatchewan environmental review process and participate in the hearings. To do this, contact the FEARO office at the address below. Groups should get on the FEARO mailing list as soon as possible to be made aware of dates and locations of the hearings. Critical scientists are especially requested to make their services available directly to the panels, who pay technical "experts" well. The terms of reference of both panels read:

"The Panel may secure the services of independent technical experts to assist and advise on complex technical and/or socioeconomic issues related to its mandate. Such experts will also be available to respond to inquiries from review participants."

ICUC requests that they be sent copies of correspondence with FEARO. The FEARO and ICUC addresses are:

• Inter-Church Uranium Committee Educational Co-operative, Phillip Penna, Coordinator, Box 7724, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada S7K 4R4. Tel. 1-306-934-3030. Fax: 1-306-652-8377.
• Saskatchewan Uranium Development Panel, Room 420, 1955 Smith St., Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada S4P 2N8. Tel. 1-306-780-8251. Fax: 1-306-780-8250.
• Rabbit Lake Panel, John McEwen, FEARO, 13th Floor, Fontaine Building, 200 Sacre-Coeur Boulevard, Hull, Quebec, Canada K1A 0H3. Tel. 819-953-8797. Fax: 819-994-1469.

As well, ICUC asks that groups write the Saskatchewan Government asking that the anti-uranium mining policy be strengthened. Please write to:
Roy Romanow, Premier of Saskatchewan, Premier's Office, Legislative Building, Regina, Saskatchewan S4S 0P3.

CZECHO-SLOVAKIA

 

Czecho-Slovakia has been the second largest producer of uranium in Eastern Europe. A number of mines and at least three mills have produced about 2,200 tonnes per year. Produc-tion declined after the Soviet Union ceased to be the major customer. There are plans to continue operation of one uranium mill only (Straz pod Ralskem) for domestic nuclear power plant needs.

Following the revolution the MAPE uranium mill was the subject of intense press coverage after Austrian ecologists found elevated radiation levels in the area around the mill. The mill, located near Budweis, has an annual production of 500 tonnes. At this mill ore has been processed from the West German Großschloppen mine, and from the Menzenschwand mine after closure of the Ellweiler mill in May 1989. Several accidents and grossly negligent procedures during the early operation of the MAPE mill have been uncovered. A detailed investigation by the Ecology Institute in Vienna has confirmed suspicions that protective measures for retaining radioactive waste are insufficient. The mill tailings basins are not water-proof, and radioactive waste water is released into a creek that flows into a lake used for swimming. Radium concentrations of up to 800,000 Bq/kg have been found in areas with unrestricted access.

Source: "Proceedings -- Meeting of Anti-uranium Citizens Committees in Europe, at Zwickau/Saxony 1-3 August 1991," six page English summary, pp.2-3.

 

FRANCE

 

With an annual production of over 3000 tonnes of uranium, France is the largest producer in Europe. There are currently about 14 operating uranium mines, mainly in the Massif Central area. The "World Nuclear Industry Handbook 1991" lists nine uranium mills with "operable" status, one "planned", and four "shut down or on standby". Uranium from the now closed West German Menzenschwand mine was milled in France. The low world price for uranium has also effected the mines in France. Several mines have closed and further shutdowns have been announced.

France is one of the only countries in Europe where, for more than a decade, there has been a nationwide citizen's movement against uranium mining. More than 100 local committees have formed a national network. The network publishes its own newsletter, analyzes many newspapers and publications, manages a documentation center, offers a rental service for radiation monitoring equipment, and holds seminars on legal action against uranium mining.

The anti-uranium movement in France has focused on the struggle to stop new mines from opening. Little attention has been given to the hazards of operating mines and mills and abandoned mine and mill wastes. However, there was an immediate reaction against proposals to dump radioactive waste from nuclear power plants in former uranium mines.

Also, a new uranium tailings regulatory problem has recently been uncovered. At least six uranium mine tailings piles in France contain levels of radium above that legally allowed by their government authorization. This is documented in the November/December 1991 issue of "Info Uranium," published by a French environmental group with the same name. All tailings piles in France must be licensed. Piles with more than 37 trillion becquerals (TBq) (1,000 curies) are put in the category of "basic nuclear installations." Facilities in this category are required to make a safety report, investigate impacts, and have public participation during the licensing process. In the spring of 1991, the independent radiation mon-itoring group CRII-RAD found that the Lavaugrasse tailings pile contains 141 TBq, and the Brugeaud pile 125 TBq, though do not have "basic nuclear installation" licences. Both are located at the Bessines-sur-Gartempe uranium mill site near Limoges (Haute Vienne). The mill is operated by SIMO, a wholly owned subsidiary of Cogema and has an annual capacity of 1,500 tonnes (1989 production was 1,000 tonnes). The radium content of these piles and their licensing status was confirmed by a French govern-ment report published in July 1991. The report notes that four other tailings piles exceed the 37 TBq limit and are not properly licensed. CRII-RAD and other anti-nuclear organizations are now trying to get the proper licensing procedures implemented.

Sources:

• "Proceedings -- Meeting of Anti-uranium Citizens Committees in Europe, at Zwickau/Saxony 1-3 August 1991," six page English summary, p.2.
• Info Uranium, No.53, Nov./Dec. 1991, pp.16-17.
• The government report noted (in French only): "Rapport de la Commission d'examen des dépóts de matières radioactives," juillet 1991; available free of charge from: Ministère de l'Industrie, 101, rue de Grenelle, F-75700 Paris Cedex, France.

