Bacon's Rebellion

Democracy Thrives in Sunlight

Southside’s Nuclear War Still Simmering

—

by

James A. Bacon
in ,

The battle over Pittsylvania County’s uranium deposit — the largest undeveloped deposit in the United States and reputedly the seventh largest in the world — has attracted the attention of the Wall Street Journal. Max Schultz, a senior fellow with the Manhattan Institute, quotes two environmental foes but makes it clear he does not sympathize with them.

According to Schulz, the Piedmont Environmental Council warns of “enormous quantities of radioactive waste.” Jack Dunavant, head of the Southside Concerned Citizens, paints a picture of environmental apocalypse. “There will be a dead zone within a 30 mile radius of the mine. Nothing will grow. Animals will die. The radiation genetically alters tissue. Animals will not be able to reproduce. We’ll see malformed fetuses.

But, then, James Kelly, former director of nuclear engineering at the University of Virginia, told Schultz that the fears are exaggerated. “It’s an aesthetic nightmare, but otherwise safe in terms of releasing any significant radioactivity or pollution. It would be ugly to look at, but from the perspective of any hazard I wouldn’t mind if they mined across the street from me.”

Who’s right? I’ve got no idea. Earlier this year, environmentalists blocked a General Assembly proposal to study the safety of uranium mining. Virginia Uranium, owner of the Pittsylvania uranium deposit, will continue pushing for an independent study.

Schulz concludes:

If the U.S. is to expand nuclear power’s role in a time of energy insecurity and climate change worries, we will have to confront the hysterical antinuclear pronouncements that have been the currency of environmentalists for nearly 30 years. The Old Dominion could be a good place for a new start.

Share this article

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

Comments

  1. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    You would get a different view from many “environmentalist” — and others as well — if they know what this source of energy was going to be used for.

    The same with long transmission lines from remote coal-fired generating plants.

    Fueling Business-As-Usual is a goal that fewer and fewer think is a desirable trajectory for society.

    Society needs a new metric for citizen well being and a Wright Plan that balances travel demand with transport capacity as well and providing Affordable and Accessible Shelter and drasticlly cutting the consumption of energy.

    Stop breaking eggs until you know what you want to cook.

    EMR

  2. floodguy Avatar
    floodguy

    The answer to make everyone on both sides of the issue happy (except for Virginia Uranium, Inc.)

    Produce electricity via nuclear but through thorium.

    It cannot melt down.

    Produces one-third the waste as uranium.

    Combine w/ plutonium, it can reduce plutonium’s waste by 80%

    Cannot be weaponized unlike uranium.

    Can be used to decrease plutonium weapon stockpiles.

    Real-life retrofit on an existing nuclear reactor proposed to be operational by 2012-2015.

  3. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    What do the 60,000 or so residents of Pittsylvania County have to say? Uranium is mined in many places – Australia, for example. It is a messy business but not a deadly business. There are definitely ecological concerns. But those concerns apply more to the people near the mines than anywhere else. So, I ask again, what do the people of Pittsylvania County think?

    This is a local decision that should be made locally. The part-time, hapless GA and the full-time, hapless governor (apparently soon-to-be VP nominee) should let the people in Pittsylvania County make this decision. Virginia’s idiotic primordial clinging to a strict construct of Dillon’s Rule once again puts a local decision into the hands of a part time pinhead organization. A strict adoption of Dillon’s Rule not only hurts NoVA but every locality that needs to make crucial decisions uninhibited by the Nattering Nabobs of Nonsense from the GA.

  4. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    floodguy – have you got some URLs to further explain what you are advocating.

    re: local decision

    uranium that is mined in arid regions away from major aquifers is at much less risk than uranium mined in areas of frequent rainfall, rivers and large water tables.

    In the end – a “local” decision could adversely impact a much wider area … and the problem is the same as we already see with things like mercury, kepone, PCBs in our waterways.

    Once it gets loose… you don’t clean it up – you live with it.

    re: uranium and settlement patterns

    It’s interesting to me that dense settlement areas require large amounts of energy to function and that energy is not generated within the dense area but instead in so-called “support” areas.

    The day may well come.. when something local nuclear reactors of the kind floodguy is talking about can be located within a dense settlement pattern.

    For instance, we already know how to build and operate nuclear reactors to supply the electricity needs of 4000 people for 10 to 20 years.

    we already have this technology right now.

    they are called aircraft carriers.

    Bonus Question:

    What are the pros/cons of utilizing reactors the size of those used on aircraft carriers to supply …get this now… location-specific energy?

    what if we could do this using the technology that floodguy is talking about?

    double triple bonus question:

    if that kind of technology existed – and we could put those kinds of reactors just about anywhere we wanted .. say 50-100 miles from where jobs are – and those same reactors could recharge plug-in electric cars at night….

    then how would that be a location-specific subsidy?

