Saturday, October 31, 2009

THE GREEN LIVING AND ENERGY EXPO


“The Region’s Premier Green Event Celebrates Ten Years of Being Green Before it Was Cool to be Green”

The 10th Annual Celebration AECP

THE GREEN LIVING AND ENERGY EXPO

November 6 & 7

***** Roanoke Civic Center

Admission is FREE!

10 – 6 on Friday, Nov. 6 and 10 – 4 on Saturday, Nov. 7

Learn about energy conservation, energy efficiency, renewable energy, green building, and
sustainable living. Enjoy the exhibits, demonstrations, seminars, and silent auction! Join us in our
efforts to save energy, save money, save our natural resources, and save the environment!
• Presentations all day/both days –check out our website for schedule

Special Thanks to Our Sponsors!

GOLD SPONSORS:

The City of Roanoke
The VA Dept. of Mines, Minerals, and Energy
The VA Dept. of Housing and Community Development
Community Energy Conservation Program

SILVER SPONSORS: BRONZE SPONSORS:

Appalachian Power Wall Construction LLC
Breakell Inc. J&R Products
Roanoke County J&
J Weatherization Energy Conservatory
Wachovia Securities

www.aecpes.org/expo

Friday, October 30, 2009

MEETING NOTICE: Virginia Commission on Energy and Environment

SENATE OF VIRGINIA
OFFICE OF THE CLERK
RICHMOND

October 30, 2009

MEETING NOTICE

TO: Members, Virginia Commission on Energy and Environment
FROM: Patty Lung, Coordinator, Senate Committee Operations
RE: Meeting Date/Time/Location

The next meeting of the

 Virginia Commission on Energy and Environment will take place on:


Monday, November 30th at 1:00 p.m.


Senate Room A of the General Assembly Building in Richmond.

The meeting agenda will be posted on the DLS website for the Commission. For inquiries regarding the agenda, please contact Ellen Porter or Patrick Cushing with the Division of Legislative Services (804) 786-3591. If I may assist you in any other manner, or if you are a member and cannot attend, please call me at (804) 698-7450.

Members:
The Honorable Mary Margaret Whipple, Chair
The Honorable J. Chapman Petersen
The Honorable Richard H. Stuart
The Honorable Charles D. Poindexter, Vice Chair
The Honorable Samuel A. Nixon, Jr.
The Honorable Clarke N. Hogan
The Honorable Joseph P. Johnson, Jr.
The Honorable Mark D. Sickles
Patrick G. Hatcher
Karen Kennedy Schultz
Hugh E. Montgomery, Jr.
August Wallmeyer
Arlen K. Bolstad
David K. Paylor
Stephen A. Walz

cc: The Honorable Susan Clarke Schaar
The Honorable Bruce F. Jamerson
Ellen Porter, Division of Legislative Services
Patrick Cushing, Division of Legislative Services
Mail List for Virginia Commission on Energy and Environment

Individuals requiring interpreter services or other special assistance should telephone Senate Committee Operations at (804) 698-7450, TDD (804) 698-7419. Persons making audio-visual presentations to the committee should call for specifications..


Thursday, October 29, 2009

Uranium mining’s polluted legacy (Canada)


We all have a responsibility to question the fall-out from uranium mining

By Donna Dillman, Contributor

Just an hour’s drive north of Kingston, 30,000 acres of private and crown land have been staked for uranium exploration, causing grave concern amongst both aboriginal and non-native communities.

Uranium exploration and mining in this area could contaminate the Mississippi River upstream of Ottawa. There’s also a risk of airborne contamination of population centres and agricultural lands, including in the Kingston area, from processing radioactive uranium ore products. More than one million people stand to be affected.

The initial concern is with the first exploratory hole drilled. The boreholes release much higher concentrations of radon gas into the air than does surface water. Both Health Canada and the U.S. Surgeon General have determined that radon gas is the second leading cause of lung cancer, after smoking.

According to the Ontario Cancer Treatment and Research Foundation, residents of Elliot Lake, ON, home to more than a dozen uranium mines in the latter half of the 20th century, suffered 65 per cent higher than average cases of colorectal cancer among females, 128 per cent greater incidence of lung cancer among men and 68 per cent greater incidence of lung cancer among women. The study also found higher infant mortality rates and childhood leukemia.

The entire Serpent River system, near Elliott Lake, was devastated during those years. The tailings sites—piles of ground-up rock with 85 per cent of the radioactivity left behind—stretch for miles, rising 30 to 40 feet into the air. A 2006 federal environmental assessment delineated the challenges surrounding making these sites safe “in perpetuity.”

What kind of legacy does that leave for our grandchildren?

To date, the Ontario government has ignored these resolutions and protests.

Click Title or Link to Read whole post :
http://www.queensjournal.ca/story/2008-03-07/opinions/uranium-minings-polluted-legacy/

AMP gets $29 million bond for solar plant in Danville area



By Denice Thibodeau
Published: October 29, 2009

American Municipal Power has been awarded a $29 million zero-interest Clean Renewable Energy Bond from the federal government to build a solar-powered energy plant in the Danville area.

The bond, financed through funds from the Energy Improvement and Extension Act of 2008 and the Recover Act, was one of 805 projects totaling $2.2 billion announced Tuesday by the U.S. Treasury Department. The energy bonds were issued to cooperative electric companies, like AMP, as well as gov-ernment agencies and public power providers, to obtain lower cost financing for clean energy development projects.

Danville Utilities is one AMP’s 81 public power partners, and is participating in several of AMP’s coal-powered and hydro-powered electricity generating projects.

Kent Carson, senior director of communications at AMP, said the bond will not cover the entire cost of the project, “but it will certainly help.”

Carson described the project as a 6-megawatt, centralized photovoltaic plant that AMP is working on with Danville Utilities.

A location for the plant has not been finalized, but sites in Pittsylvania County will be considered, Carson said.

The AMP Danville project is the only project in Virginia to be awarded one of the energy bonds.

Click Title or Link to Read whole post :
http://www2.godanriver.com/gdr/news/local/danville_news/article/amp_gets_29_million_bond_for_solar_plant_in_danville_area/15042/

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

Statement of Task: Uranium Mining in Virginia (NAS Study)

Comment: This is the approved scope of study as presented and approved by the Uranium Sub Committee of the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission. The Academy of Science will meet on November 11 to determine whether they will undertake this study which is being paid for by Virginia Uranium, Inc. The second part of the study that was approved by the commission has not found funding as of yet.

Uranium Mining in Virginia

Statement of Task

Uranium mining in the Commonwealth of Virginia has been prohibited since 1982 by a state moratorium, although approval for restricted uranium exploration in the state was granted in 2007. A National Research Council study will examine the scientific, technical, environmental, human health and safety, and regulatory aspects of uranium mining, milling, and processing as they relate to the Commonwealth of Virginia for the purpose of assisting the Commonwealth to determine whether uranium mining, milling, and processing can be undertaken in a manner that safeguards the environment, natural and historic resources, agricultural lands, and the health and well-being of its citizens. In particular, the study will:

1) Assess the potential short- and long-term occupational and public health and safety considerations from uranium mining, milling, processing, and reclamation, including the potential human health risks from exposure to “daughter” products of radioactive decay of uranium.

2) Review global and national uranium market trends.

3) Identify and briefly describe the main types of uranium deposits worldwide including, for example, geologic characteristics, mining operations, and best practices.

4) Analyze the impact of uranium mining, milling, processing, and reclamation operations on public health, safety, and the environment at sites with comparable geologic, hydrologic, climatic, and population characteristics to those found in the Commonwealth. Such analysis shall describe any available mitigating measures to reduce or eliminate the negative impacts from uranium operations.

5) Review the geologic, environmental, geographic, climatic, and cultural settings and exploration status of uranium resources in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

6) Review the primary technical options and best practices approaches for uranium mining, milling, processing, and reclamation that might be applicable within the Commonwealth of Virginia, including discussion of improvements made since 1980 in the design, construction, and monitoring of tailings impoundments (“cells”).

7) Review the state and federal regulatory framework for uranium mining, milling, processing, and reclamation.

8) Review federal requirements for secure handling of uranium materials, including personnel, transportation, site security, and material control and accountability.

9) Identify the issues that may need to be considered regarding the quality and quantity of groundwater and surface water, and the quality of soil and air from uranium mining, milling, processing, and reclamation. As relevant, water and waste management and severe weather effects or other stochastic events may also be considered.

10) Assess the potential ecosystem issues for uranium mining, milling, processing, and reclamation.

11) Identify baseline data and approaches necessary to monitor environmental and human impacts associated with uranium mining, milling, processing, and reclamation.

12) Briefly characterize a potential public education and outreach program in the Commonwealth of Virginia for a uranium mining operation (for example, health and safety issues, inspection and enforcement, community right-to-know, emergency planning).