 

GERMANY

WISMUT

The Wismut mining company has produced about 200 million tonnes of solid waste. There is serious groundwater contamination and the stability of tailings dams is questionable. In some cases, toxic industrial waste has been dumped on top of the tailings.

(For further information on Wismut, see WISE News Communique's 340.3400, 341.3416, 344.3444 and 346.3467.)

 

---

EASTERN GERMANY/EARTHQUAKE HAZARD

By Peter Diehl

The Thuringian uranium province in the Ronneburg area (near Gera) is located in the center of highest earthquake risk in the whole of Eastern Germany. Evidence of this was presented at a conference on earthquakes and civil engineering held in January 1991 at Potsdam. The last major reported earthquake in the area was on 6 March 1872, and had an intensity of 7.5 on the MSK-scale (Medvedev, Sponheuer, Karnik). At an intensity of seven, cracks in walls and chimneys are observed. At an intensity of eight, large cracks in masonry are observed and parts of gables and roof ledges collapse. The intensity of the maximum credible earthquake for this area is predicted at 8.5.

Earthquakes of these intensities do not present the risk of total damage to buildings, and the influence on tailings dams is uncertain but is a risk that needs to be considered. There are dams in the area holding back a liquid and solid sludge containing up to 86 million tonnes of solid waste. The dam embankments themselves are made from tailings material, which contain a high percentage of liquid, thus contributing to instability. In some situations, collapse of a dam would result in a large spill that would bury small villages where several hundred people live. Some villages are located immediatly at the foot of tailings embankments, only meters away. In these areas groundwater is contami-nated and fresh water is piped in.

An additional hazard is that tailings dams are located directly on geologic faults. This is because the uranium was found in geologic fault zones. The tailings have been placed in the mined out open pits and embankments added above ground. During an earthquake, differential movement along a fault can occur, which could cause cracks and even collapse of an embankment.

To determine the risk of dam failure, detailed field studies need to be carried out. Little data on these dams is presently available. To move the tailings to a safer area would require a huge effort and great expense. In the U.S., the largest tailings pile moved had a size of about a few million tonnes

 

HUNGARY

 

Uranium mining in Hungary is concentrated in the area around the city of Pécs at the foot of the Mecsek mountains in the southern part of the country. Annual production is about 500 tonnes of uranium. The future of this mine is uncertain since the main customer, the U.S.S.R., stopped buying. An Irish company, Glencar Explorations, has for some time held an option to continue the operation at reduced employment, but no contract has been signed. The economics are not attractive due to the low grade of the ore. At the site there has been heap leaching of low grade ores, where a liquid (called a leaching agent) is allowed to seep through piles of ore, and the uranium rich liquid collected at the bottom. Contami-nation of groundwater by the leaching agent is one source of contamination. Another is radioactive dust blown over adjacent residential areas. The slurry from conventional ore proces-sing is dumped in large holding ponds with a total surface area of about two square km. Here also, radioactive dust is blown into the surrounding area and groundwater is contaminated. Elevated radon levels have been found in homes nearby and investi-gations are underway to determine if this is due to use of radioactive waste as construction material.

Source:

• "Proceedings -- Meeting of Anti-uranium Citizens Committees in Europe, at Zwickau/Saxony 1-3 Aug. 1991," six page English summary, p.2.
• See also: "Hungary: glasnost reaches uranium mines," - WISE News Communique 340.3404, 19 October 1990, p.7

 

INDIA

 

The only exploitable uranium deposits in India are in and near Jaduguda in Singhbhum district. The deposits already exhausted there had an average grade of 0.06%, which makes it one of the worst grades mined in the world. Now, even lower grade ore is being mined, at only 0.02%.

The World Nuclear Industry Handbook 1991 lists four uranium mills in India. All have "operable" status and are operated by Uranium Corporation of India, Ltd. (UCIL). The 1989 production at Jaduguda is given as 115 tonnes uranium, and the 1989 production at the other three mills, Mosaboni, Rakha, and Surda, is given as 15 tonnes uranium each. These three mills produce copper as a by-product. According to Anumukti, a mill bigger than the one at Jaduguda is under construction nearby at Turamdih. The mines in the Jaduguda area are underground.

The following two articles and "New Deposit" notice are edited versions reprinted from Anumukti, A Journal Devoted To Non-Nuclear India, Vol.5, Number 1, August/September 1991. The mining areas described are operated by UCIL

---

THE PRICE JADUGUDA HAS PAID

By Ms. Manimala Dharmayug, 4 March 1990.

Go to the mines of Jaduguda
From where come the uranium loads
See how it is carried in open trucks, and falls in middle of roads.
Go the reactors of RAPP
How radiation has spread!
Look at the workers of Tarapur
How they have been mislead.
Very frightening, very frightening, very frightening indeed
Is the Maya of atomic energy.

--Narayanbhai

There was a time when Jaduguda used to be a place of scenic beauty. There were dense green forests, low mountains, small villages surrounded by hills, hardworking people, playful and ever smiling children, open air, and flowing streams. It was once so beautiful there!

But they had one more thing -- uranium in the womb of mother Earth. Exploring man got to know of this, then atomic man had to grab it at all costs. The bowels of the Earth were torn open and digging and ever more digging was done to get the uranium out. The hunger of nuclear reactors for uranium was satisfied but the people of 1,200 neighboring vil-lages have become both hungry and naked. People whose sustenance was the forest, became dispossessed. Jun-gles were destroyed, hills became bar-ren, and the people became powerless.

