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.