By addressing these questions, the study will provide independent, expert advice that can be used to inform decisions about the future of uranium mining in the Commonwealth of Virginia; however, the study will not make recommendations about whether or not uranium mining should be permitted nor will the study include site-specific assessments.

http://dls.virginia.gov/GROUPS/cec/052109/studyscope1.pdf

Uranium would be biggest 'eyesore' of all (Uranium Mining)



Wednesday, October 28, 2009 9:08 AM EDT

If Ben Davenport and Chatham Town Council are so concerned about the appearance of Chatham and how it is perceived by visitors to the town, it seems only logical that they would be more concerned about the potential uranium mine and mill that Virginia Uranium Inc. and its Canadian partners are planning rather than getting themselves into a sweat over a couple of dilapidated buildings.

It seems odd that Mr. Davenport, the driving force behind this "eyesore" cleanup campaign, has to this point remained completely silent about the issue of uranium mining and milling, and yet he describes an abandoned building as "a real shame."

The real shame will occur when the blasting begins at Coles Hill and Chatham becomes known as the most radioactive place on the East Coast.

It is also telling that Virginia Tech would be willing to provide "planning support" for the sanitizing of Chatham when they are at the same time planning massive support for VUI's toxic adventure which will take place a mere six miles from the center of town.

If the town cannot afford to remove an old mobile home from Whitehead Street, how do they think they will be able to pay for cleaning up 30 or 40 years of a uranium mine spewing poison onto its streets and rooftops?

They can plant all the flowerbeds they want, but if uranium mining becomes a reality for Pittsylvania County, all the flowers in the world will not attract anyone to Chatham, with the exception of the unemployed uranium miners from other states who will descend on the town.

Rather than panicking about the mouse running across the floor, Davenport and the town council would be wiser to make a plan about the thousand-pound gorilla sitting in the room with them.

Which one poses the greater threat?

Jesse Pyrant Andrews

Halifax

http://www.wpcva.com/articles/2009/10/28/chatham/opinion/opinion02.txt

NRC committee to meet to discuss uranium study

By John Crane
Published: October 28, 2009

The National Research Council governing board’s executive committee will meet next month to discuss the study that would determine whether uranium can be mined and milled safely in Virginia.

The meeting will take place Nov. 10 in Washington and will be closed to the public, said Jennifer Walsh, spokeswoman for the National Academy of Sciences.

Walsh said she does not know if the committee will decide during next month’s meeting whether to approve the study.

That first phase would cost as much as $1.4 million. Virginia Tech’s Virginia Center for Coal and Energy Research would handle the money and contract with the NAS for the study. The second part of the study, dealing with the socioeconomic aspects of mining, still needs to be developed by the Virginia Coal & Energy Commission. VUI would not fund the second part.

If the governing board approves the study request, the next step would be the NRC negotiating and entering into a contract with Virginia Tech’s Center for Coal and Energy Research. The board would then appoint a provisional committee of about a dozen scientific experts to perform the study and write its report.

There will be public comment regarding the makeup of the committee, William Kearney, NRC spokesman, said last month.

Click Title or Link to Read whole post :
http://www2.godanriver.com/gdr/news/local/danville_news/article/nrc_committee_to_meet_to_discus_uranium_study/15011/

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Perriello visits University wind energy laboratory



Katherine Raichlen, Cavalier Daily Associate Editor
October 27, 2009

“We talked about the availability of wind energy in Virginia,” Allaire said, adding that there is “very good wind energy” along the coastal areas and in the Appalachian Mountains area along the western edge of the state. “There’s a large effort underway to develop offshore wind energy farms,” he said, as well as an interest in building a wind turbine manufacturing plant and establishing wind farms.

The politicians visited Grounds “in part to support the efforts of U.Va. to try to promote wind energy and other alternative energy sources,” Allaire said.

“He’s looking at ways in which this kind of activity can help to generate jobs in Virginia,” Allaire said about Perriello specifically. For example, he added, if Areva, a multinational nuclear power conglomerate, establishes a wind turbine manufacturing plant in Virginia, including the impact of in-state suppliers, it could mean about 20,000 new jobs in the commonwealth.

“A fair amount of this might come in Tom Perriello’s district,” Allaire noted, “so that’s why he’s interested in it.”

Perriello spokesperson Jessica Barba said Perriello has focused on alternative and renewable energy sources and how they can be “economic drivers” in central and southern Virginia from the beginning of his term.

“He’s toured a lot of facilities around the district that have promising projects going on,” she said. “[The work in the ROMAC lab]’s just one of many projects [Perriello]’s seeing … that have promise to become economic drivers of the area.”

Read the complete post at or click Title:

http://www.cavalierdaily.com/2009/10/27/perriello-visits-university-wind-energy-laboratory/

Monday, October 26, 2009

Staunton receives Green Government Certification

October 26, 2009
Staff Reports

At the recent Virginia Municipal League’s meeting in Roanoke, members of the Staunton City Council were awarded the Green Government Certification Award.

The Green Government Challenge is a friendly competition designed to encourage implementation of specific environmental policies and practical actions that reduce the carbon emissions generated by both the local government and the community.

At the Sept. 24 council meeting of September 24, the board discussed and unanimously agreed to submit an application to the VML.

Go Green Virginia covers a wide range of activities and programs that are essential to sustainability, including government policy, energy efficiency, green buildings, waste management, vehicles, land use/transportation, water/air quality, employee incentives, education/community participation, schools and innovation.

Read the complete post at or click Title:

http://www.newsleader.com/article/20091026/NEWS01/91026007/1002/news01/Staunton+receives+Green+Government+Certification

Sunday, October 25, 2009

Summer 2009 - Chesapeake currents (Uranium Mining)




History: Chesapeake Currents is published by Clean Water Action.
Clean Water Action is a national citizens’organization working for clean, safe and affordable water, prevention of health-threatening pollution, creation of environmentally-safe jobs and businesses,and empowerment of people to make democracy work. Clean Water Action organizes strong
grassroots coalitions and campaigns to protect our environment, health, economic well-being and community quality of life.

maintaining the ban on uranium mining in virginia

Uranium and mining industry lobbying to lift a twenty-five year ban on uranium mining persuaded Clean Water Action and allies to mount a counter-effort that will last at least through the 2009 election year, and likely into the 2010 legislative session. Clean Water Action involvement stepped up following a Virginia state panel vote for a uranium study after a House of Delegates panel had killed a similar proposal during the 2008 session. The renewed prospect of uranium mining was initially generated by Virginia Energy Plan 2007, a plan on meeting future energy needs developed by the administration of Governor Tim Kaine under a General Assembly mandate.

The Virginia Commission on Coal and Energy voted 12–0 in November, 2008
to move forward on a wide-ranging study on the potential impact of
uranium mining in Virginia. Earlier that year, in February, the Virginia
Senate passed a proposal to create a 17-member commission to oversee a two year National Academy of Sciences study of whether uranium could be safely mined on 200 acres in south-central Virginia. After uranium was discovered in an area of Pittsylvania County used for cattle, hay and timber, a proposal to mine the large deposit near Chatham in the early 1980s generated controversy that led to the existing ban, in effect since 1982.

Opponents were concerned at the time, and remain so, that radioactive milling waste, a result of processing, would pollute the environment.

Under the Senate proposal, Virginia Uranium, the company most active in
attempting to lift the ban, would have picked up the cost of the report, which had been estimated at $1 million or more. Virginia Uranium was clearly betting that the study would somehow imply that the mining could be done “safely”, and that the company could use it as the basis for a push to lift the ban.

Following the Senate action, after more than an hour of debate, the House Rules Committee on March 3, 2008 voted down the proposal over concerns about land, air and drinking water contamination. The vote eliminated any chance that the controversial bill could pass during the 2008 session, and provoked the uranium and mining industry to seek a study commissioned by the Virginia Commission on Coal and Energy, which was not subject to legislative approval. These efforts are widely viewed as initial steps towards lifting a ban on uranium mining in Virginia, and a member of the House of Delegates leadership indicated that review of the ban during the 2009 session was likely.

Clean Water Action members, staff and allies generated pressure to keep the
ban in place, and no action to lift the ban was taken during the short legislative session in Richmond.

With energy in national headlines, and a renewed push for expansion of nuclear power by the industry, Clean Water Action members will be working to remind candidates for office in 2009 that:

-Uranium has never been mined on the east coast.

-It is mined in less populated drier states such as Utah,New Mexico, Wyoming and Nebraska.

-Release of radioactive materials from uranium mining could contaminate
local waters and the surrounding area,causing cancer in humans and other ill effects in animal and plant life in the region, and downstream all the way to the Chesapeake Bay.

-Efforts to place radioactive waste at Yucca Mountain in Nevada have
been largely shelved by the Obama Administration, and there is still no
long-term solution for the safe storage of radioactive waste.

-The events of 2001 have renewed concerns that not only the risk of accidents, such as the 1979 near meltdown at Three Mile Island, but also of intentional actions by terrorists make nuclear power an unacceptably unsafe way to meet energy needs.

-Costs and the length of time to expand nuclear make it an ineffective approach for addressing the immediate crisis of climate change.