Prohibited Area
Existence of the uranium deposits was discovered in the 1950's. In 1967, uranium mining and processing equip-ment was moved in. Along with the equipment came operating workers, mining scientists, and officials -- all from the outside. Buildings and houses were constructed. Those who came without houses, got new homes, and those that had lived there for generations became homeless. Some of the homeless went to distant hills, some to Naroana, some wandered around and are still wandering.

This green, self-contained Adivasi (aboriginal) village in the Singbhum district of Bihar became part of the mainstream of development. Cars and other vehicles started going back and forth from the Rakha mining station to Jaduguda. The air became filled with smoke and the clean Gura river became dirty. About 1,200 villages were consumed and Jaduguda became an industrial township. Today this place provides the uranium for all the Indian reactors with the exception of Tarapur.

Those villages and people who refused to be displaced in the beginning are now slowly being squeezed out. Radioactive pollution is increasing rapidly. However, as yet, even after 24 years, there are no local monitoring stations to measure the pollution.

The waste from the uranium mill is transported through a long pipe to the tailings pond. This pond covers an area of 3.6 square km. The pipe leaks from breaks in a number of places. Waste water has spread far and wide. A population of nearly 5,500 people are suffering from this water pollution. Chati Kocha, Rani Kocha, Dungardih, Lakhi, Talaitand and other villages are dependent on the waters of a lake which is posted with a sign in English reading, "Prohibited Area." The villagers do not understand English but they do understand and know that the air they breathe, the water they drink, and the food they eat are all contaminated.

An Epidemic Of Deformities
The village in the immediate vicinity of the tailings pond is Chati Kocha. A little farther is Rani Kocha. The total population of these two villages combined is about 500, of which about 100 are children. A survey of the children found that two are completely blind, six can only see dimly, four are hearing impaired, and eight are mentally retarded. Half the women complained of white discharge and 47% complained of early and frequent menses. In the last five years, eight women gave birth to deformed children that died within a week of birth. In these five years there were more than 30 spontaneous abortions. All the women complain of fatigue, weakness and depression. Half the men too complain of tiredness and depression. The amount of lympho-cytes in the blood of 54% of the people are quite high, indicating a disposition towards cancer.

The conditions of the children and plant workers are terrible. Seven year old Manoj has both his legs turned outwards below the knees. He cannot walk properly. Eight year old Mani's left arm is only of elbow length. Eight year old Shiv and nine year old Tulsi are thalesimia patients and require frequent blood transfusions. Munna, who is twelve, suffers from mega-colon. He can neither speak nor walk, nor do anything with his hands.

Elders of the area say that earlier it wasn't like this. Those families which have had deformed babies had not seen a case of deformity for at least five generations. Thus, the general public opinion in the area is that all these illnesses and deformities are due to uranium mining and processing.

Official Claims
UCIL says that radioactivity is spreading slowly and is well within internationally accepted "safe limits." According to officials, the amount of uranium found in the ore is only 0.04- 0.06%. The administration officials claim that once uranium is extracted from the uranite, the remaining por-tion of the ores are not radioactive. The wastes contain only 0.005 milli-grams per liter of uranium. Water after use is thrown into the Gura river which flows into the Subarnarekha. The pollution from Jaduguda thus spreads all over Singbhum.

Before the mines were built, UCIL planners gave a clear warning that the wastes should not be exposed un-tended and neither should they be released to the rivers. Till now the UCIL administration has been lying that the radioactivity posed no risk at all but now plans are afoot to set up an effluent treatment plant at the cost of 10 million rupees (approximately US$2.58 million). This is being done after an investigation by central authorities and the International Committee for Radiological Protection. It is due to this pressure that attempts are now being made to stop the waste water from reaching the Subarnarekha.

While the UCIL management doesn't accept the fact that radioactivity has in any way been harmful to either people, animals, trees or plants, the high officials have made arrangements for their own food to come from a government farm about 44 km away.

A Dump For Outside Waste
Radioactive waste from the Nuclear Fuel complex at Hyderabad and the Variable Energy Cyclotron Center at Calcutta is also dumped here in the pond. Earlier this waste was kept in Hyderabad, but in 1982 four workers died while working in the midst of this waste. At that time there was strong protest from neighboring residents against waste storage in the vicinity. It was after this that the waste began to be sent to Jaduguda.

 

---

LIVING WITHOUT HOPE IN DUNGARDIH

By Suren Raut, Sampoorna Kranti Vidyalaya-Vedchhi, India.

It was hot, humid, typical monsoon weather, but there had been no showers. After the long walk I felt very thirsty. In the distance was a farmer taking out young rice saplings for later transplantation. "Could I have a drink of water?" I asked. "You will have to go to my home," he answered.

We walked along the side of a large pond, almost a lake, with lovely lush green scenery. There were cattle grazing in the grass on the banks at one end of the pond. The farmer told me, "You can't drink the water from this pond. It is poisonous, gives you TB. It is lucky that you came here after the rains. During the summer the water dries up and the dust blows in the hot winds. It is terrible. One is thirsty all the time."

By the side of the pond is a small village named Dungardih. There are about 25 houses there. I saw a well and walked towards it. The farmer exclaimed, "No! No! Don't drink water from there. It is also poisonous. The only water you can drink here is tap water supplied by the company."

"What about your animals? What do they drink?" I enquired. "What can the poor creatures do? They drink the poisonous water from the pond," was the answer.