  5. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Re: Local decision

    It is worth noting that the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors unanimously passed a resolution supporting Senate Bill 525 (which would have created a uranium study commission).

    The Chatham Town Council also unanimously passed a resolution supporting a uranium study.

    Senator Robert Hurt (who represents Pittsylvania County) voted in favor of Senate Bill 525. In fact, the bill passed the Senate by a vote of 36-4.

    Delegate Don Merricks (who represents the District that contains the Coles Hill deposit) spoke in favor of a uranium study at the House Rules Committee, where the bill was killed this past March. Delgate Merricks commented that “3 of every 4 letters he received from constituents was in favor of a uranium study”.

    Clearly, there was/is a very strong desire among the citizens of Pittsylvania County to see that this opportunity is carfully studied to determine if it can be done safely.

  6. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    Larry:

    Right on re “local” (a Core Confusing Word) issue.

    The proper goegraphy for decisons of this kind are “area of impact” not close geographic proximity or municipal jurisdiction.

    (All those who anon 9:46 listed figure to profit in some way, that is why political jursidiction is not a good idea for delimiting decisions.)

    Area of impact can be huge — what is area of impact of a decision by farmer in Afghanastan to raise opium? Or an “importer” in West Africa of South American Cocane? Or a Columbian tribe to raise Cocoa and sell the “excess” to buy medicine.

    Same issue with uranium. BIG impact area.

    Some notes on your settlement pattern comments.

    “re: uranium and settlement patterns

    “It’s interesting to me that dense settlement areas require large amounts of energy to function…”

    Actually it is the dysfunctionally scattered urban settlement patterns that require far more energy per capita.

    “… and that energy is not generated within the dense area …”

    It could be, and should be. Google Modular Integrated Urtility Systems (MIUS). We were big supporters after the 1973 oil crisis. MIUS require Community cooperation and do not garantee short term Enterprise profit so they are still on the shelf.

    “…but instead in so-called “support” areas.”

    The “support area” is not the problem, it is the transmission and distribution distance.

    “The day may well come.. when something local (Core Confusing Word) nuclear reactors of the kind floodguy is talking about can be located within a dense settlement pattern.”

    The day is here as you point out but it is the Community vs Enterprise short term profit problem again.

    “For instance, we already know how to build and operate nuclear reactors to supply the electricity needs of 4000 people for 10 to 20 years.”

    The military creates and controls the Community.

    “we already have this technology right now.

    they are called aircraft carriers.”

    And submarines and …

    “Bonus Question:

    “What are the pros/cons of utilizing reactors the size of those used on aircraft carriers to supply …get this now… location-specific energy?”

    Cost and safety

    “what if we could do this using the technology that floodguy is talking about?”

    What is the cost and what is the risk?

    “double triple bonus question:

    if that kind of technology existed – and we could put those kinds of reactors just about anywhere we wanted .. say 50-100 miles from where jobs are – and those same reactors could recharge plug-in electric cars at night….”

    Jobs and cars are not the only ingredients of Balance but you are on the right track.

    You enjoy Canada, check out the history of the Planned New Communities on the British Columbia coast far north of Vancouver.

    “then how would that be a location-specific subsidy?”

    Depends on who pays and who benefits.

    EMR

  7. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    Larry:

    The place in B.C. is Kitimat in shadow of big hydro dam and an Alcan Aluminum smelter.

    No Balance.

    EMR

  8. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    EMR – one of the distinguishing features of the more remote places in Canada is how they get their power.

    and this is true is many parts of the world that do not have the scope and scale electric grid that we have.

    For instance, Fort Simpson gets it’s power for an enormous diesel generator and the fuel for it comes in on a barge.

    Yellowknife, a town of 20,000 does not get a single kilowatt of power from coal plants nor nukes.

    I think looking at the way that Canada generates and distributes electricity engenders a broader understanding of the issue of electricity and settlement patterns.

    Canada …because of it’s lower population and abundant hydro.. and tremendous potential for wind and solar…

    I am one who thinks that electricity is a central hallmark of civilization… and I think the concept of “balance” as we describe/envision it here in BR – assumes the availability of abundant electricity though I could be wrong.

    There are indeed some cities in the world where electricity is not widespread but most of those places are very different kinds of places….

    I can envision a world with electric vehicles and a lot less gasoline…. but I cannot even fathom a world without electricity.

  9. Former editor Avatar
    Former editor

    The Wall Street Journal article failed to quote any experts on the risks of uranium mining and milling. Failed to mention recent stories documenting those risks, such as Goliad County, Texas, announcing earlier this year its intent to sue a uranium company in federal court on claims of contaminating drinking water. Failed to mention the Nov.2007 investigation by Wyoming’s DEQ into the poor practices at the Smith-Highland Ranch ISL mine. Failed to mention stories such as Cameco alerting Canada’s regulators that they may have contaminated Lake Ontario. Failed to mention the recent incident in France where officials there ordered residents not to use their water for anything after a uranium leak apparently spilled into two rivers.