Private capital has been unwilling to risk investment in nuclear, requiring billions of dollars in loan guarantees by the federal government to underwrite the nuclear industry. Such commitments undermine efforts to
invest in safer and more cost-effective energy production methods.

what you can do:
Send a message to the Governor and your state representatives on our site at: www.cleanwateraction.org/takeaction/va

or

Write a short letter to the Governor and your state representatives to oppose any attempts to lift the ban on uranium mining in Virginia:

Governor Tim Kaine
Office of the Governor
Patrick Henry Building, 3rd Floor
1111 East Broad Street
Richmond, Virginia 23219

State Senator and Delegate
The Honorable (Delegate/Senator’s
First and Last Name)
910 Capitol Square
Richmond, Virginia 23219

—Andrew Fellows, Chesapeake Regional Director, afellows@cleanwater.org

Click Title to read whole letter:
http://www.cleanwateraction.org/files/publications/chesapeake/chesapeake-currents-summer2009.pdf

Saturday, October 24, 2009

Solar rising

From Environment Virginia site:

What kind of potential does solar energy hold for our future? The sun provides the Earth with as much energy every hour as humanity uses every year.

Virginia actually has more solar power potential than most. Our state averages more than four sun hours per day.

Germany, a global leader in solar energy, receives only two peak sun hours a day. If we set the right goals, standards and incentives, Virginia can and should become a national leader in solar energy development and generation, creating new green jobs in the process.

That’s why we’re working to fast-track solar development at the state and federal levels. Environment Virginia’s partner groups are supporting projects across the country.

Read whole article:


What are the health effects of ionising radiation?

Very high doses of radiation: death within hours or days, due to damage to brain and nerves

High doses: death within weeks, due to damage to the gastrointestinal tract, to the bone marrow, where blood cells are formed.

Lower doses: less severe:radiation sickness (nausea, fatigue and vomiting). Sterility. Some years later – cancer, (especially of thyroid), diseases of digestive organs, bone, & muscle.

Genetic effects: cell damage passed on to later generations

US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Fact Sheet on Biological Effects of Radiation – Cancers associated with high dose exposure (greater than 50,000 mrem) include leukemia, breast, bladder, colon, liver, lung, esophagus, ovarian, multiple myeloma, and stomach cancers. Department of Health and Human Services literature also suggests a possible association between ionizing radiation exposure and prostate, nasal cavity/sinuses, pharyngeal and laryngeal, and pancreatic cancer.

This dose-response model suggests that any increase in dose, no matter how small, results in an incremental increase in risk. …High radiation doses tend to kill cells, while low doses tend to damage or alter the genetic code (DNA) of irradiated cells……………Genetic effects and the development of cancer are the primary health concerns attributed to radiation exposure. The likelihood of cancer occurring after radiation exposure is about five times greater than a genetic effect (e.g., increased still births, congenital abnormalities, infant mortality, childhood mortality, and decreased birth weight)

Genetic effects are the result of a mutation produced in the reproductive cells of an exposed individual that are passed on to their offspring. These effects may appear in the exposed person’s direct offspring, or may appear several generations later.

What is not so obvious is the harm being done to human (and animal) health by “low level” ionising radiation from every stage of the uranium – nuclear cycle.

Low level radioactivity includes the on-going amount of radiation released from the everyday operation of the uranium industry and of the world’s 433 nuclear power plants, plus leaks and accidents.

Low level radiation causes mutations in genes leading to various cancers. It weakens the immune system, making the body more vulnerable to heart disease and to infections.Genetic effects: cell damage passed on to later generations.

“The everyday releases of low-level radioactivity by nuclear power plants has been found to cause several kinds of health damage including premature births, congenital defects, infant mortality, mental retardation, heart ailments, arthritis, diabetes, allergies, asthma, cancer, genetic damage and chronic fatigue syndrome. It has been linked to previously unknown infectious diseases, and the resurgence of old ones by damaging the developing white blood cells originating in the bone marrow and thus weakening the immune system” -Sara Shannon,author of Technology’s Curse

Read article at:
http://nuclear-news.net/health-environment/

Friday, October 23, 2009

Going ‘green’ could help Southside (Virginia)

By Tara Bozick
Published: October 22, 2009

GRETNA — Generating renewable energy from local sources could help rural areas like Southside, business leaders told policymakers Thursday.

The Renewable Energy Subcommittee of the Virginia Commission on Energy and Environment met in Gretna on Thursday to learn about the area’s “green” and energy initiatives, said subcommittee chairman and Delegate Charles Poindexter, R-9th District.

Ken Moss of Piedmont BioProducts in Gretna told the subcommittee that second-generation biofuels — those using biomass like wood or grass — would bring prosperity to farming communities in Southern Virginia.

“The biggest hurdle is the legislative side of this,” Moss said. “We don’t want to be legislated out of the market.”

Al Weed, chairman of Public Policy Virginia, presented the grassroots organization’s Community Power Initiative — a campaign that calls for small, community-sized base load energy plants located throughout Virginia.

“The most significant renewable energy resource we have in Virginia is biomass,” Weed said. “We have the resources to do it. What we have to do is get the market going.”

Changes in public policy could make using biomass for energy more cost-effective, he said. Renewable energy incentives coupled with taxing carbon emissions would create more demand for biomass-based energy.

Weed would like Virginia to institute a mandatory standard for utilities to supply renewable energy as opposed to the current voluntary standard. Investment capital just isn’t there without a mandatory standard, he added.

Biomass-based energy would be more stable as it would be produced locally, Weed said. Communities wouldn’t have to rely on importing energy and industries could see a nearby energy supply as an attractive asset.

“We’re seeing creation of a market for Virginia’s biomass resources,” Weed said. “It’s very exciting.”

Other presenters at the Renewable Energy Subcommittee meeting included:
• Brett Vassey of Virginia Manufacturers Association
• John Petchul of paper producer Greif Packaging LLC in Amherst County
• Tim Davidick of ADMMicro, a Roanoke-based manufacturer of advanced energy management systems
• Jack Wall, owner of LEED-certified builder Wall Construction in Madison Heights

http://www2.godanriver.com/gdr/news/local/danville_news/article/going_green_could_help_southside/14874/

Thursday, October 22, 2009

"Coal Country" film

L.I.F.E.,Inc. presenting "Coal Country" film

11/10/2009 6:00 PM-8:00 PM EST

Gretna Library
207 Coffey Street
Gretna, VA 24557

Maximum Number of Attendees: 30


Probe into uranium mine leak continues

Posted Tue Oct 20, 2009 9:26pm AEDT

The Commonwealth supervising scientist of the Ranger uranium mine at Kakadu National Park says investigations are continuing into water contamination at the site.

Alan Hughes has told a Senate estimates committee that Energy Resources of Australia has conducted geophysical surveys to determine the impact and extent of leaking from a tailings dam at the mine.

Greens Senator Scott Ludlam is demanding the report be made public as soon as possible.

"We don't think those sort of reports should be internal," Senator Ludlam said. "We think that should clearly be in the public domain.

"If the company has any further results or information or monitoring results, we certainly think they should be released when they are ready."

Read article at: http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/10/20/2719474.htm

Roanoke River Roundtable 2009 Annual- Membership Meeting

Upper Roanoke River Roundtable
2009 Annual Membership Meeting
When: November 13, 2009, 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm
Where: Conference Room at the Western Virginia Water Authority Field Operations Center,
3322 Hollins Road NE, Roanoke, VA 24012
Who: Open to the Public (Only members can participate in the elections)
Agenda
6:00 pm Reception (light refreshments provided)
6:30 pm Presentation by Karl Kleinhenz, City of Roanoke
Roanoke’s Stormwater Utility Program
7:00 pm Committee reports and board elections

Tuesday, October 20, 2009

Report Examines Hidden Health and Environmental Costs Of Energy Production and Consumption In U.S.

Date: Oct. 19, 2009
Contacts: Sara Frueh, Media Relations Officer
Alison Burnette, Media Relations Assistant
Office of News and Public Information
202-334-2138; e-mail


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Report Examines Hidden Health and Environmental Costs Of Energy Production and Consumption In U.S.

WASHINGTON -- A new report from the National Research Council examines and, when possible, estimates "hidden" costs of energy production and use -- such as the damage air pollution imposes on human health -- that are not reflected in market prices of coal, oil, other energy sources, or the electricity and gasoline produced from them. The report estimates dollar values for several major components of these costs. The damages the committee was able to quantify were an estimated $120 billion in the U.S. in 2005, a number that reflects primarily health damages from air pollution associated with electricity generation and motor vehicle transportation. The figure does not include damages from climate change, harm to ecosystems, effects of some air pollutants such as mercury, and risks to national security, which the report examines but does not monetize.

Requested by Congress, the report assesses what economists call external effects caused by various energy sources over their entire life cycle -- for example, not only the pollution generated when gasoline is used to run a car but also the pollution created by extracting and refining oil and transporting fuel to gas stations.

These effects are not reflected in energy prices, government, businesses and consumers may not realize the full impact of their choices. When such market failures occur, a case can be made for government interventions -- such as regulations, taxes or tradable permits -- to address these external costs, the report says.

The committee that wrote the report focused on monetizing the damage of major air pollutants -- sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, ozone, and particulate matter – on human health, grain crops and timber yields, buildings, and recreation. When possible, it estimated both what the damages were in 2005 (the latest year for which data were available) and what they are likely to be in 2030, assuming current policies continue and new policies already slated for implementation are put in place.