Most of the men have gone to work, which means employment with the company in the mines or mill. Farming is not considered "work". Only the "unfit" and unemployed do it.

I saw some children playing in a field and joined them. They looked very weak, with thin, emaciated arms and legs. Sanatan Mardi, better known by his nickname Daman, studies in the second standard. He was born with no fingers or toes. His mother called me over to her hut and told me, "I have lost five children. They were very weak and all died within a few days of birth. My only hope and support is Daman."

A 25 year old young man, named Mohan, from a neighboring hut told me, "I am 'unfit'. I worked for just three months. My younger brother still works in the mill. It is the air. That is what makes us unfit. My father died three years ago after being declared unfit."

"How do you know that your younger brother won't get unfit?" I asked. "Our health is bound to become bad, but what are we to do? One has to eat. We know that it is more dangerous to work in uranium mines than in other mines. Look at Ghasia Majhi. He has a tumor in his neck. And there is my neighbor Hoding Majhi. He has been sitting for the last five years at home after being declared unfit. His toes have had to be amputated. But why look at this village alone? Go to any village where there is a uranium mine -- Bhatin, Surdha, Narua, Rakha, Bhusabani -- you find the same thing everywhere. There are skin diseases, pain in the stomach, TB, cancer, pain in the joints. Terrible weakness and pain, that is our lot."

"What about a hospital? Where do you go for treatment?" "There is a hospital run by the company just near the mill (at Jaduguda). But there is no govern-ment hospital. This one is only meant for company employees. Some local people also go there, but it is very expensive. Most of us go to the government hospital at Tatanagar (40 km away)."

In the morning I got a ride in a truck to the Bhatin mines. True to the description in Narayanbhai's song, there are open trucks that drive underneath a loading shed. Loading is done by automatic loaders. A button is pressed and a huge load of broken rock descends from the roof into the truck. It does this three times before a truck is full. Sometimes small lumps of ore fall by the side. The driver or his "cleaner" just pick them up and toss them over into the truck. Nobody wears any gloves or protective clothing. I asked a worker about this and was told, "The company does give uniforms but we can't wash them everyday. Some leave them in the changing rooms while others take them home. Masks are available but not for everybody."

 

New Deposit A major deposit of uranium has been found at Domiasiat, 140 km south-west of Shillong in north-east India. It is claimed that the deposit is "the largest, richest, near-surface and low-cost sandstone type uranium deposit discovered in India so far." The ore is spread over a 10 square km area at depths varying from eight to 47 meters from the surface. Six layers of varying dimensions with grades up to 0.41% uranium oxide have been delineated by drilling. Indian Express, 13 August 1991.

 

(362-3.resources) WISE Amsterdam -

Note: Publishers' addresses not included if listed in the contact list.

(December 6, 1991) Anumukti. Sept. 1991. Anumukti, A Journal Devoted to Non-Nuclear India. Vol. 5, Number 1, Aug./Sept. 1991. 16 pp. Focuses on uranium mining. Articles cover uranium mining in India, Australia, U.S., Canada, Germany, and Japan.

Bossew, Peter. Nov. 1990. "Radioecological Investigations in the Surroundings of MAPE Uranium Ore Processing Plant Near Ceske Budejo-vice in Southern Bohemia, CSFR." 51 pp. Prepared on behalf of Greenpeace Austria. Gamma-Strahlenmeßstelle, Währingerstr. 59, A-1090 Vienna, Austria. Tel. 43-222-408 22 89.

Cochran, Thomas B.; and Norris, Robert Standish. 14 Feb. 1991. "Soviet Nuclear Warhead Production." 68 pp. NWD 90-3 (3rd Rev.), Natural Resources Defence Council, 1350 New York Ave. NW, Wash. D.C. 20005, U.S.A. Tel. 202-783-7800.

Gadekar, Dr. Surendra. 1990. "Uranium Mining In Jharkhand" (India). 4 pp. Safe Energy and Environment, No. 7, 10 Oct. 1991, pp. 22-25. Safe Energy and Environment, 28 Nazrul Park, P.O. Aswininagar, Calcutta 700 059, India.

German Bundestag. 23 Nov. 1989. "Response of the Federal Govern-ment." Publication 11/5788. 40 pp. Translation of debate in the German parliament titled, "Involvement of the Federal Republic of Germany in production and trade in uranium around the world, human and land rights of those affected." The Green Party, Colmantstr 36, Box 1422, 5300 Bonn, FRG. Tel.49-228-692021.

Greenpeace Australia. March 1991. "Uranium Mining and the Australian Economy: The Facts." 9 pp. Data showing that about 15 times as many jobs per dollar are created in manufacturing as compared to the Ranger uranium mine. Information also on the Ranger uranium mine's contribution to government revenue, Australia's balance of payments, and distribution of revenue.

Greenpeace Australia. May 1991. "Greenpeace Briefing on Uranium Mining, Subsidary statement to the Uranium Policy Review Committee." 20 pp.

Greenpeace Canada. 1991. "Nuclear Reactions, Saskatchewan Church Leaders Speak Out on Uranium Mining and Nuclear Power." 24 pp. Excerpts from presentations church leaders made to the Saskatchewan Energy Options Review Panel.

Hallam, John R. Sept. 1990. "Friends of the Earth Submission on Uranium Mining to Industries Assistance Commission Inquiry Into Mineral and Mineral Processing, 'Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About Uranium Mining in Australia'." 61 pp. FOE, Australia. Includes overview of problems throughout nuclear fuel chain and details on uranium mines in Australia.

