The Virginian-Pilot
©
VIRGINIA BEACH
The state is considering lifting its 28-year ban on uranium mining, a move that has so alarmed Virginia Beach officials that they are spending $437,000 to study the worst-case scenario for the city’s water supply .
Virginia Beach has hired engineering firm Michael Baker Corp. to look into what could happen to Lake Gaston if there were a catastrophic accident at a possible uranium mining site upstream in south-central Virginia.
The state has tapped the National Academy of Sciences to provide information about best practices, risks and the potential for uranium mining in Virginia.
But that study won’t be comprehensive enough and state legislators dismissed concerns raised by Beach officials about the scope of the academy’s work, said Thomas Leahy, the city’s public utilities director.
“If the other side had volunteered to look at this issue, we wouldn’t have to do this study,” Leahy said.
Still, the cost of the Baker study surprised some Beach City Council members.
“That’s ridiculous,” said Councilman Bill DeSteph. “There’s probably a more fiscally responsible way to do it.”
Councilwoman Barbara Henley said, “I know that studies have a tendency to cost a lot of money, but we have a major investment in Lake Gaston.”
Sen. Frank Wagner of Virginia Beach, a member of the state’s uranium mining subcommittee, said the city’s study is premature when the National Academy of Sciences hasn’t even started its work. “Given the tough budget times, it would be in the better interest of the city to wait,” Wagner said.
The academy is still completing its contract and the research will take about 18 months to complete, said Jennifer Walsh, a spokeswoman for the organization.
Virginia Uranium Inc., the company interested in mining for ore in Pittsylvania County, is paying the $1.4 million cost of the study because of the state’s budget crisis.
The National Academy of Sciences is a reliable resource and its review will be thorough, Wagner said.
“They have an unblemished record,” he said.
Beach officials said they don’t question the academy’s credentials. They hope to share the results of their work with the academy, Leahy said.
The scope of the city’s study includes disaster modeling and a review by a panel of experts. Based on the results, more research may be needed and Virginia Beach may look to the state and neighboring cities to help defray the costs, Leahy said.
Water from Lake Gaston replenishes Norfolk’s reservoirs and Chesapeake is entitled to use a portion of the water.
For now, city officials need to know how concerned they should be about radioactive material getting into the water supply from a mining operation, Leahy said.
Michael Karmis, the director of the Virginia Center for Coal & Energy Research, is working with the National Academy of Sciences on its study. He said it is unclear how influential the city’s results will be.
“I understand the reasoning why people will do other studies,” Karmis said. “No study will replace the weight and credibility of the National Academy.”
Deirdre Fernandes, (757) 222-5121, deirdre.fernandes@pilotonline.com
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Twitter
Google
Yahoo
NAS study not site specific
It's very important for the City of Virginia Beach to do its own independent study. The state study by NAS is not only suspiciously underwritten by Virginia's uranium mining special interests but also is not site specific. Our geology is very unique - we don't have the dry arid soils like out west where there is uranium mining.
We need uranium far more
We need uranium far more than we need Virginia Beach. Let's move forward with this.
Uranium money for Wagner
Also, seeing that Sen. Wagner thinks the study is premature...it's worth noticing that Virginia Uranium gave Frank Wagner $2000 last year.
http://www.vpap.org/candidates/profile/money_in_details/5699?donor_id=148831
This is the company that's been formed to mine that uranium ore. Not much money in the grand scheme, but I'll bet it's easier to get in the door lobbying once you've kicked in a couple grand to a state legislator.
I encourage all Pilot readers to use VPAP. Great website.
Object early and often
In many (most?) public policy issues there are interested parties who win, and interested parties who lose. Usually the best-organized, best-financed party is the one who wins. Usually that party is the one who stands to make the most money from getting the right outcome. Here, that's clearly the people who own the potential mining site, and the nuclear power industry. Left to their own devices, individual citizens (who drink the water that comes from that area) have very little chance of being meaningfully heard in the decision-making process.
Three cheers to the VB Council for recognizing the cause for concern here, and taking action. This is absolutely the purpose of local government.
Mind if I glow?
This sort of situation has come up time and time again in America's history, typically with the people down stream losing out. America has rivers that are poisonous because of mining or other business concerns that got away with saying 'oh everything will be okay, WE'VE checked it all out.' We only have to look as far as the Elizabeth River to see the results. Then there are the rivers in West Virginia. In North Idaho there is the Coeur d'Alene River, loaded with toxic chemicals from decades of silver and lead mining. Children there have higher than normal levels of lead in their bodies. The mining interests said it was all safe too. Now the Coeur d'Alene River is one of the largest Superfund sites in the country. I don't know about anyone else, but I don't want to take chances with my water supply with the past history of the mining companies.
Who needs Uranium? A Virginia Company is leading the
Way in developing the use of Thorium as a fuel for Nuclear reactors. Thorium is close on the periodic table to Uranium and has many advantages and considerably fewer disadvantages when used in a nuclear reactor to generate electricity. First, thorium is a by-product of burning coal. A typical 1000 megawatt coal facility produces 13 tons of Thorium a year. Thorium in it's natural state and even after use in a reactor has no military use and is relatively safe for humans. You can hold thorium in your hand without harm. So it's something terrorists DON'T have any use for. The nuclear reaction can be easily stopped and if the reaction went bad an entire area wouldn't become uninhabitable. For more information take a look at this article from Wired magazine.
http://www.wired.com/magazine/2009/12/ff_new_nukes/all/1
Why are we even discussing this?
People are actually debating whether we could dump uranium waste into our water. Why?
Because those who do not want to protect our water source have another AGENDA. It involves MONEY.
The survival of VB is being directly threatened by those who are considering this mining activity.
The city doesn't need any study to oppose this even though it might buttress its case. It's just common sense.
Here we go.
No one was discussion that
No one was discussion that. That's some straw man argument you made up.
Well Worth It
This study is well worth the money. The City needs to due it's due diligence with respect to this issue. If the Virginia Beach water supply suffered catastrophic contamination the impacts to the City would be unprecedented. Good job Virginia Beach for being proactive and hiring a great consultant.
I don't agree
I don't agree. Someone is already doing the work so why spend our money to do it twice? If there's some questions after the first study is complete then we can look at bringing someone else in.