The committee also separately derived a range of values for damages from climate change; the wide range of possibilities for these damages made it impossible to develop precise estimates of cost. However, all model results available to the committee indicate that climate-related damages caused by each ton of CO2 emissions will be far worse in 2030 than now; even if the total amount of annual emissions remains steady, the damages caused by each ton would increase 50 percent to 80 percent.

Problems From Electricity Generation

Coal accounts for about half the electricity produced in the U.S. In 2005 the total annual external damages from sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and particulate matter created by burning coal at 406 coal-fired power plants, which produce 95 percent of the nation's coal-generated electricity, were about $62 billion; these nonclimate damages average about 3.2 cents for every kilowatt-hour (kwh) of energy produced. A relatively small number of plants -- 10 percent of the total number -- accounted for 43 percent of the damages. By 2030, nonclimate damages are estimated to fall to 1.7 cents per kwh.

Coal-fired power plants are the single largest source of greenhouse gases in the U.S., emitting on average about a ton of CO2 per megawatt-hour of electricity produced, the report says.

Burning natural gas generated far less damage than coal, both overall and per kilowatt-hour of electricity generated. A sample of 498 natural gas fueled plants, which accounted for 71 percent of gas-generated electricity, produced $740 million in total nonclimate damages in 2005, an average of 0.16 cents per kwh. As with coal, there was a vast difference among plants; half the plants account for only 4 percent of the total nonclimate damages from air pollution, while 10 percent produce 65 percent of the damages. .

The life-cycle damages of wind power, which produces just over 1 percent of U.S. electricity but has large growth potential, are small compared with those from coal and natural gas.

So are the damages associated with normal operation of the nation's 104 nuclear reactors, which provide almost 20 percent of the country’s electricity.

But the life cycle of nuclear power does pose some risks; if uranium mining activities contaminate ground or surface water, for example, people could potentially be exposed to radon or other radionuclides; this risk is borne mostly by other nations, the report says, because the U.S. mines only 5 percent of the world’s uranium. The potential risks from a proposed long-term facility for storing high-level radioactive waste need further evaluation before they can be quantified.

Life-cycle CO2 emissions from nuclear, wind, biomass, and solar power appear to be negligible when compared with fossil fuels.

#################################
The report was sponsored by the U.S. Department of the Treasury. National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine, and National Research Council make up the National Academies. They are independent, nonprofit institutions that provide science, technology, and health policy advice under an 1863 congressional charter. Committee members, who serve pro bono as volunteers, are chosen by the Academies for each study based on their expertise and experience and must satisfy the Academies's conflict-of-interest standards. The resulting consensus reports undergo external peer review before completion. For more information, visit http://national-academies.org/studycommitteeprocess.pdf. A committee roster follows.

Copies of Hidden Costs of Energy: Unpriced Consequences of Energy Production and Use are available from the National Academies Press; tel. 202-334-3313 or 1-800-624-6242 or on the Internet at http://www.nap.edu. Reporters may obtain a copy from the Office of News and Public Information (contacts listed above).

# # #
[ This news release and report are available at http://national-academies.org ]


Please click on below link to read all of the release:
http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=12794

Sunday, October 18, 2009

VRRBAC meeting will be held Monday, October 19, 2009

The next VRRBAC meeting will be held Monday, October 19, 2009

from 10 a.m. until 12:00 p.m. at the

Bedford County Administration Office, Ground Floor Training Room

122 E. Main Street, Bedford, VA 24523!

VIRGINIA ROANOKE RIVER BASIN
ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Meeting Agenda
Monday, October 19, 2009
10:00 a.m. until 12:00 p.m.
Bedford, VA
A. Call meeting to order
B. Welcome; Recognition of Members and Guests
C. Consider Minutes of August 21, 2009 Meeting
D. Presentations
Virginia's Stormwater Regulations
Jan Briede, DCR Stormwater Outreach Manager
Smith Mountain Lake FERC Re- licensing Status, EIS
Russ Johnson, Franklin County Board of Supervisors and VRRBAC member
E. Sub-Committee Reports/Review of draft Structure
Agriculture and Forestry Sub-Committee - Haywood Hamlet, Chair
Lake Interests Sub-Committee - No Chair
Permit Holders Sub-Committee - John Lindsey, Chair
Public Officials and Government Entities Sub-Committee - Robert Conner, Chair
Roanoke River Interests Sub-Committee - Read Charlton, Chair
F. Next Meeting Date/Topic /Location
G. Other Business
H. Adjournment
Committee Members
Senator Wm. Roscoe Reynolds
Walter Coles, Sr., Chatham
Senator Frank M. Ruff
John H. Feild, Mecklenburg
Delegate Kathy J. Byron Haywood J. Hamlet, Phenix
Delegate Thomas C. Wright, Jr Evelyn Janney, Floyd
Delegate Onzlee Ware. Bob Jean, Brookneal
Delegate Charles D. Poindexter Russ Johnson, Wirtz
Representative Tom Perriello John Lindsey, Penhook
Mike McEvoy, Chairman, Roanoke Billy Martin, Sr., Blue Ridge
Tim Pace, Collinsville Robert H. Conner, Vice-Chair, Ebony
Mark Wagner, Huddleston Read Charlton, Vice-Chair, Charlotte
Court House

http://www.deq.virginia.gov/vrrbac/

THE NUCLEAR FUEL CHAIN:URANIUM MINING

Human Health Implications of Uranium Mining and Nuclear Power Generation

Uranium mining is the messiest and most contaminating stage of nuclear power generation. Yet, without it, the whole process cannot go ahead. The cost to the global environment, and to persons, of this stage must be factored into the cost of nuclear power generation.

Uranium mining, in particular open pit mining, which is what is currently proposed in several locations in southern Ontario, involves digging thousands of tons of radioactive rock out of a giant hole. (The Rossing uranium mine in Namibia is 1 km wide, 3 km long and 1/3 km deep (28)). Large quantities of this rock are dumped onto the earth’s surface.

The ore is then transported to a milling facility, usually nearby, and crushed to a 18 fine sand-like consistency, creating large amounts of radioactive dust and a huge volume of finely ground mill tailings. The uranium is separated out, usually with strong acids or alkalis. The sand-like tailings, containing about 85% of their original radioactivity, and often the chemicals used in the extraction process, are deposited in large tailings ponds or containments nearby. Dust containing uranium and its progeny is produced in large quantities by rock-crushing operations. This particulate matter, containing long-lived radioactive isotopes, can leave the site on wind.

Wind erosion of tailings piles can be significant as long as these remain exposed to weather. Radon gas is continuously produced by the decay of thorium 230, a radioactive decay product of uranium 238, through radium into radon. Thorium 230 has a half-life of 76,000 years, and will produce radon gas unabated for millennia. In undisturbed uranium deposits, most of the radon gas is trapped within rock formations until it decays into other radioactive byproducts. However, crushed tailings on or near the earth’s surface allow considerable radon to escape. In a 10 km/hr breeze, it can travel 960 km within 4 days; much further in higher winds. Radon gas decays sequentially into several other solid radioactive isotopes of polonium, bismuth and lead, before finally becoming the non-radioactive lead 206. These radioactive progeny of radon settle onto crops, bodies of water and soil. Their patterns of accumulation in the biosphere, including our food species, are not well known. The three isotopes of polonium produced by radon, in addition to being radioactive, are among the most toxic naturally occurring substances on earth. The toxicity of lead is well documented.

Radon is a major contributor to the excess of lung cancer seen in uranium miners (4, 5, 6). Radon at levels seen in some residences also carries a risk (29). Radon emanations from bedrock in certain areas may be unavoidable, however these can be greatly increased in the presence or proximity of crushed mine tailings or abandoned mine workings which provide pathways of migration to the surface. Some high residential radon readings are being found by homeowners near old mine sites in the Bancroft/Haliburton area (30).

Groundwater and surface water in the vicinity of uranium mining operations frequently become contaminated (31). At the advanced exploration stage of mine development, holes about 1-2" in diameter and up to 1200 feet deep are drilled into rock, usually into the most concentrated deposits. A hole of this depth is almost certain to penetrate 19 aquifers, giving water access to radioactive rock surfaces.

Many uranium compounds and decay products are soluble, toxic and radioactive. In an area of fractured granite bedrock, as found in some uranium bearing areas of Ontario, many of the aquifers interconnect and contamination quickly becomes widespread.

Uranium in drinking water, at levels in excess of the safe drinking water standard of .02 mg/L or 20 ppb, is principally toxic to the kidney, in particular the proximal tubules (32). Uranium can also affect fertility, fetal growth and postnatal viability (33). It may cause malformations in fetuses and might be associated with reproductive cancers. It concentrates in bone and may interfere with the activity of osteoblasts, possibly contributing to bone cancers and osteoporosis (

Tailings impoundments containing liquid material can leach contaminants into the soil and groundwater. Tailings dams can fail, releasing massive quantities of radioactive material into local waterways (35). Near the decommissioned mines at Elliot Lake, tailings piles were covered with water to prevent the escape of radon gas, a standard procedure.

