The Grand Canyon's Uranium Boom - Environment and Energy

06.05.2008

The Grand Canyon's Uranium Boom

Judy Pasternak had a good piece in the Los Angeles Times on Sunday taking a closer look at the rapid proliferation of uranium-mining claims on the fringes of Grand Canyon National Park. The number of claims within five miles of the park has soared from just 10 in January 2003 to more than 1,100 now, with most of the new claims on the Kaibab Plateau north of the canyon. Pasternak highlights the dilemma for environmentalists: On the one hand, there's concern the activity could spoil the landscape and pollute the Colorado River, which has downstream users like L.A.'s Metropolitan Water District worried. On the other hand, uranium for emissions-free nuclear power has to come from somewhere, and it just so happens that much of America's uranium is located near some of the Southwest's best scenery.

One thing this episode illustrates fairly clearly, though, is the need for mining-law reform--which, strange as it may sound to Easterners, is a perennial hot-button issue in the West. Under the General Mining Act of 1872, which still governs hard-rock mining claims, the Forest Service is obligated to approve applications for exploratory drilling in National Forest land, without conducting any sort of environmental review. This would at least force the mining companies to provide some evidence to back up their contention that the drilling can be conducted with minimal damage. The law has a whole host of other problems too--primarily in that it allows mining companies to extract precious metals from public lands without paying anything in royalties to the feds, and then stick taxpayers with cleanup costs. Last fall the House approved legislation to overhaul the 1872 mining law, but so far it's stalled in the Senate.

It's also worth noting that John McCain has yet to take a public stance on the matter, which seems to put his love of the Grand Canyon (and general affinity for Teddy Roosevelt-style conservation) at odds with his bizarre insistence that massive subsidies for nuclear power should be the cornerstone of any climate-change bill.

--Josh Patashnik

Posted: Tuesday, May 06, 2008 1:55 PM with 8 comment(s)

Comments

You must be logged-in to comment.

Not a subscriber? Click here to get a digital or print and digital subscription to The New Republic!

liberal reformer said:

That is an exponential increase in the number of claims close to the park in the last five years. Nuclear power can provide more BTU's that can offset the demand for more coal - fired plants but it should not be done at the expense of the enviroment or through hugely increased subsidies.

May 6, 2008 3:24 PM

singlespeed said:

Josh, Reform indeed. Many of the issues with the Mining Act could have been resolved years ago but thanks to Bush and his Dept. of Interior cronies who manage public lands open to mining under the BLM, National Forest, BIA umbrellas, they have systematically stalled any Mining reforms or directed regional offices to fast-track mining claims in their pillage of public lands in the West.

But the last thing we need is to be mining for more raw uranium when we can reprocess existing nuclear plant waste streams before the Grand Canyon is ultimately despoiled from uranium mining tailings. Anyone who's half-perceptive can drive through the southwest and central Rocky Mountains and see the mounds of century and decades old mining tailings that continue to affect downstream water sources. Moab was a uranium town before mountain bike and jeeps found it and the DOE finally moved uranium tailings from the Atlas Mine near Moab and the Colorado river in 2005. 21 years after the mine closed.

Before we even humor the thought of increased uranium mining in pristine desert and semi-arid areas of the southwest, home to some of our greatest national parks and monuments, not to mention the people who live and work and love that landscape we should seriously pursue reprocessing. We're still dealing with the legacy from the last uranium boom. Repeating our mistakes in the name of global warming is as doomed as our rush towards corn based bio-fuels is turning out to be.

Here are a few articles on the current state of affairs from High Country News about the second uranium rush. I highly recommend a subscription for the TNR folks.

www.hcn.org/.../hcn.Article

May 6, 2008 4:21 PM

The Market Traders said:

The Grand Canyon's Uranium BoomNew Republic (subscription), DC - 16 hours agoJudy Pasternak had a good piece in the Los Angeles Times on Sunday taking a closer look at the rapid proliferation of uranium-mining claims on the fringes ...

May 7, 2008 7:32 AM

sdmcleod said:

Someone should tell Harry Reid that we need a place to store the spent nuclear fuel. Right now it is in 55 gallon drums behind chainlink fences next to the reactors that produced it. Harry Reid is preventing it being stored in a safe and secure facility that our taxes have already paid billions to build. NIMBYs should not be allowed to vote.

May 7, 2008 9:28 AM

dhauck said:

sdmcleod - yeeesss...ish

Eventually, we will probably make Sen. Harry give in. But as a strong supporter of the Great Lakes Water Compact, I understand his hestitation on the whole Yucca Mountain project. I just hope he shows the same commitment to principle when his Vegas constituents finally outgrow their own water supply and come looking to siphon my lake.

May 7, 2008 1:02 PM

amyoren said:

What's ridiculous is that we already have enough nuclear waste sitting around the country right now to fill Yucca Mt to capacity. Also, ironically, even though Yucca Mt is pretty much our best bet for a repository site, some scientists think that it will become less safe in the future, because *climate change* will make the area warmer and wetter, increasing possible leakage of the waste, and attracting more people to the region who will want to access groundwater.

So yeah we need to find alternative energy sources. But if John McCain thinks it should be mostly nuclear then he's a moron. And the fact that he doesn't seem to care about learning this stuff is scarily Bush-like.