Herbert Jauch
5 December 2008
opinion
Over the past few months, the debate about the costs and benefits of uranium mining has been reignited.
Following the release of a uranium study by the director of the Labour Resource and Research Institute, Hilma Shindondola-Mote, earlier this year, mineworkers and environmental organisations have raised concerns.
At the heart of the dispute is whether a mushrooming uranium mining industry is a curse or a blessing for Namibia.
There may be several benefits associated with increased mining activities.
These include employment for a few hundred workers and tax income for the Namibian government, which has announced that it plans to increase the royalties payable by mining companies for the extraction of the country's minerals.
For almost 30 years, Roessing was the only uranium company in the country.
This scenario has changed.
A second uranium mine, Langer Heinrich, became operational in 2007 and 40 exclusive prospecting licenses and 12 mining licenses had already been issued by September 2008.
A "uranium rush" seems to be under way, based on the assumption that nuclear power might fill the world's current energy gaps.
Namibia's uranium oxide is exported in its raw form and enriched in countries with uranium converters such as France, the US, Canada and China.
But the cons must be factored into the equation.
Exposure to even relatively low levels of radiation over a long period can be extremely harmful to the health of workers and communities living around uranium mines.
Several workers who spent long years working at uranium mines developed serious health problems.
Cancerous strains are commonplace as workers are exposed to dust and radon gas daily and thus develop diseases such as TB and lung cancer.
Although mining companies usually deny any responsibility and refuse to compensate workers, there is increasing evidence of a link between uranium mining and workers' health problems.
Uranium mining uses an enormous amount of water.
In a recent article in The Namibian, the writer pointed out that the proposed uranium mine by the Canadian company Forsys Metal, would use 1 million litres of water each day.
Situated on the Valencia farm in the Erongo region, the mine would consume in only three months the amount of water that the current users in the area would consume in 36 years.
Given that all existing and envisaged uranium mines are in the Namib desert, one needs to ask if it is wise to spend Namibia's most scarce resource - water - on mining operations that may only bring short-term benefits.
All existing and proposed uranium mining sites are in the Namib desert, mostly in the protected area of the Namib Naukluft Park.
Besides using huge amounts of water, uranium mining also leaves large craters as it relies on open-pit operations.
Once mining activities cease, the huge holes remain.
Furthermore, radioactive dust particles may be blown over many kilometres.
This brings mining into direct conflict with tourism ventures that rely on Namibia's natural beauty as a main attraction.
International minerals prices have a direct impact on the viability of mining operations.
The globe is experiencing a plummet in copper prices.
Copper firm Weatherly International has just recently announced that it will retrench 643 workers in Namibia due to this slump.
Similarly, uranium oxide prices dropped by almost 70 per cent between July and October 2008.
This raises doubts about the viability and sustainability of uranium mining.
Few countries are considering an expansion of their nuclear energy programmes due to the costs and risks involved and this has a direct impact on uranium prices.
Namibia currently does not have a comprehensive legislative framework to deal with all the implications of uranium mining.
This makes the country open to abuse by companies who pursue an agenda of short-term profits and pay very little attention to the long-term consequences for the host country.
The Ministry of Mines and Energy is finalising a new law governing uranium mining, but close monitoring will also be required to prevent abuses.
This requires a high level of technical competence and political will.
It is telling that Canadian and Australian mining companies seem to spearhead the new rush for Africa's uranium.
Despite high quality uranium deposits in their own countries, they are focusing on Africa's uranium resources, with Niger, Malawi, Tanzania and Namibia the main targets.
There seems to be only one explanation for this paradox: labour costs are higher, and environmental restrictions are more stringent in Australia and Canada.
In April 2006, the managing director of Paladin stated that "the Canadians and Australians have become oversophisticated in their environmental and social concerns over uranium mining. The future is in Africa."
This makes a proper cost-benefit analysis of uranium mining an absolute necessity.
The disastrous Ramatex investment has shown that blind faith in investors can cost workers and the host country dearly.
When assessing the prospects of uranium mining, there is a need to look beyond the short-term effects and consider the long-term implications for Namibia.
The author works as a senior researcher for the Labour Resource and Research Institute (LaRRI)
Be the first to Write a Comment!
Copyright © 2008 The Namibian. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright holder directly for corrections — or for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material, click here.
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