Recent drought has caused serious difficulties with this maintenance protocol. A mere 15 years into the thousand-year period for which it was designed, this environmental safeguard system is underperforming (36). Over 100 million tons of uranium tailings are stored in the Elliot Lake area (37). Dry piles of uranium mill tailings are subject to erosion by wind and water.

In Ontario, near Bancroft and Haliburton, there are about 5 million tons of uranium mine tailings. Many of these were abandoned by mines which closed before 1977, and as such they are under the jurisdiction of neither the federal nor the provincial governments (40).

As a result, according to a study by the Canadian Institute for Radiation Safety (CAIRS) (40), many of the tailings "have not undergone any remedial work designed to place them in a safe condition." Tons of radioactive rock are laying around unprotected, with contaminants leaching out, wind blowing dust, radon gas escaping, fencing and signage falling into disrepair and the area being used more and more for hunting, hiking and recreation.

What are the risks from these tailings? According to the CAIRS study, a person walking over a typical tailings pile for 1 hr every day will absorb a gamma radiation dose of, on average, 0.73 mSv/yr (41). This would be in addition to the ~1.0 mSv/yr of background gamma radiation we all receive. Consider that doubling a person’s exposure will in general double his/her cancer risk, and that this person will also be exposed to higher than normal levels of radon gas near the tailings. If a house were built on the tailings, or if substantial amounts of radioactive fill were used near this house, or to mix concrete for the house, and a person or family spent between 8 and 24 hrs/day in this house, their radiation exposure could be substantial.

URANIUM REFINING AND ENRICHING

After the uranium is mined and milled, it is refined. Canadian uranium from all sources is sent for further processing to a refinery in Blind River, Ontario or to a conversion facility in Port Hope, Ontario.

The UF6 is then sent to an enrichment plant in Kentucky where the isotopes U 238 and U 235 are separated from each other and remixed in more desirable proportions. Uranium with an excess of the fissionable U 235 is "enriched"- this leaves a stockpile of extra U 238 or "depleted" uranium.

Uranium ore, yellowcake (the milled uranium destined for Port Hope or Blind River for refining), and uranium fuel rods for use in reactors are all transported by rail or truck to their destinations. This carries with it the risk of an accident or major spill, with further risk of air, water and soil contamination.

Canadian CANDU reactors use unenriched uranium. Until 1965, all Canadian uranium was used exclusively for American nuclear weapons, including the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombs. After this, the Canadian government decided that Canadian uranium was only to be used for civilian purposes, such as electricity generation (25).

To read the whole report click or paste the link below:

http://www.safewater.org/PDFS/reportlibrary/HumanHealthImplicationsUraniumNuclear.pdf

Saturday, October 17, 2009

NOTICE OF MEETING:Renewable Energy Subcommittee of the Commission on Energy

SENATE OF VIRGINIA
OFFICE OF THE CLERK
RICHMOND

September 25, 2009

NOTICE OF MEETING

TO: Members, Renewable Energy Subcommittee, of the Energy and Environment Commission
FROM: Angi Murphy, Senate Committee Operations
RE: Meeting Date/Time/Location

A meeting of the Renewable Energy Subcommittee of the Commission on Energy and Environment has been scheduled for Thursday, October 22, 2009 at 10:00 a.m. in the Pittsylvania County Public Library (Gretna Branch) at 207 Coffey Street, Gretna VA 24557.

Members:

The Honorable Charles D. Poindexter, Chair
The Honorable Joseph P. Johnson, Jr.
Patrick G. Hatcher
Hugh E. Montgomery
August Wallmeyer
Arlen Bolstad
David K. Paylor
Stephen A. Walz

Enclosure (s):

cc: The Honorable Susan Clarke Schaar
The Honorable Bruce F. Jamerson
Ellen Porter, Division of Legislative Services
Patrick Cushing, Division of Legislative Services
Mail List for Virginia Commission on Energy and Environment

http://dela.state.va.us/Dela/ComOpsStudy.nsf/82965f555b18a72185256c330058a983/11D8A24A68C83B088525763C006011F1?OpenDocument

Uranium company moving offices

Comment: How many jobs did local uranium people say coming to Southside Virginia, 500, don't think so!

Gazette News Service Posted: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 10:35 pm Posted

Uranium mining company Cameco Corp. has announced that it will move its U.S. headquarters from Lakewood, Colo., to Cheyenne next year.

Spokesman Ken Vaughn said that the move is scheduled for Feb. 1 and will bring about 12 new jobs to Wyoming.

The Canadian-based company is one of the world's largest uranium producers.

Cameco owns and operates the Smith Ranch-Highland in situ uranium mine near Glenrock, the only operating uranium mine in Wyoming. It also owns and operates the Crow Butte in situ uranium mine near Crawford, Neb.

Vaughn said the company has more Wyoming projects under development.

The company employs 165 people in Wyoming and 69 in Nebraska.

http://billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-regional/wyoming/article_1982cd68-b944-11de-839f-001cc4c002e0.html

Uranium ban to become law

CAPE and Council support new legislation

by Nadine Armstrong/Hants Journal
Article online since October 15th 2009, 11:09

CAPE president Barbara Gallagher and West Hants Warden Richard Dauphinee had discussed the benefits of supporting a ban on uranium exploration and mining in Nova Scotia during a 2008 sitting of council. Hants Journal file photo. Uranium ban to become law

CAPE and Council support new legislation
By Nadine Eagles-Harvie A moratorium on exploration and mining of uranium in Nova Scotia will be made law.

The province introduced legislation Oct. 14, to entrench a uranium ban that had been in effect since 1981.

Citizens Action to Protect the Environment (CAPE) president Barbara Gallagher said she was thrilled to hear the announcement. “Our group worked to bring this issue to the attention of the public and we are extremely pleased that this government has followed through on that promise.”

She notes the Municipality of West Hants has been supportive of the CAPE’s efforts to lobby for this legislation.

Counsillor Shirley Pineo said at the July sitting of council that although the moratorium on uranium exploration has served its purpose, it was time to legislate a permanent ban.

Gallagher said this legislation,. “We need this kind of long-term protection for both human health and the environment.”

The legislation contains three key elements:

-- prohibiting exploration for, or mining of, uranium in Nova Scotia

-- allowing mining of uranium that is encountered in the course of mining other minerals as long as the uranium is present in quantities less than the designated threshold value of .01 per cent by weight

-- allowing radiometric or other normal exploration techniques to be used in exploration for other minerals

Natural Resource Minister John MacDonell said the legislation would send a clear message to the mineral industry and all Nova Scotians regarding government’s long-term intentions with respect to uranium.

"We will legislate this moratorium because it is what Nova Scotians want," said Natural Resources Minister John MacDonell. "This measure responds to the concerns that Nova Scotians have expressed over the mining of uranium in our province."

http://www.novanewsnow.com/article-388723-Uranium-ban-to-become-law.html

Friday, October 16, 2009

Eco Tech: Tennessee researchers develop hybrid motor to convert regular cars to hybrids


Eco Factor: Hybrid Retrofit Kit developed by Tennessee researchers.

Anupam Oct 12 2009

As most auto makers are launching the plug-in hybrid variants of their most popular models, a research team at the Middle Tennessee State University and Tennessee Tech University has unveiled a breakthrough Plug-in Hybrid Retrofit Kit that can convert any regular automobile to a hybrid.

Kit allows car owners to convert their regular gas guzzlers into hybrid vehicles by retrofitting them with a small electrical system that easily mounts .
To read article:
Via: BusinessJournal486017

Thursday, October 15, 2009

DOE Launches Online Resource to Help Local Governments Expand Use of Solar Energy

October 15, 2009

The U.S. Department of Energy today announced the availability of a new online resource for local governments that assists community leaders and local stakeholders in building sustainable local solar markets. The online publication, Solar Powering Your Community: A Guide for Local Governments, provides local governments with proven best practices enabling them to drive economic development, support clean energy jobs, and reduce carbon emissions by building a robust local solar market.

"The Guide is based on successful projects in cities across the United States, bringing together information, best practices, and step-by-step instructions into a single resource that can help local governments accelerate the adoption of solar technologies," said Solar Energy Technologies Program Manager John Lushetsky. "The recommendations in the Guide have been successfully field tested in cities around the country, making it a valuable resource for any community that wants to reap the environmental and economic benefits of solar energy."

The publication outlines best practices and lessons learned from 25 Solar America Cities and other local governments across the nation that have successfully increased solar energy use in their communities. It also describes the country's most innovative solar programs and policies, explains the benefits, provides implementation tips, and includes brief case studies.

The practices outlined in the Guide have been designed to meet the needs of local governments from small municipalities to large counties and metropolitan centers in diverse geographic areas. Topics included in the Guide include: strategies for solar initiatives, incentives, updating and enforcing local rules and regulations, engaging utilities, creative solar jobs and supporting economic development, outreach and education, and leading by example by installing solar on government buildings.

Solar Powering Your Community: A Guide for Local Governments is available on the Solar America Cities Web site.

