- Unbeliebable: White House turns Bieber petition response into immigration screed
- Obama signs law denying Iran ambassador’s visa, but says law is ‘advisory’
- Mich. judge to laughing convicted killer: ‘I hope you die in prison’
- Man charged in Kansas City-area highway shootings
- Keystone XL pipeline still on hold after State Dept. decision
- Fla. man charged with killing 16-month-old son to play Xbox undisturbed
- Drones from the deep: Pentagon develops ocean-floor attack robots
- Michigan mayor slaps back atheists’ try to erect ‘reason station’ at city hall
- PHILLIPS: Where is the conservative establishment?
- 7.5-magnitude earthquake shakes southern Mexico
Report cites benefits of Va. uranium mining
Also notes environmental risks
Lifting a decades-long ban on uranium mining could generate more than 1,000 jobs and have an annual economic impact of $135 million, should the hot button-issue of tapping a site in Southside Virginia move forward, according to a study from a Richmond-based economic forecasting firm.
The 179-page report from Chmura Economics and Analytics assumes that the site would be operated and dismantled within established federal guidelines and concludes that the potential impact on real estate values would be "minimal."
Virginia Uranium Inc. wants the General Assembly to lift a 30-year moratorium on uranium mining in the state so that it can tap into an estimated 119-million-pound site in Pittsylvania County - considered to be one of the world's largest untapped sources of the radioactive element widely used in nuclear reactors.
"This moves us one step closer toward energy independence for America and the energy security and economic benefits that it brings," said Ray Ganthner, president of the Virginia Energy Independence Alliance.
Opponents, however, vociferously oppose lifting the ban, citing environmental and public health concerns.
"We really think what this does is it highlights the concerns we've been voicing all along," said Rob Marmet, senior energy policy analyst with the Piedmont Environmental Council.
The Chmura analysis, prepared for the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission, came with a number of caveats. It concluded that a "baseline" scenario with a moderate environmental impact on water, air, noise and soil quality was more likely to occur than others, but that the risks and rewards were not balanced. In essence, the negative economic impact in the event of severe environmental damage was twice as large as the positive impact in the best-case scenario of negligible environmental impact.
The issue has drawn heightened scrutiny after Virginia Uranium flew about a dozen state legislators to France in June to inspect a closed mine in the western part of the country where uranium was mined for about 50 years, until the late 1990s. Legislators and members of the public were also treated to a fact-finding trip to Canada in September by the company.
But lawmakers are also awaiting results from a National Academy of Sciences study, paid for by Virginia Tech with funds from Virginia Uranium, analyzing the environmental and public health effects of mining.
Sen. John C. Watkins, Powhatan Republican and member of the subcommittee devoted to the issue, said that a lot depended on the results of that report.
"There's a tremendous amount of work to be done, even if the moratorium were to be lifted," said Mr. Watkins, who took the trip to Canada in September. "It's not something that cannot be adequately safeguarded. ... That's been proven."
Still, there have been conflicting studies within the state. One conducted for the city of Virginia Beach found that uranium mining, processing and toxic waste storage upstream from Virginia Beach could contaminate the city's water supply for as long as two years, though a subsequent report commissioned by Virginia Uranium challenged those findings.
More recently, a study released in September by the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League, said that "pervasive flooding" regularly occurs throughout the site, which would increase the risk of radioactive contamination if the site is eventually used to store uranium.
© Copyright 2014 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
About the Author
David Sherfinski covers politics for The Washington Times. He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org.
- Supreme Court weighs appeal to concealed-carry gun laws
- Michael Bloomberg charts $50M challenge to NRA: 'Got to make them afraid'
- McAuliffe's PAC off to fast start, with $254,000 raised in two weeks
- Virginia Republican Bob Marshall stands by remarks that raise eyebrows
- Obama urged to enforce ban on importing military-style firearms
Latest Blog Entries
TWT Video Picks
Women losing coverage under Obamacare, too
- Scalia to students on high taxes: At a certain point, 'perhaps you should revolt'
- Former Ranger breaks silence on Pat Tillman death: I may have killed him
- Special Forces' suicide rates hit record levels casualties of 'hard combat'
- Feds approve powdered alcohol; 'Palcohol' available later this year
- Justice at last: 'Evil woman' outed for grabbing girl's game ball
- EDITORIAL: Mark Warner running scared?
- Hillary swoons at admitted illegal immigrant: 'Wow,' you're 'incredibly brave'
- U.S. Navy to turn seawater into jet fuel
- Army goes to war with National Guard, seizes Apache attack helicopters
- CHARLES: Holder's undermining of the law deserving of contempt
Top 10 handguns in the U.S.