Staking a bet: Invest money into EF mill

 


Published/Last Modified on Saturday, September 12, 2009 9:09 PM MDT

Little, if anything, was settled at Wednesday’s board of county commissioners hearing regarding the special use permit application for Energy Fuels. No movie stars attended either.

Citizens spoke of the need of jobs on the West End – the mill is planned to be near Paradox on private land owned by EF CEO, George Glasier. Others spoke out on the possibility of contamination. For the record, once again, the Daily Press’ editorial position on the mill: we’re not for it, nor are we against it. Our editorials have staked: Take your time, commissioners. Consult with experts in the field, get it right, expect litigation.

Some comments from Wednesday:

Advertisement
• James Black of Redvale: “I strongly recommend approval of this mill. Your community will support you; even if you’re subject to litigation. We will support you with our tax dollars.”

• Dale Reed of Montrose, Uncompahgre Valley Association, said the mining industry has a “stained history. That the BOCC decision would leave a mark on the Paradox Valley for “thousands of years, long after the benefits of the jobs on the West End have evaporated.”

• Sandy Nelson of Hotchkiss, representing the Local Pipefitters 145: “This is a lot of work for our workers around the country. It is good for this country. If we don’t have the mill, we will be importing our uranium from somewhere else. We need this mill.”

The past and present are joined with a simple caveat: uranium mining and milling from sources like the now buried Uravan mill were, for decades, unregulated and very hazardous to workers and the environment; now they are somewhat less hazardous.  Milling today is less hazardous for workers as mining, but it will leave a radioactive pile of tailings that five bucks says won’t be maintained in 200 years.   

Energy Fuels says, in a recent report on radiation pathways sent to CDPHE, that   “…main (mill) exposure (from particulate and radon gas sources)…. of people in proximity of the mill (include)… ore haulage, storage, and handling at the ore pad, grinding of the ore in the mill, mill tailings, transportation accidents involving the release of yellowcake.”  Workers exposure?   “….from inhalation of yellowcake dust, ore dust, and radon….and from exposure to gamma radiation from radionuclides outside their bodies”   

The BOCC should take advantage of state funding of up to $50,000 and see if George Glasier is still willing to add to that amount and find some disinterested expertise to sort through the truly complex maze of environmental and public health questions on their plate.
 

¤ Please read our Disclaimer and Privacy Policy before participating in our online community.

Comments

    Sue wrote on Sep 24, 2009 12:43 PM:

    " I'm curious whether the person who wrote this editorial was even present at the 9/9/09 Pinon Ridge public meeting, because there were two obvious mistakes made: 1st, Daryl Hannah attended the meeting - I think she qualifies as a "movie star" and 2nd, Sandy Nelson is a staff member of Montrose County, not a citizen from Hotchkiss who spoke at the meeting. Please check your facts before committing them to paper because when mistakes are made on the easy stuff, we, the public wonder how accurate the rest of the story is. Thanks. "

    JudyJ wrote on Sep 16, 2009 8:34 PM:

    " Regarding the proposed uranium mill in our county (upwind?):

    1. How convenient that Mr. Glasier just happens to already own the land . . .

    2. Creating jobs does seem admirable; however, selling crack creates jobs, too, does it not?

    3. Pollution (water, air) MUST be the ultimate consideration, above all else. "


Post a comment


READER COMMENTS 

• Be respectful of others, the writer and the subjects in the story.

• Be relevant. Keep your comments on point. 

• See the guidelines for TalkAbout. Perhaps your comment is best for that community forum, available from the home page, instead of commenting on a particular story.

Comment posters are responsible for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they provide. We urge comment writers to treat this as a public forum where manners matter. We encourage a collegial, non-insulting tone. All readers comments must be approved by our staff before posting to the Web site. Be aware, in accordance with the Communications Decency Act and provisions upheld in judicial appeal, that you are responsible for comments posted on this Web site. Montrose Press is not liable for messages from third parties.

DO NOT POST:
* Potentially libelous statements or damaging innuendo.
* Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
* Personal attacks, insults or threats.
* The use of another person's real name to disguise your identity.
* Comments unrelated to the story.

Opinions, advice and all other information expressed in montrosepress.com's reader comments represent the individual's own views and not necessarily those of the Montrose Press. Montrose Press does not endorse and is not responsible for statements, advice or opinions offered by anyone other than authorized Montrose Press spokespersons.

Thank you for your comments!

(optional)