For more information about the Solar America Cities visit the Solar America Cities Web site.

http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/news/progress_alerts.cfm/pa_id=248

Recovery Act Announcement: Secretary Chu Announces New Investments in Cutting-Edge Wind Energy Research Facilities

October 15, 2009

U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu announced new investments today in three university-led wind energy research facilities that enhance the United States' leadership role in testing and producing the most advanced and efficient wind turbines in the world. The funding is from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, and the research will focus on improving both land-based and offshore wind generation.

"Wind power has potential to provide 20% of our electricity and create hundreds of thousands of jobs," said Secretary Chu. "We need to position the United States as the clear leader in this industry, or watch these high-paying jobs go overseas. The investment we're making today will help ensure that America has both the talent and the technology we need to compete."

Three university-led consortia have been selected for up to $24 million to support university research and development programs to improve land-based and offshore wind turbine performance and reliability, as well as provide career educational opportunities for undergraduate and graduate students in wind energy technologies. The three competitively selected, university-led projects will include partners from private industry, state and local governments, and other universities. The projects selected today support the Obama Administration's focus on increasing clean energy generation, while supporting the long-term development of a clean energy workforce.

Over the next two years, the university consortia will acquire utility-scale and prototype wind turbines that will provide researchers and students with hands-on R&D and educational opportunities on the most rapidly growing form of renewable energy in the country. Universities will also use the U.S. Department of Energy's funds to enhance their wind technology curricula and provide financial assistance to students for research fellowships and internships with the rapidly expanding wind industry.

The following projects have been selected for negotiation of an award:

Illinois Institute of Technology (Chicago, Illinois) – up to $8 million
The Institute will use this funding to install a test turbine, a GE 1.5 MW turbine, at an existing wind project owned by a consortium partner at Marseilles, Illinois. The university consortium's research and development plan includes advanced concepts for rotor control and drive train control, robust sensors for blades, and improved aero elastic models to improve wind turbine performance and reliability. The close proximity of the University's turbine to an existing wind farm provides an ideal opportunity to study turbine to turbine wake interaction, wind farm interaction, and wind energy efficiencies. The Institute will develop and offer wind energy courses addressing the technical, operational, social, and environmental aspects of wind energy in consultation with industry. Fellowships will be offered annually to masters and undergraduate students in wind energy engineering fields of study.

University of Maine (Orono, Maine) - up to $8 million
The University of Maine plans to design and deploy two 10 kW and one 100 kW floating offshore turbine prototypes. Two turbines will be located at the University of Maine's Deepwater Offshore Wind Test Site that will be located in a pre-selected site in state waters and one turbine will be operated at an offshore test site in the Isle of Shoals by the University of New Hampshire. The University consortium's research and development plan includes optimization of designs for floating platforms by evaluating: (1) options for using more durable, lighter, hybrid composite materials, (2) manufacturability, and (3) deployment logistics. Educational initiatives include a model Master of Science Degree in Renewable Energy and the Environment with a focus on deepwater wind energy and a new undergraduate minor in Deepwater Wind Energy. The University will target educational grants at individuals who are participating in Maine-based wind energy education and training in order to enter the job market.

University of Minnesota (Minneapolis, Minnesota) – up to $8 million
The University plans to install a new Siemens 2.3 MW turbine research facility at the University of Minnesota Outreach Research and Education (UMore) Park in Rosemount, Minnesota to study novel mechanical power transmission and electric generator systems. The University consortium's research and development plan includes active and passive flow control strategies to increase energy capture, broaden the operational envelope of the turbine, and reduce structural loads and fatigue. The University of Minnesota's turbine will be in close proximity to an existing wind farm, providing an opportunity to further validate and reinforce research findings regarding turbine wake interaction, wind farm interaction, and wind energy efficiencies. The educational initiatives include new graduate and undergraduate web-based course modules, programs specifically focused on wind power technologies and integration with other renewables, and student internships with industrial partners at consortium field sites.

Final award amounts are subject to final project negotiations. For more information about the U.S. Department of Energy's Wind and Hydropower Technologies Program, visit the Wind and Hydropower Technologies Program Web site.

http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/news/progress_alerts.cfm/pa_id=250

Wednesday, October 14, 2009

The case against uranium mining

14/10/2009 8:39:00 AM

A LONG term North West cattle station owner believes primary producers need to be consulted on how their land would be affected by uranium mining before any decision on the industry’s future was made.
Margaret Campbell owned the “Rosebud” cattle station, which bordered the former Mary Kathleen uranium mine near Cloncurry, while it was still in operation from the 1950s to the 80s.

She said she had seen firsthand how a uranium mine could be a health and economic problem for those living in such close proximity to the site.

She can remember a flock of ducks being killed instantly when they landed on a nearby creek that allegedly contained radioactive water.

“I can remember the pipes at the mine breaking and this horrible grey stuff running past my kitchen window,” she said.

“The message the mine sent back was it is only the tailings but don’t let your kids play in it.”

Mrs Campbell said creek overflows during the wet season would destroy surrounding vegetation.

“It can’t all be cleared away – it stays radioactive. Cattle producers wouldn’t be able to sell their cattle if they’re contaminated and it would be hard to know which cattle are contaminated. The government and the mining companies need to talk to producers before any decision was made,” she said.

“It is not really the kind of industry you want around.”

http://www.northweststar.com.au/news/local/news/general/the-case-against-uranium-mining/1648704.aspx?src=rss

107 households to be relocated due to mining activities

Wednesday, October 14, 2009, 13:40

Denison Mines Zambia Limited has signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with Chief Sinadambwe of Siavonga district for the relocation of 107 households from a uranium mining site.

The relocation of the families follows Denison Zambia Limited’s (DMZL) plans to start mining uranium deposits in the area.

The mining activities will be concentrated in the two villages of Muntanga and Dibbwii in Chief Sinadambwe of Siavonga district, approximately 40 kilometres from Siavonga township.

The signing of the MoU between Chief Sinadambwe and DMZL General Manager, Andrew Goode took place yesterday in the office of Siavonga District Commissioner, Emily Striedl.

“This MoU sets out the basic procedures for the relocation negotiation process between the parties and describes how DMZL will through the Relocation Committee, negotiate with the traditional leadership, government stakeholders and affected villages at every stage of the relocation process,” stated the six paged document.

The MoU further stated that a relocation committee, which is the steering committee for all issues relating to relocation of the affected communities and comprises of representatives from DZL.

The document further outlines that once the relocation process has been concluded and a site approved by both parties, the mine will facilitate the undertaking of a valuation exercise to properly value the immovable assets and agricultural fields that fall within the mine area in order to come up with a compensation package.

The MoU added that the compensation package for all households who will have signed and executed the provisions of the relocation agreement will be considered and determined.

“The package will describe what kind of compensation each affected household can be expected to be entitled to as a result of the impending relocation. Standard compensation criteria will be developed and will guide the allocation of individual compensation based on the information from the valuation of immovable assets and fields,” it stated.

The compensation package for the affected villages will include among other things, improved houses designed by an architect, a school, clinic, market, and sports facilities.

The design of the new village will also incorporate the potential for future electrification projects in conjunction with the Rural Electrification Authority.

ZANIS
Click below for all story:
http://www.lusakatimes.com/?p=18845

Tuesday, October 13, 2009

Letter to the NAS from Concerned Citizens of Virgina about the Funding of Uranium Mining Study

Comment: A group of citizens wrote the following letter to the National Academies.

October 2, 2009

The Governing Board Executive Council
of the National Academies
2100 C Street, NW
Washington, DC

Dear Members of Executive Council:

This letter is written by a group of concerned citizens to provide the National Academies with further information regarding the source of funding for the uranium mining study requested by the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission. On August 20, 2009, the Coal and Energy Commission submitted a formal request that the National Research Council (“NRC”) undertake a study of whether uranium can be mined and milled safely in the Commonwealth of Virginia. The Coal and Energy Commission made this request after the House Committee of the Virginia General Assembly tabled a proposal to lift the moratorium on uranium mining in Virginia and to establish the Uranium Mining Commission.[i] On September 8, 2009, the NRC responded that this request deserves the National Academies’ serious attention and will be submitted for review to the NRC’s Governing Board Executive Committee.

At the time the request for the uranium mining study was submitted, the source of the funding for this project was not determined. Since then it has come to our attention that the study will be funded by a for-profit corporation, Virginia Uranium, Inc., which has plans to mine and mill uranium in Pittsylvania County, VA. It has been widely reported in the Virginia local press that Virginia Uranium, Inc. has offered to pay the entire cost of the uranium mining study and that these funds would be contributed to the Virginia Center for Coal and Energy Research at the Virginia Tech University (“VA Tech”), which would then pass them on to NRC.[ii] VA Tech has recently been reviving its nuclear program and has received a grant from the federal government to study the uranium deposits at Coles Hill, the location of the future uranium mine planned by Virginia Uranium, Inc.[iii] In light of this new information, we felt that the National Academies should be apprised of the fact that the end source of the uranium mining funding is a for-profit corporation.

The National Academies have the impeccable reputation for providing independent, objective, and non-partisan advice with high standards of scientific and technical quality. Although the uranium mining study is yet to be undertaken by the National Academies, the study’s credibility is already being questioned in the Virginia local press, various blogs and public organizations’ websites because of the perceived conflict of interest.[iv] We believe that it is in everybody’s best interest to ensure that the National Academies continue to maintain the integrity of its studies and reports to ensure public confidence in them. Therefore, it is very important that the National Academies are conclusively aware of the end source of finding for the uranium mining study prior to accepting this project.

For these reasons, we respectfully request the Governing Board Executive Council to investigate whether the end source of funding for the requested uranium mining study is in fact a for-profit corporation and if so, whether this fact would create an appearance of conflict of interest that would taint the credibility of the results of the uranium mining study and the integrity of the National Academies’ reports in general.

Thank you very much for your time and attention. In the event that you would like to discuss the matters in this letter with a representative of our group.

Respectfully,
(Names Withheld)

Monday, October 12, 2009

Environmental Problems and Violations Accumulate for Uranium Mining and Processing

The uranium mining industry insists that the in-situ leaching process for extracting uranium is environmentally safe, mining violations and associated fines imposed by mining regulatory agencies continue to accumulate.

To avoid violations, mining companies request more lax environmental standards. Significant problems also occur with uranium processing and transportation.

Here are some recent examples:

•Uranium Mine (Power Resources, Inc.) to pay $1.4 million settlement. See http://www.trib.com/articles/2008/07/10/news/breaking/doc4876424160775926209366.txt.

•Cameco Resources agrees to pay $50,000 fine for deficienies identified during abandoned drill hole inspection at Smith Ranch ISL site. See http://www.wise-uranium.org/umopwy.html#SMITHR.

•According to Texas Commission on Environmental Quality records, 51 requests for “amended restoration tables to make them higher” have been granted out of 80 uranium mining production areas. See http://www.victoriaadvocate.com/goliad_county/story/323434.html.

•Strathmore pays $18,000 fine for numerous violations connected to exploration activities at Sky ISL project site (Wyoming). See http://www.wise-uranium.org/upusawy.html#SKY.

•The Cotter Corp. uranium mill has been cited by the state for radioactive contamination at the adjacent Shadow Hills Golf Club. See http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/aug/14/uranium-mill-cited-for-new-contamination/.

•$50,000 penalty imposed on Cameco's subsidiary Crow Butte Resources for violations at ISL uranium mine (Nebraska). See http://www.wise-uranium.org/umopusa.html#CROWBCD080523.

•Wyoming DEQ issues Notice of Violation to Cameco Resources for deficienies identified during abandoned drill hole inspection. See http://www.wise-uranium.org/umopwy.html#SMITHR.

•Cameco Resources Reaches Settlement with Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality. See http://www.cameco.com/media_gateway/news_releases/2008/news_release.php?id=236.

•Wyoming Model In Situ Uranium Mine Under Scrutiny for an Alarming Volume of Environmental Violations. See http://www.nunnglow.com/latest/wyoming-deq-sanctions-uranium-mine.html.

•WISE Uranium Reports Cogema Seeks Approval Groundwater Restoration. See http://www.nunnglow.com/latest/wise-uranium-reports-cogema-seeks-approval-for-groundwater-restoration.html

•Probe finds uranium mine violations. See http://www.nunnglow.com/probe-finds-uranium-mine-violations.html

http://www.nunnglow.com/latest/violations-accumulate-for-uranium-isl-mining.html

Latest News And Video From The Department Of Energy's Solar Decathlon Competition On The National Mall




Sat Oct 10, 2009 2:30pm EDT

Latest News And Video From The Department Of Energy's Solar Decathlon
Competition On The National Mall

STORY SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is hosting the 2009 Solar
Decathlon on the National Mall in Washington, D.C., where 20 University Teams
are competing to design, build, and operate the most attractive, effective,
and energy-efficient solar-powered house.

Solar Decathlon is one of the DOE's signature programs to promote cutting
edge design and green technology. The competition will take over the National
Mall in October (9-13 & 15-18) in an unprecedented display of green innovation
and design, as the teams construct a one-of-a-kind solar village.

Each team had to transport their solar house to the competition site and
virtually rebuild them in the solar village. More than 800 students will be
competing in ten contests that evaluate the architecture, engineering,
comfort, marketability, appliances, lighting and other aspects of the houses.
All the houses are Zero Energy Homes (ZEH), which produce as much energy as
they consume. Teams will have to perform everyday tasks such as cooking,
laundry and washing dishes to test the energy efficiency of their homes. Plus,
for the first time the solar village will be connected to a micro-grid
constructed on the Mall and connected to Pepco, and the houses will be able to
push extra energy into the DC grid.

The 20 teams competing are: Cornell University, Iowa State University, Penn
State, Rice University, The University of Arizona, The Ohio State University,
Universidad de Puerto Rico, Virginia Tech, Universidad Politecnica de Madrid
(Team Spain), University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, University of
Kentucky, University of Louisiana at Lafayette, University of Minnesota,
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Team Alberta, Team Boston, Team California,
Team Missouri, Technische Universitat Darmstadt (Team Germany) and Team
Ontario/BC.

The public is invited to tour the homes and exhibits during much of the
competition before the winner is announced on Friday, Oct. 16. For more
information and current standings, visit: www.solardecathlon.org.

Broadcast-Quality Video of All 20 Solar Homes and University Teams Now
Available for Download

WASHINGTON, Oct. 10 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ --
VIDEO: You can now view and download the latest broadcast-quality video
footage from the Solar Decathlon competition, including virtual tours of each
home and soundbites from members of each team, at the following address:
http://stratacomm.net/solar-decathlon/videos.html

NEWS: U.S. Dept. of Energy hosts cutting-edge green technology and design
competition on National Mall

FORMAT: B-roll and Soundbites
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES:http://www.prnewswire.com/broadcast/39848/press.html
SOUNDBITES: Steven Chu, Secretary of Energy, Student representative from all 20 teams
B-ROLL INCLUDES: *aerial shots of the solar village and monuments on the
National Mall *virtual tour of each house
VIDEO PROVIDED BY: U.S. Department of Energy
SOURCE U.S. Department of Energy
MultiVu Media Relations, 800-653-5313 EXT. 3

http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS68047+10-Oct-2009+PRN20091010

Friday, October 9, 2009

Keeping Agriculture Alive in the Shadow of a Uranium Mine: Potential Effects and Regulatory Solutions for Virginia

By admin
May 20, 2009

This is a preview of one of the upcoming Volume 34 notes

by Maggy J. Lewis

Note deals with the emerging regulatory controversy over the potential mining of a uranium deposit located in rural Southern Virginia. The “Coles Hill” deposit is thought to be the largest deposit of uranium in the United States, but has been largely ignored since the Virginia General Assembly instituted a moratorium on uranium mining in the early 1980’s. The increase in the price of uranium in recent years has revived the debate on uranium mining. There is potential for the moratorium to be lifted in the near future and for uranium mining to be introduced to Virginia for first time.

Virginia’s climate, topology, and climatology are substantially different from those areas in the Southwest where uranium historically has been mined. In addition, the location of the mine is in an area that, although considered rural within the state, has a significantly greater population density than the western mining areas.

The region of Southern Virginia where the proposed mine is located has historically been powered by nearby textile and furniture industries and agricultural production, especially tobacco. The present-day economy of the immediate region is comprised of more than a thousand farms, primarily producing tobacco, corn, wheat, and soybeans, and beef cattle and swine.

Although uranium mining has the potential to bring short-term economic prosperity to Southern Virginia, there are potential risks to the agricultural economy. The mining and milling process, as well as waste products, also bring significant risks of contamination to the surrounding environment. These risks which have been realized at other mining locations, and these risks may be exacerbated by the unique hydrological environment of Virginia. The increased exposure of crops and livestock has the potential to pose a significant safety and health risk to consumers of those products. More importantly, the public perception of risk or danger from uranium mining may also result in serious negative repercussions for the marketability of agricultural products from the nearby regions, regardless of whether those risks present any real threat.

Note addresses the potential implications for agricultural production if uranium mining becomes a reality for Virginia by looking at scientific and sociological data at other mine sites, as well as public perception of food safety threats. There are gaps to be filled in both regulation and enforcement mechanisms as they apply to uranium mining’s effects on agricultural crops and livestock. This Note provides suggestions for means of regulating the output of agricultural products from the potentially affected regions of Virginia under the current statutory framework for developing state and site-specific protocols to ensure safety and preserve the public confidence in the food supply. By taking the proactive regulatory approach proposed by this Note, agriculture can continue to be a successful economic base of the Southern Virginia both during the uranium mining process and after it has come to an end.

The debate over Cole’s Hill will continue. Should Virginia tap these resources? How should Virginia protect farmers? What does mining Uranium say about Virginia’s balancing of energy needs and the safety of the food supply?

http://elpr.org/2009/05/20/keeping-agriculture-alive-in-the-shadow-of-a-uranium-mine-poten tial-effects-and-regulatory-solutions-for-virginia/

With major rules revision, Va. aims to reduce bay pollution

By Rex Springston
Published: October 6, 2009

Virginia took a big step yesterday to reduce the amount of pollution that washes off subdivisions, office parks and other new developments.

Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Board adopted, by a 7-1 vote, the first major revision of state stormwater rules in two decades.

The rules would require developers to do more things, such as building ponds or low-lying gardens, to decrease runoff pollution.

"Today we mark significant milestone in the protection of the Chesapeake Bay and Virginia's rivers, lakes and streams," Gov. Timothy M. Kaine said.

Regulators see the stormwater crackdown as one piece of the puzzle in restoring the polluted Chesapeake Bay. As the Obama administration leads a renewed bay cleanup, state and federal officials also are considering pollution cuts from farms, suburban lawns and other sources.

The stormwater rules dictate things a developer must do to limit runoff long after a project is finished. That runoff can carry animal waste, oil, grime and other pollution into streams.

Among other things, the rules call for a 38 percent reduction in the amount of phosphorus, a cause of algae, that flows from a site within the bay's watershed.

"We feel that standard is excessive [and not] supported by sound science," Philip F. Abraham, representing a commercial real estate industry group, told the board before the vote.

Many builders say the rules would add to project costs and, ultimately, consumers' bills. State officials say any increased costs would be minimal.

Some observers said they expect opponents to take their case before the General Assembly.

As proposed 11 months ago, the rules called for the 38 percent phosphorus cut statewide. In one of several moves made to address opponents' concerns, the board set a less-stringent limit for waters outside the bay watershed.

Kate G. Wofford, director of the Shenandoah Valley Network, a conservation group, opposed that change. "I believe all Virginians deserve better -- not just those that happen to live in the bay watershed."

Overall, however, Wofford supported the regulations.

Because the rules adopted yesterday differ significantly from those the board proposed last year, the panel decided to set the regulations aside temporarily, hold a comment period from late October to late November and then vote again Dec. 9.

The board is not expected to make significant changes when it votes again.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact Rex Springston at (804) 649-6453 or rspringston@timesdispatch.com.

http://www2.timesdispatch.com/rtd/news/state_regional/article/WATR06_20091005-220003/297662/

Uranium mining operations have cooled

Texas' only active mine has scaled back production!

By Asher Price
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Friday, October 09, 2009

ENCINO — Even as the nuclear energy industry aims to expand, its momentum appears to have slowed for the moment.

About two years ago, the price of uranium was at $136 a pound, the scrubby, sandy pastures where Mesteña Uranium LLC operates would have been filled with trucks, drills and hard hats.

But now, with uranium selling in low-$40s, only a few crews are operating here!

With the price of uranium down, privately held Mesteña has cut its payroll, from 225 employees, including contractors, at the beginning of the year, to about 135 today.

Uranium is the fuel for the nuclear plants, and Mesteña's Alta Mesa operation, about a dozen miles west of Encino in South Texas, is the only active mine in the state.

In an effort to cut back capital costs, production has been throttled back from about 850,000 pounds a year to 650,000 pounds, said Paul Goranson, vice president of Mesteña and overseer of day-to-day operations.

The company had hoped to mine uranium in another part of the ranch — owned by the shareholders of Mesteña — but that expansion was cut after the price of uranium dropped.

"The global nuclear renaissance has been put on hold," Goranson said. "We ramped up (on employees), but we've had to cut them back fast."

The price shot up from less than $10 a pound in 2002 to a high of $136 in summer of 2007.

The revival of nuclear power also renewed the kind of opposition to nuclear power that had lain dormant since the late 1970s, when the last new plant began construction.

Some environmentalists and landowners say uranium mining threatens groundwater and uses large amounts of water.

"We want to put a stop to uranium mining until we have better protections in place," Cyrus Reed, conservation director of the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club, said last year.

But economic crisis and changes in supply appear to have had a lot more to do with the drop in uranium prices.

Goranson said that hedge funds that had bought the uranium with plans to hold on to the commodity found themselves needing to raise money, fast, and willing to sell "at whatever price they could get."

Meanwhile, the market upheaval made it hard for utilities to secure the loans they needed to build nuclear plants that cost hundreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars.

There are no miners' lamps or carts headed underground at the Mesteña operation, called the Alta Mesa facility. Known as in-situ recovery, the process involves pumping oxidized water into the ground, which loosens and dissolves the uranium.

Then the uranium-bearing water is pumped to the surface and into a recovery plant, where the uranium is separated from the water. The water, now free of the uranium, is pumped back underground to capture more uranium.

The recovered uranium, meanwhile, is filtered, dried and packaged as a yellowcake powder for shipping. Each drum of yellowcake has the energy equivalent of 10,000 tons of coal, or enough to fill a 100-car train.

The drums are sent by 18-wheeler to Illinois, where they are converted to a uranium gas, then to Kentucky or Ohio for enrichment as fuel in nuclear reactors.

asherprice@statesman.com; 445-3643
To read whole story click below:
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/2009/10/09/1009uranium.html

Southside could lead bioenergy future (Virginia)

Patent agent Galen Barefoot of Warrenton (left) and George Overstreet, an unemployed former trucker of Clover, check out a mobile biomass gasifica-tion system from Auburn University’s Center for BioEnergy and BioProducts in front of the Institute of Advanced Learning and Research on Tuesday. The facility hosted a Southern Virginia bioenergy conference for stakeholders

By Tara Bozick
Published: October 8, 2009

Virginia and the country on the cusp of a bioenergy future, Southern Virginia has the opportunity to lead the way, industry experts say.

“Southern Virginia has everything to offer,” said Ken Moss of Piedmont BioProducts in Gretna. “We have location to population centers north and south. We’ve got the agricultural heritage of the people and we’ve got the political wheel to support the development of bioenergy.”

Moss and 175 people attended the “Southern Virginia Bioenergy: Making Innovation Work” conference at the Institute for Advanced Learning & Research in Danville on Tuesday.

The conference brought area stakeholders together to focus on Virginia’s renewable energy agenda. Entrepreneurs shared bioenergy projects and business models to educate and garner interest and support for a regional bioenergy future.

Charles R. Hawkins, chair of the Virginia Tobacco Commission, started the morning in a public forum on the viability of such an industry in Southside. Moss and Kimble Reynolds Jr., regional director of the Martinsville office of Rep. Tom Perriello, D-5th District, also participated in the panel.

“This is an opportunity for us to replace some of the income that tobacco used to produce,” Hawkins said. “The main thing is everybody understanding the importance of it. It’s not going to be easy. It’s going to require some effort. It’s going to take years.”

Pittsylvania County has a bioenergy history with Dominion’s Pittsylvania Power Station in Hurt, fuel procurement manager Roy Byrd said. The 80-megawatt power station has burned wood chips or biomass to produce electricity for the past 17 years.

The station uses “waste wood” and produces low levels of sulfur dioxide for an environmentally friendly operation. As one of the largest biomass stations on the East Coast, producing enough power for more than 20,000 houses, it serves as part of Dominion’s commitment to reaching the Virginia target of getting 12 percent of energy from renewable generation by 2022.

Dean Price of Red Birch Energy in Martinsville reinforced the idea that the energy supply needs to be decentralized, with small-scale refineries serving the communities that supply them with feedstock.

Price said such a system could be replicated anywhere, including Danville.

“This is not something we need to debate. We’ve got to do something,” Price said. “What the president has before him is a very daunting task. He’s got to change our energy usage.”

Owners of VanDerHyde Dairy near Chatham thought more seriously about capitalizing on the release of cow manure’s methane gas when the recession hurt milk prices, co-owner Roy VanDerHyde said. Currently, manure stored in pits releases methane gas to the atmosphere.

“Now, we’re trying to do something productive with it,” VanDerHyde said. “Sustainability — that’s the name of our game of trying to stay in business.”

Using an anaerobic digester to separate solids and liquids in the manure for electricity generation could also be beneficial in that those liquids could be used for crop applications, he said.

VanDerHyde estimates the manure from more than 900 cows could produce power for 600 homes. That’s more than the number of houses in Chatham (554).

Additionally, the process would burn off pathogens and reduce pathogens in bedding, which would mean increased milk quality, he said.

“A lot of other dairies are watching to see how I make out with this,” VanDerHyde said.

Conference speakers and industry experts also agreed that “green” technology and bioenergy could provide incentive for young people to stay or come back to rural communities.

That’s why tree farmers and brothers Clark and Joe Graves, of Graves Family Forests in Halifax County, came to the conference. They already established conservation easements on their land to keep it undeveloped, but both wanted to know what options the next generation would have in an agricultural endeavor.

“We have to all be positive about it,” Clark said. “There’s not just one product or answer.”

Liam Leightley, executive director of the Institute, encouraged everyone interested in bioenergy to keep tabs on legislation.

“What we saw today was a significant amount of innovation. People who aren’t just sitting, but are actually doing,” Leightley said, ending the conference. “We have the potential here in Southern Virginia to lead.”

Share This:Email My Facebook Delicious Digg Twitter Favorites More

http://www2.godanriver.com/gdr/news/local/danville_news/article/southside_could_lead_bioenergy_future/14442/