O'Faircheallaigh, Ciaran. 1990. "Uranium Demand, Supply and Prices: 1991-2000." 36 pp. Greenpeace International. Can be obtained from Greenpeace offices in Canada, U.K., U.S.A., and Australia. The introduc-tion reads, "The purpose of this study is to estimate the balance between demand and supply of newly mined uranium for the world outside the centrally planned economies (WOCA) over the years 1991-2000... to draw conclusions regarding likely trends in uranium prices during the coming decade." Among the conclusions: "It is predicted that the uranium market will be almost exactly in balance over the decade as a whole. Development of even one small new uranium project in Australia would mean that supply would significantly exceed demand..." Does not take military consumption into consideration. Two appendices list statistics and data for uranium mines (WOCA only) that produced more than 100 tonnes U3O8 in 1988, and projects which could be in production during 1991-2000.

International Campaign For Tibet. Oct. 1990 (2nd edition). Essential Environmental Materials on Tibet. 72 pp. ISBN: 1-879245-02-7. International Campaign For Tibet, 1511 K St. NW, Suite 739, Wash. D.C. 20005, U.S.A. Tel. 202-628-4123. Fax: 202-347-6825.

Moody, Roger. 1990. Plunder! 200 pp. Published jointly by PARTIZANS/ CAFCA in London, England and Christchurch, New Zealand. ISBN: 09517522-0-0. Price: ,4.95 (US$12) plus postage. Available from: PARTIZANS, 218 Liverpool Road, London N1 1LE, England. Tel. 44-71-609 1852. Written by an activist-organizer, this is not just another academic study or expose of a large multinational (in this case RTZ), but a wealth of detailed information and analysis about its organizational structure and mode of operation. An indispensable aid for communities planning counter-strageties to corporate mining activities.

Movement Against Uranium Mining. Uranium Mining In Australia. July 1991 (2nd edition). 16 pp. ISBN: 0-9594933-1-X. A general explanation of uranium mining and its health and environmental effects, as well as how Aborigines are affected and the con-nection between Australian uranium and nuclear weapons.

Nuclear Engineering International. 1990. World Nuclear Industry Handbook 1991. 330 pp. Reed Business Publishing. Distribution by: ESCO Business Services, Box 935, Finching Field, Braintree, Essex, CM7 4LJ, UK. Tel. 44-371-810 433. Price: £65. Annual publication. Its "Fuel cycle facility listing" does not list individual uranium mines but does include uranium ore processing (i.e uranium mills) by country (not including the USSR). Data for about 80 facilities in 23 countries.

Regnier, Robert. Jan. 1991. "In Defence of the Christian Leaders' Statement on Uranium Mining." 16 pp. Inter-Church Uranium Committee Educational Co-operative. A reply to a published attack on an anti-uranium mining statement by church leaders.

Texas Energy Alliance. Undated, about 1990. "Collection of Short Articles on Uranium Mining." 25 pp. Eight articles describing different aspects of uranium mining in Texas, with stress on the problems of in-situ leach mining.

French Language Publications

Info Uranium. Published by Info Uranium in France. Six issues/year. Europe: 90 FF (US$16.50). Outside Europe: 120 FF (US$22). Issue No. 52 includes a 10 page report on the meeting of anti-uranium groups in Zwickau, Germany, 1-3 August 1991.

La Gazette Nucléaire. Groupment de scientifiques pour l'Information sur l'Energie Nucléaire (GSIEN) (Group of Scientists for Information on Nuclear Energy), 2, rue Fraçois Villon, F-91400 Orsay, France. Six per year. Foreign annual subscriptions cost 120 FF (US$60). The 32 page Nov. 1991 issue (No. 111/112) is on mines, miners and wastes.
La Gazette Nucléaire will not be published in 1992 (financial problems...)

German Language Publications

Citizen Committee Against Uranium Mining in the Black Forest and Citizen Committee Oberrothenbach. Dec. 1991. "Tagungsband -- Tagung der Bürgerinitiativen gegen Uranabbau in Europa, Zwickau (Sachsen) 1-3 Aug. 1991" ("Proceedings -- Meeting of Anti-uranium Citizens Committees in Europe, at Zwickau/Saxony 1-3 August 1991"). 108 pp. Price: DM10 (US$6), plus postage. Order from the Citizen Committee Against Uranium Mining in the Black Forest or Citizen Committee Oberrothenbach. Problems created by uranium mining in Germany described in detail. Short regional reports included for France, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Hungary, Rumania, Bulgaria, the Soviet Union, Estonia, Spain, and Yugoslavia. In addition, reclamation is examined. Selected articles available in English and French. A six page condensed report available in English.

Beleites, Michael. 1991. Untergrund -- Ein Konflikt mit der Stasi in der Uranprovinz(Underground -- a Conflict with Stasi in the Uranium Province). 274 pp. Basisdruck-Verlag, Berlin. ISBN: 3-86163-044-3. Price: DM19.80 (US$12). Documents the author's experience with Stasi, the East German secret police, while he was writing the first public report (1988) on uranium mining in East Germany, "Pechblende -- der Uranab-bau in der DDR und seine Folgen" (Pitchblend -- Uranium Mining in the GDR and its Consequences). Beleites obtained access to some of the files Stasi kept on him, compares his diary with them, studies Stasi's methods, and reports meetings he had after the revolution with former Stasi-officers responsible for his persecution.

