Daily Press Writer
Last month, President Bush signed the Energy Policy Act, revamping the nation's energy policy for the first time in more than a decade. Given the nation's dependence on foreign oil, many politicians and experts are looking for alternate energy sources.
|
Advertisement |
In the middle of the 20th century, Montrose County and the Uncompahgre Plateau were major sources of uranium, the fuel used to generate nuclear power. Overnight, towns such as Uravan and Nucla, capitalizing on the nuclear theme, sprang into existence.
The era was part of long line of boom and bust cycles in Colorado mining. By the 1980s, the uranium boom had become a bust. The price of uranium sank, and with it the hopes and dreams of hundreds of miners disappeared.
Over the last year, due to the increased price of uranium, a new chapter has begun on the plateau. Once-idle mines are now busy with activity, returning hope to the industry.
Drive for nuclear energy
In the United States, 20 percent of the electricity is created from nuclear power while in France, nearly 80 percent of electricity is generated from nuclear power.
"Nuclear energy is an extremely important source of electricity," said Stuart Sanderson, president of the Colorado Mining Association.
Sanderson said the United States must diversify its power generation, and like the president, he advocates nuclear energy as an energy source.
Until recently, nuclear power was not considered a reliable source of energy, partly because of perceived safety concerns. In 1979, an accident at the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant nearly released radiation, but a catastrophe was averted. Residents of the Ukraine were not so lucky. In 1986, a faulty design at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant and untrained personnel caused the release of radiation, resulting in the death of more than 40 people.
The perception about nuclear power has changed. Many countries in Asia and around the world have begun massive nuclear plant construction projects. China has nine nuclear reactors and plans to construct 18 additional plants. India has 14 nuclear power plants and wants to build 24 more.
"We have a slow rate of growth for nuclear power in our forecast," said Ron Hagen, an energy specialist in nuclear energy with the U. S. Department of Energy.
This drive toward nuclear power in the United States and around the world has caused uranium prices to increase dramatically. In 2001, the metal was trading at $9 per pound and now hovers near $30.
Hagen said nuclear power plants until recently have depended on a large stockpile of uranium, including converting nuclear weapons from the former Soviet Union and pillaging tailings from old uranium mines.
"It's an industry that depends on 50 percent inventory," Hagen said.
Sanderson said the worldwide demand for uranium is about 170 million pounds annually but only 100 to 103 million pounds are produced, heavily depleting the stockpiles.
"I don't think there is a question that there is a shortage," he said.
Looking at old sources
Hagen said Canada and Australia have been the major suppliers of uranium for years, because the mined ore is more pure than that on the Western Slope of Colorado, making it less expensive to produce.
Recently, because of the increased price of uranium, the Cotter Corporation has opened several mines on the Uncompahgre Plateau, and thousands of mining claims have been filed over the last year in the region.
Michael Tucker, the lease management program manager at the Department of Energy, said one mine opened in 2003, two mines opened in 2004, and the company began mining one more this year with plans to open two more by the end of the year.
"The price has been depressed for ten years and the industry has been living on stockpiles," Tucker said.
He said the federal government is considering opening up several old uranium mines next summer.
"There is significant demand for uranium properties," said Ed Cotter, project manager of the uranium-leasing program with the Steller Corporation. (Cotter is not affiliated with the Cotter Corporation.)
Historically, uranium mining on federal lands was done through the Uranium Leasing Program. After World War II, the government withdrew federal lands from public holdings, ensuring the country an adequate supply of uranium.
Until 1968, the government regulated the price of uranium. After that year, the metal was sold on the open market. The push for nuclear power and the nuclear weapons program in the United States pushed the price as high as $40 a pound.
In 1974, companies were given 20-year leases for the Uranium Leasing Program. During that period, 1.7 million tons of ore were mined, yielding 6.5 million pounds of uranium. But when the leases came up, most companies opted not to renew, given the lack of economic incentives.
With the increased demand for uranium, the government restarted the leasing program in 2004. Today, the DOE administers 13 active leases in San Miguel and Montrose counties and has considered adding 25 inactive lease tracts.
Cotter said the DOE is doing an environmental assessment on the proposed lease sights.
"We are going to look at the environmental impact of expanding the program," said Tucker.
In August, the agency conducted public meetings in Naturita and other towns on the Western Slope as part of the environmental assessment.
"We would like input from the public on the issues that citizens think the Department of Energy should consider in preparing the environmental assessment for the Uranium Leasing Program," Tucker said.
He said the agency could let the current lease run out, maintain the current lease in the future or increase the number of leases. If the leases are made available, the agency will conduct a bidding process where the highest bidder is awarded the lease.
Tucker said the environmental assessment would be finalized in February. This would make the lease tracks available by next spring.
Sanderson said expanded uranium mining is good for the mining industry in Colorado and was pleased to see the renewed activity.
"We are engaged in uranium production for the first time in years," he said.
Hagen, however, is not convinced that the Western Slope will return to its dominant position in the industry. He said there would be some growth in the area, but the cost of production is too high. The ore from mines on the Western Slope are less than 1 percent uranium. This is compared with high-production mines that can be as high as 20 percent.
"(Is the Western Slope) going to be major player - probably not," he said.
Nuclear safety issue
Many media outlets have proclaimed nuclear power as the winner of the Energy Policy Act, because it offers tax incentives to build new power plants. However, some energy analysts are not convinced that nuclear energy is market competitive.
"There are plenty of problems with nuclear power," Hagen said.
He said nuclear power plants have huge capital costs. This can make private financing of new power facilities difficult, according to a report by the Rocky Mountain Institute, a non-partisan group that studies energy policy.
Hagen said federal government studies estimates the cost of nuclear power at $1,900 a kilowatt hour (kwh) but the industry has the cost at $1,200 kwh. He said industry studies often exclude the capital costs in the calculations.
Hagen said because a nuclear power plant has not been built in the United States in 20 years, the construction costs have not been determined.
"Nobody knows what it will cost," he said.
The Rocky Mountain Institute report said wind and other renewable energy could more quickly address the nation's energy problems. It stated that Spain and Germany added 10 times as much energy output in 2004 with wind power as the entire world with nuclear power.
"We think a sound energy policy should let all energy technologies compete," said Nathan Glasgow, special aid to the CEO at the Rocky Mountain Institute.
The other problem with nuclear power is waste. Large volumes of radioactive waste are created during the enrichment of uranium. Also, after uranium fuel cells have been drained of energy they remain highly radioactive.
"The problem of waste is the one that has not been solved," Glasgow said.
The government has proposed storing the fuel cells at Yucca Mountain in Nevada, but the facility is mired in lawsuits and controversy. A temporary site has been suggested in Utah on an Indian Reservation but the earliest the site can be ready is 2007.
For now, spent fuel from nuclear power plants is being stored at the nation's 100 nuclear power plants.
Hagen added that safety with nuclear power is always a concern. He sited the problems at the Davis-Besse plant in Ohio as an example. Because of faulty construction, pipes within the plant where found to be corrosive. The problem was eventually discovered but not before it created a stir with the public and within the industry.
"It is a sign that you have to be careful," Hagen said.
Sanderson said nuclear power is a viable and safe form of power in the United States and around the world. He said nuclear power creates zero emissions and plants are becoming increasingly efficient.
"They (nuclear power plants) are, contrary to popular belief, extremely safe," he said.
Contact James Shea via e-mail at jamess@montrosepress.com
Kaitlyn Heichel wrote on Nov 3, 2009 2:01 PM:
Sarah Bond wrote on Jul 13, 2009 5:31 PM: