HomeMy WebLinkAbout20090624.tiff2400 Hampshire Square
Fort Collins, CO, 80526
February 2, 2009
Mr. Bill Garcia
Weld County Commissioner
915 Tenth Street
P. O. Box 758
Greeley CO 80632
Dear Mr. Garcia:
µir! 1 COUNTY
,.rFS
WAR -2 A II: Icl
Hello. My name is Matthew Donovan and I am a student at Poudre High School in Fort
Collins. I have recently become aware of an alarming new presence on the Front Range. I
am writing this letter in the hopes that you, Sir, may be able to stop this menace to our
safety and quality of life. I am of course, referring to the proposed uranium mine outside
of Wellington, Colorado. The Centennial Project, as it has been named, is in my opinion,
the most serious threat to public health in our area. The implications of this project being
allowed to continue are simply too dangerous and too great for me to ignore. As I am sure
you know Powertech Uranium Corporation has secured the rights to 6,880 acres of
grassland located between Wellington and Nunn, Colorado. They plan to use the In -Situ
Leaching method of mining for the Northern part of the property while digging an open
pit mine in the Southern area. In -Situ Leaching is a process in which dangerous
chemicals are often pumped into the ground, dislodging uranium ore and other materials,
which are then pumped back to the surface and extracted. Open pit mining is more
straightforward as it simply involves digging a massive hole in the ground and extracting
the uranium ore from the loose dirt. Please do not allow either of these methods in the
Centennial Project because although the uranium company claims that their mining
methods are safe, environmentally friendly, and cost effective, the truth is all uranium
mining is tremendously unsafe, environmentally damaging, and it is citizens like you and
me who pay the price for this cheap source of energy.
As I mentioned before, Powertech has decided to use the In -Situ Leaching (ISL) method
of extraction in the Centennial Project. The mining industry claims In -Situ Leaching to be
"a controllable, safe, and environmentally benign method of mining which can operate
under strict environmental controls and which often had cost advantages." Sadly, this
statement is a complete and total lie. In -Situ Leaching, also called In -Situ Recovery or
Solution Mining, is dangerous and problematic in many ways. The chemicals used in the
process are referred to as lixiviant. As the lixiviant travels through the uranium ore layer,
it dissolves hazardous chemicals such as arsenic, selenium, molybdenum, vanadium, and
radium 226 in addition to the extremely radioactive uranium ore. (It is important to note
that in their buried state, these chemicals pose absolutely no threat to any person, plant, or
animal aboveground. It is only during the next phase of mining that they become a
concern.) This carcinogenic cocktail is then pumped back to the surface where the
C °/lawn/C.R.h orLS
— oroa `f
Ferse / ern- sent 3/3/01
uranium ore is extracted and the wastewater is dumped into holding pools. This is the
point at which the toxins wreak havoc on their surroundings. Radium 226 is a very
radioactive element with an abnormally long half- life. When dumped into the holding
pools, it quickly reverts to its solid state as a fine powder. Picked up by the wind, this
radionuclide can float for hundreds of miles. When it settles, as a fine powder, it
continues to emit radiation for centuries to come. In addition to the inherent dangers
associated with it, ISL mining is usually haunted by problems. Pump failure, pipe failure,
retention pond failure, and mineral precipitation are simply a few of the myriad of
possible problems an ISL mine can face. In any of these scenarios, the complicated
process of infusion and extraction would cease to work and toxins would be released into
the ground, the air, and our water sources.
Just because the uranium ore is extracted from the dangerous mixture of toxins, does not
mean it is safe. In addition to the raw uranium, the ore contains radon and polonium -210.