SDAG Wismut. 1990. Seilfahrt -- Auf den Spuren des sächsischen Uranerzbergbaus("Travelling in a mine cage down into the underground mine -- on the track of uranium mining in Saxony"). 152 pp. Bode-Verlag, Haltern. ISBN: 3-925094-40-7. Price: DM48 (US$29). Hardcover, with color photographs. Published by the mining company itself, it is the first book on uranium mines in Saxony. A book on mines in Thuringia is expected in 1992.

Reimar, Paul. 1991. Das Wismut-Erbe -- Geschichte und Folgen des Uranbergbaus in Thüringen und Sachsen ("The Wismut Legacy -- History and Consequences of Uranium Mining in Thüringen and Saxony"). 192 pp. Verlag Die Werkstatt. ISBN: 3-923478-55-0, paperback. Price: DM22 (US$14). The first independent book on Wismut.

Schuhmann, Holger; et. al. 1990. Das Uran und die Hüter der Erde, Atom-wirtschaft -- Umwelt -- Menschenrechte (Uranium and the Protectors of the Earth, Nuclear Economy -- Environment -- Human Rights). 204 pp. Quell Verlag, Stuttgart. ISBN: 3-7918- 2261-6. Price: DM 19.80 (US$12). Edited by the Society for the Conservation of Nature (BUND) and Society for Dangerous People (GfbV), it was initiated by a 1988 cental European tour by Indigenous people. There are chapters on the U.S., Canada, Australia, Africa, ecological and health hazards of uranium mining, international involvement of German companies in uranium mining, and nuclear testing in the Pacific. The editors are interested in cooperating on translations to other languages, perhaps enriched by additional chapters on the local situation. Contacts: BUND, Georg Löser, Dunantstr. 16, W-7800 Freiburg, FRG, tel. 49- 761-88595-0; fax -90; GfbV, Günter Wippel, Oberau 63, W-7800 Freiburg, FRG, tel. 49-761-31193 or 381282.

(362-3.resources) WISE Amsterdam -

Note: Publishers' addresses not included if listed in the contact list.

(December 6, 1991) Anumukti. Sept. 1991. Anumukti, A Journal Devoted to Non-Nuclear India. Vol. 5, Number 1, Aug./Sept. 1991. 16 pp. Focuses on uranium mining. Articles cover uranium mining in India, Australia, U.S., Canada, Germany, and Japan.

Bossew, Peter. Nov. 1990. "Radioecological Investigations in the Surroundings of MAPE Uranium Ore Processing Plant Near Ceske Budejo-vice in Southern Bohemia, CSFR." 51 pp. Prepared on behalf of Greenpeace Austria. Gamma-Strahlenmeßstelle, Währingerstr. 59, A-1090 Vienna, Austria. Tel. 43-222-408 22 89.

Cochran, Thomas B.; and Norris, Robert Standish. 14 Feb. 1991. "Soviet Nuclear Warhead Production." 68 pp. NWD 90-3 (3rd Rev.), Natural Resources Defence Council, 1350 New York Ave. NW, Wash. D.C. 20005, U.S.A. Tel. 202-783-7800.

Gadekar, Dr. Surendra. 1990. "Uranium Mining In Jharkhand" (India). 4 pp. Safe Energy and Environment, No. 7, 10 Oct. 1991, pp. 22-25. Safe Energy and Environment, 28 Nazrul Park, P.O. Aswininagar, Calcutta 700 059, India.

German Bundestag. 23 Nov. 1989. "Response of the Federal Govern-ment." Publication 11/5788. 40 pp. Translation of debate in the German parliament titled, "Involvement of the Federal Republic of Germany in production and trade in uranium around the world, human and land rights of those affected." The Green Party, Colmantstr 36, Box 1422, 5300 Bonn, FRG. Tel.49-228-692021.

Greenpeace Australia. March 1991. "Uranium Mining and the Australian Economy: The Facts." 9 pp. Data showing that about 15 times as many jobs per dollar are created in manufacturing as compared to the Ranger uranium mine. Information also on the Ranger uranium mine's contribution to government revenue, Australia's balance of payments, and distribution of revenue.

Greenpeace Australia. May 1991. "Greenpeace Briefing on Uranium Mining, Subsidary statement to the Uranium Policy Review Committee." 20 pp.

Greenpeace Canada. 1991. "Nuclear Reactions, Saskatchewan Church Leaders Speak Out on Uranium Mining and Nuclear Power." 24 pp. Excerpts from presentations church leaders made to the Saskatchewan Energy Options Review Panel.

Hallam, John R. Sept. 1990. "Friends of the Earth Submission on Uranium Mining to Industries Assistance Commission Inquiry Into Mineral and Mineral Processing, 'Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About Uranium Mining in Australia'." 61 pp. FOE, Australia. Includes overview of problems throughout nuclear fuel chain and details on uranium mines in Australia.

O'Faircheallaigh, Ciaran. 1990. "Uranium Demand, Supply and Prices: 1991-2000." 36 pp. Greenpeace International. Can be obtained from Greenpeace offices in Canada, U.K., U.S.A., and Australia. The introduc-tion reads, "The purpose of this study is to estimate the balance between demand and supply of newly mined uranium for the world outside the centrally planned economies (WOCA) over the years 1991-2000... to draw conclusions regarding likely trends in uranium prices during the coming decade." Among the conclusions: "It is predicted that the uranium market will be almost exactly in balance over the decade as a whole. Development of even one small new uranium project in Australia would mean that supply would significantly exceed demand..." Does not take military consumption into consideration. Two appendices list statistics and data for uranium mines (WOCA only) that produced more than 100 tonnes U3O8 in 1988, and projects which could be in production during 1991-2000.

International Campaign For Tibet. Oct. 1990 (2nd edition). Essential Environmental Materials on Tibet. 72 pp. ISBN: 1-879245-02-7. International Campaign For Tibet, 1511 K St. NW, Suite 739, Wash. D.C. 20005, U.S.A. Tel. 202-628-4123. Fax: 202-347-6825.

Moody, Roger. 1990. Plunder! 200 pp. Published jointly by PARTIZANS/ CAFCA in London, England and Christchurch, New Zealand. ISBN: 09517522-0-0. Price: ,4.95 (US$12) plus postage. Available from: PARTIZANS, 218 Liverpool Road, London N1 1LE, England. Tel. 44-71-609 1852. Written by an activist-organizer, this is not just another academic study or expose of a large multinational (in this case RTZ), but a wealth of detailed information and analysis about its organizational structure and mode of operation. An indispensable aid for communities planning counter-strageties to corporate mining activities.

Movement Against Uranium Mining. Uranium Mining In Australia. July 1991 (2nd edition). 16 pp. ISBN: 0-9594933-1-X. A general explanation of uranium mining and its health and environmental effects, as well as how Aborigines are affected and the con-nection between Australian uranium and nuclear weapons.

Nuclear Engineering International. 1990. World Nuclear Industry Handbook 1991. 330 pp. Reed Business Publishing. Distribution by: ESCO Business Services, Box 935, Finching Field, Braintree, Essex, CM7 4LJ, UK. Tel. 44-371-810 433. Price: £65. Annual publication. Its "Fuel cycle facility listing" does not list individual uranium mines but does include uranium ore processing (i.e uranium mills) by country (not including the USSR). Data for about 80 facilities in 23 countries.

Regnier, Robert. Jan. 1991. "In Defence of the Christian Leaders' Statement on Uranium Mining." 16 pp. Inter-Church Uranium Committee Educational Co-operative. A reply to a published attack on an anti-uranium mining statement by church leaders.

Texas Energy Alliance. Undated, about 1990. "Collection of Short Articles on Uranium Mining." 25 pp. Eight articles describing different aspects of uranium mining in Texas, with stress on the problems of in-situ leach mining.

French Language Publications

Info Uranium. Published by Info Uranium in France. Six issues/year. Europe: 90 FF (US$16.50). Outside Europe: 120 FF (US$22). Issue No. 52 includes a 10 page report on the meeting of anti-uranium groups in Zwickau, Germany, 1-3 August 1991.

La Gazette Nucléaire. Groupment de scientifiques pour l'Information sur l'Energie Nucléaire (GSIEN) (Group of Scientists for Information on Nuclear Energy), 2, rue Fraçois Villon, F-91400 Orsay, France. Six per year. Foreign annual subscriptions cost 120 FF (US$60). The 32 page Nov. 1991 issue (No. 111/112) is on mines, miners and wastes.
La Gazette Nucléaire will not be published in 1992 (financial problems...)

German Language Publications

Citizen Committee Against Uranium Mining in the Black Forest and Citizen Committee Oberrothenbach. Dec. 1991. "Tagungsband -- Tagung der Bürgerinitiativen gegen Uranabbau in Europa, Zwickau (Sachsen) 1-3 Aug. 1991" ("Proceedings -- Meeting of Anti-uranium Citizens Committees in Europe, at Zwickau/Saxony 1-3 August 1991"). 108 pp. Price: DM10 (US$6), plus postage. Order from the Citizen Committee Against Uranium Mining in the Black Forest or Citizen Committee Oberrothenbach. Problems created by uranium mining in Germany described in detail. Short regional reports included for France, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Hungary, Rumania, Bulgaria, the Soviet Union, Estonia, Spain, and Yugoslavia. In addition, reclamation is examined. Selected articles available in English and French. A six page condensed report available in English.

Beleites, Michael. 1991. Untergrund -- Ein Konflikt mit der Stasi in der Uranprovinz(Underground -- a Conflict with Stasi in the Uranium Province). 274 pp. Basisdruck-Verlag, Berlin. ISBN: 3-86163-044-3. Price: DM19.80 (US$12). Documents the author's experience with Stasi, the East German secret police, while he was writing the first public report (1988) on uranium mining in East Germany, "Pechblende -- der Uranab-bau in der DDR und seine Folgen" (Pitchblend -- Uranium Mining in the GDR and its Consequences). Beleites obtained access to some of the files Stasi kept on him, compares his diary with them, studies Stasi's methods, and reports meetings he had after the revolution with former Stasi-officers responsible for his persecution.

SDAG Wismut. 1990. Seilfahrt -- Auf den Spuren des sächsischen Uranerzbergbaus("Travelling in a mine cage down into the underground mine -- on the track of uranium mining in Saxony"). 152 pp. Bode-Verlag, Haltern. ISBN: 3-925094-40-7. Price: DM48 (US$29). Hardcover, with color photographs. Published by the mining company itself, it is the first book on uranium mines in Saxony. A book on mines in Thuringia is expected in 1992.

Reimar, Paul. 1991. Das Wismut-Erbe -- Geschichte und Folgen des Uranbergbaus in Thüringen und Sachsen ("The Wismut Legacy -- History and Consequences of Uranium Mining in Thüringen and Saxony"). 192 pp. Verlag Die Werkstatt. ISBN: 3-923478-55-0, paperback. Price: DM22 (US$14). The first independent book on Wismut.

Schuhmann, Holger; et. al. 1990. Das Uran und die Hüter der Erde, Atom-wirtschaft -- Umwelt -- Menschenrechte (Uranium and the Protectors of the Earth, Nuclear Economy -- Environment -- Human Rights). 204 pp. Quell Verlag, Stuttgart. ISBN: 3-7918- 2261-6. Price: DM 19.80 (US$12). Edited by the Society for the Conservation of Nature (BUND) and Society for Dangerous People (GfbV), it was initiated by a 1988 cental European tour by Indigenous people. There are chapters on the U.S., Canada, Australia, Africa, ecological and health hazards of uranium mining, international involvement of German companies in uranium mining, and nuclear testing in the Pacific. The editors are interested in cooperating on translations to other languages, perhaps enriched by additional chapters on the local situation. Contacts: BUND, Georg Löser, Dunantstr. 16, W-7800 Freiburg, FRG, tel. 49- 761-88595-0; fax -90; GfbV, Günter Wippel, Oberau 63, W-7800 Freiburg, FRG, tel. 49-761-31193 or 381282.

(December 6, 1991) Uranium is a dark grey, radioactive, metallic element, discovered by the German chemist H.M. Klaproth in 1789.

(362-3.uranium) WISE Amsterdam - Uranium has two main uses: as an explosive component of nuclear bombs, and as fuel for nuclear reactors. Uranium is both radio-logically and chemically toxic. It poses a health hazard as a heavy metal as well as a radioisotope.

Naturally occurring uranium is a mixture of three isotopes: uranium-234 (0.01%), uranium-235 (0.71%), and uranium-238 (99.28%). Uranium is the heaviest non-human-made element. Uranium ore normally contains a few hundredths of a percent uranium, though extremely high-grade ore in Saskatchewan, Canada contains up to 60% uranium.

Uranium metal, also called depleted uranium (DU) cannot by itself cause an atomic explosion. DU is used to make armour piercing, incendiary ammunition, and to strengthen armor in military vehicles. Du is used for these purposes because it: has a high density (it is the heaviest non-humanmade substance on Earth); is relatively soft compared to other metals; and it is pyrophoric (starts on fire spontaneously) when finely divided. Ammunition is specially made to take advantage of one or more of these three attributes. DU is also attractive because it is cheaper and more accessible than alternative substances, such as tungsten. Because of its high density, bullets made out of DU are more efficient than any other material at passing through steel. DU is not only the best armor penetrator, but is required to penetrate modern armor plating.

URANIUM MINING AND THE NUCLEAR FUEL CHAIN

 

Uranium mining is referred to in industry jargon as the "front end" of the nuclear industry. This is because uranium mining is commonly regarded as the first link in the nuclear fuel chain, even though it is preceded by exploration. The nuclear fuel chain is the sequence of interdependent opera-tions involved in producing nuclear weapons, uranium ammunition, fuel for nuclear electricity generation, and radioactive isotopes for medical and industrial purposes. Civil and military aspects of the fuel chain are so inter-dependent that it is impossible to completely separate them. However, some medical and industrial radio-active isotopes can be produced by particle accelerators, which are not based on uranium fuel and not connected to nuclear power generation and nuclear weapons production.

Whether regarded primarily civil or military, the nuclear fuel chain requires conversion of uranium from one chemical form to another and transportation involving great distances. The nuclear fuel chain is more technically complex, capital intensive, time consuming, and dangerous than the production process for other forms of energy. These attributes of the nuclear fuel chain are the reason why there is no nation that operates its nuclear industry entirely within its own borders. The few nations possessing the resources (natural, financial, and human) to do so have chosen not to for many reasons, not the least being to minimize local risks such as contamination from uranium mining and weapons testing.

The most common sequence in the fuel chain for commercial electricity producing reactors begins with uranium exploration, proceeds to uranium mining and milling, conver-sion, enrichment, fuel fabrication, fission in a light-water reactor (LWR), reactor waste storage, and finally reactor decommissioning. A variation of this sequence is when natural uranium is used as fuel in heavy-water reactors, such as the Canadian made CANDU.

The primary purpose of the uranium processing stages of exploration, mining, milling, conversion, enrich-ment, and reprocessing is to extract the U235 for use in nuclear weapons and reactors. U235 is the most essential radioisotope for nuclear fission, since it is the only one of the three primary fissionable materials that occurs naturally.

 

1989 URANIUM PRODUCTION BY COMPANY (% of total western world production and export sales from the USSR and China)
Cameco	15%
Cogema	14%
Rio-Tinto-Zinc	11%
Nuclear Fuel Corp. of South Africa	8%
Energy Resources of Australia	8%
Denison	5%
Uranerz	5%
Others	34%	USA	14%
		USSR, China	3%
		USSR, China	Olympic Dam
		South America, Europe, Far East	15%
Source: "The Source," October 1990, Cameco Corp., 2121-11th St. West, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada s7M 1J3. Tel. 1-306-956-6310. Fax: 1-306-956-6318. Greatest producer by country in 1988 was (only those over 100 tonnes included): Canada, U.S.A., South Africa, Namibia, Australia, France, Niger, Gabon, Spain, India, Portugal.