Last login: Saturday, May 8, 2010
It's just so stupid. The level of radioactivity in yellowcake is not even on the same scale as refined uranium. It's NOT the glowing green stick in the Simpon's intro, it's yellowcake uranium at worst. The no-big-deal stuff you can buy by the pound on ebay. It's a naturally occurring material: a uranium-rich sand deposit that hardened into a sandstone rock. That is what uranium ore is. It is found on the surface, just "rocks" laying around, in the western US. http://www.amazon.com/Uranium-Ore/dp/...
Flag this comment
UEC purchased another company's "fully licensed" uranium plant in Karnes county, and I'm curious what this means for Goliad county. Have you heard anything?
"if either project starts it will mean violence!"
-Kenneth SchusterietSeptember 24, 2009 at 7:38 a.m.
Gee, isn't threatening violence the essential terrorist tactic?
Sidney Braquet was right about y'all.http://www.victoriaadvocate.com/news/...
Wow, a balanced, insightful, well-researched article on the positive fiscal impact of uranium mining. This is awesome. Bravo!
Q&A for environmental concerns about in situ uranium mining can be found here: http://seekingalpha.com/article/28727...
"Manuel Longoria vs. URI where Mr. Longoria accused URI of dumping all kinds of radwaste on top of and underneath his property. Cause number 16264, filed August 25, 1995. Look it up."
So, can you name an aquifer and local economy that was destroyed as a result of such an uranium mining incident? That was the challenge.
"Uranium mining will have the unintended consequence of contaminating our ground water and destroying our economy."
Can anyone give me a single example, from all the uranium mining that has gone on in Texas, where this has occurred? Do you know how many uranium mines are in Texas? There have been 110, according to this EPA database (http://www.epa.gov/rpdweb00/tenorm/pu...).
Please name the aquifer that was destroyed, the uranium mine responsible, and the local economy that went with it.
Mark, As I understand it, Cameco will act as an agent and sell the yellowcake from Iraq, then give the money to the Iraqi government. It's a highly regulated material, and Cameco has all the IAEA licenses in place. I'm not sure what your point is, here. The US government has plenty of uranium, and was among the first to value it.
Are you saying money is bad, the capitalist maket is evil, and therefore mining is wrong? That's an opinion, and you have a right to it, but if you're going to spew hateful Marxist rhetoric, at least call a spade a spade.
I agree with rollinstone throughout the comments in this thread, and others. This person is extremely well-informed, and they're presenting important facts.
I've learned posting from any perspective other than "mining is evil" elicits comments that are attacking me, rather than my perspective and what I think or know to be true. Although kenneth hasn't found this thread yet, so it's been more polite than most. And thus more productive, in terms of discussion.
Bravely onward into the fog, then, as I want to point out that UEC is still under the same laws and restrictions as any rancher, farmer, or industry would be in terms of aquifer pumping. Also, if you want them to use less water restoring the aquifer where they drill, fine... but the reason they have to do it that way is the nutcases trying to argue that this aquifer is pristine -- it's not. It has uranium in it. UEC did not put the uranium there, they want to get it out. Unreasonable baselines mean more water pumped through in clean-up. So -- which is it? Do you want the water restored to better-than-ever quality under their 20 acre mine site, or do you want them to pump millions of gallons through to bring a "naturally contaminated" aquifer up to drinking-water standards? Oh, you just want them to go away and not mine here? That's really not your call, unless you own the mineral rights. This is Texas.
Have a nice day. =D
PS: To keep the screeching, possibly drug-crazed hippies and their jars of dirty water at bay, I'll reference sarneke's account of living near UEC's drilling site in Goliad (@ bottom of page: http://www.victoriaadvocate.com/users... )
Well, to note the juridictional issue only skips an important bit of information. "Among reasons" it was thrown out was, more importantly, was that the TCEQ issued a formal statement saying contamination of the aquifer due to UEC's drilling activities was "not possible". So, yeah, jurisdiction, and the totally full of crap thing, those were the two reasons. (See how mentioning the other reason does have bearing on the story?)
Meanwhile, Blackburn is ready to load up the BS express again this Saturday, to see if his law firm can get another $350,000+ out of the county. The appropriate place to deal with concerns about this mining venture is at the contested case hearing currently under way. All this other stuff is just a waste -- and doesn't Goliad County have a budget shortfall? Aren't they having a hard time providing ambulances to rural county taxpayers? Blackburn is not your friend, and he is bilking you for all it's worth. Wake up people!