    Max also failed to mention that VUI would likely have to mine using the horrendous open-pit method, rather than the more “benign” ISL method. Failed to mention the proposed mine is in a rural but populated area where most folks are dependent on private water wells. Failed to mention the area also is prone to severe weather, such as flash flooding, tornadoes and high wind warnings (which were issued multiple times earlier this year).

    Max stayed away from interviewing knowledgeable people like Doug Brugge of Tufts University, who with two colleagues published a study fairly recently about their findings into the effects of uranium on human health. That’s worth taking time to read.

    From a former journalist, it was more than obvious Max had his own agenda with regard to that story. And it’s disappointing some people will likely be swayed by it.

  10. floodguy Avatar
    floodguy

    @ Larry

    World Nuclear Assn http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf62.htm

    MIT Tech Review http://www.technologyreview.com/Energy/19758/

    Cosmos Magazine http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/348

    Energy Week (Orrin Hatch) http://www.thoriumpower.com/files/Hatch_Legislation.pdf

    Energy Week (Harry Reid?) http://cache.search.yahoo-ht2.akadns.net/search/cache?ei=UTF-8&p=thorium+power+harry+reid&fr=my-myy&u=energywashington.com/secure/energy_docnum.asp%3Ff%3Dew_2002.ask%26docnum%3D4142008_reid&w=thorium+power+harry+reid&d=av1hPy72Q9Tk&icp=1&.intl=us

    FuturePundit http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/004829.html

    Energy from Thorium blogspot http://thoriumenergy.blogspot.com/

    Thorium Power LTD info page http://www.thoriumpower.com/default2.asp?nav=technology_solutions&subnav=benefits

  11. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    Thank you “former editor” for providing some perspective.

    We do not know where you were and edito but for those who wonder why he is “former” see THE ESTATES MATRIX.

    Larry said:

    “EMR – one of the distinguishing features of the more remote places in Canada is how they get their power.

    …

    “I think looking at the way that Canada generates and distributes electricity engenders a broader understanding of the issue of electricity and settlement patterns.”

    How so?

    There are a lot of envoros who do not think Ontario Hydro does such a good job.

    “I am one who thinks that electricity is a central hallmark of civilization…”

    No argument here.

    “and I think the concept of “Balance” as we describe/envision it here in BR – assumes the availability of abundant electricity though I could be wrong.”

    You are not wrong, the issue is the amount of consumption to achieve the current level of convenience.

    Urban areas could have the same level of service with 25% of the energy consumption. Recall we have a system designed and constructed by Enterprises that are paid by the amount of consumption and capital expenditure. From the AC / DC decison forward waste has paid the suppliers handsomely.

    “I can envision a world with electric vehicles and a lot less gasoline…. but I cannot even fathom a world without electricity.”

    Electricty yes but what voltage? AC or DC? What location of generation? What waste heat recovery?

    We need to find a way to have conservation pay, not cost.

    EMR

  12. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    Here’s the question EMR.

    If technology ultimately produces a way to generate electricity locally – perhaps miniature reactors using thorium combined with solar/wind – and combined with plug-in electric vehicles , would that no allow/promote “scatterization” with much less location subsidy issues?

  13. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    No, because of distribution costs of electricity and other factors.

    In the current senerio transmission and distribution waste half the energy put into the system.

    The MIUS systems — the term for what you are describling, regardless of energy source — rely on recovering waste heat, recycling and and other conservation measures.

    (These are also factors that Lewenz argues would lower the cost of compact settlements and more than pay for fireproof building materials, etc.)

    MIUS systems do not produce low per KW energy, they produce sustainable energy supplys in community settings. “Scatterization” runs up costs.

    If you are talking about scattering Alpha Neighborhood or Alpha Village scale components, each with their own MIUS, then the energy to connect the components that are not large enough to achieve Critical Mass and Balance also drive up the cost — even with your very effecient electric shared vehicles, vacume tube freight / package systems, etc.

    The primary thing that supports contemprary life that is not location dependent is electronic transmission of information.

    (While there is room in the radio spectrum for more, faster information movement that does not include goods or people. Also note the recent reissue of the cancer warning from high flux electronic transmissions. No one knows what the second, third or fourth generation impacts may be but that is another story.)

    As noted in the derivation of the 87 1/2 Percent Rule, if citizens are living at 30 persons per acre at the Dooryard and Cluster Scale what is the advantage to scattering those components? — if there is useable and accessible Openspace which is possible with intelligent design.

    Again Lewenz states the case well.

    Fairly allocate the costs and you have compact, not scattered settlement patterns.

    So the answer is NO.

    EMR

Leave a Reply

Read More