Polonium -210 is an element with a toxicity one billion times as high as cyanide. Radon is
also released from the processing facility as a gas. This dangerous gas can float on the
breezes for hundreds of miles before it settles to the ground where humans and livestock
can breathe it in. In fact, the U.S. Surgeon General has determined that radon is the
second leading cause of lung cancer after cigarette smoking since tens of thousands of
Americans die every year from exposure to radon gas. Powertech claims that it will only
allow 25 millirems of radiation to escape the plant each year. This tiny amount of
radiation would pose no threat to humans, if it were the true amount. However, how is it
possible to release such a small amount of radiation per year if radon gas is naturally
released during processing and the company allows radioactive particles to sit in outdoor
holding ponds? Gavin Mudd, an expert in the field of uranium mining stated that, "The
technique of In- Situ Leaching is not controllable, inherently unsafe, unlikely to be able
to meet `strict environmental controls,' and not an environmentally benign method of
mining." Who are we to believe in this situation? Are we to believe the expert who has
nothing to gain from denouncing uranium mining, or the corporation who could make
millions of dollars off this project?
If we allow uranium mining to begin in Northern Colorado, there will be serious public
health consequences. It is impossible for the high levels of radiation and pollution created
by the mining process not to affect people. If we allow Powertech to begin mining, we
open the floodgates for poisoning, cancer, birth defects, and radiation poisoning. Once
mining begins, how will we be able to stop it? At what point do we draw the line? As an
elected official, it is your responsibility to fight for the best interests of your constituents.
Which of those people who campaigned for your election will benefit from living next to
a uranium mine? Radioactive and toxic threats to our health cannot and should not be
allowed to exist for the sole purpose of income. If we stand by and do nothing while
Powertech Uranium Corporation destroys our environment and our quality of life, what
will those who come after us think? Will they talk of how we did nothing and watched
our homes be destroyed by big business? Alternatively, will they speak of how we stood
up for our right to live safe, long lives in the state we love? How history remembers us is
in our own hands.
In addition to ISL mining, Powertech intends to open up a part of the southern area of the
property to open pit mining. More than half of the total uranium at the site is located in
this southern region. If the corporation were allowed to mine the ground conventionally,
it would likely create a 129 foot hole in the ground. This hole would be the height of a
twelve -story building. Once mining is completed, the company will most likely sell the
land and move out without making any effort to fill in this massive scar upon our earth. Is
it right to let them desecrate our land in such a way with zero accountability? As I
mentioned before, radionuclides can float on the wind for hundreds of miles. Are we not
responsible for where these dangerous elements can travel? In addition, Powertech states
that they will not leave any tailing piles behind. These piles usually contain the highest
levels of Polonium -210 and radium on earth. Luckily for us, these tailings are to be
transported off site. However, where will they go? There is no place on earth these toxic
dirt piles can be safely disposed. Are we just going to let the corporation dump them on
some other small rural community? Or perhaps bury them in a landfill where the toxins
can slowly leach into groundwater and pollute the earth? On the other hand, will we
simply ignore this issue? After all, it is not our responsibility what Powertech chooses to
do with their toxic waste. Nevertheless, is it not our responsibility as human beings and
fellow Americans to do what we can to prevent the suffering of others?
The company also states on their website that other activities that emit 25 milirems of
radiation are things such as eating 27.57 tablespoons of peanut butter, drinking 36.7 liters
of tap water, or driving 22 miles in a car. Personally, I would prefer to eat a peanut butter
and jelly sandwich for lunch rather than inhale particles of radium -226. Call me crazy,
but I would rather drink a large glass of water to cool off during the summer than be
stuck in a cloud of radon gas. I do not know about you, but I would rather drive 22 miles
to visit a friend or relative than be drenched with rain infused with polonium 210 every
time I am caught in a storm.
The most populated areas of Colorado are directly downwind from the Centennial Project
Site. This includes larger cities such as Denver, Fort Collins, and Greeley, but also
smaller communities with people who would be equally affected by a uranium mine. As
Dr. Gordon Edwards stated, "Uranium ore bodies are among the deadliest mineral
deposits on earth. They harbor large quantities of dangerous radioactive materials.
Exploration and mining activites liberate these poisons into the air we breathe, the water
we drink, and the food we eat." Imagine a mother living on a farm just south of the
uranium mine mixing a bottle of formula for her baby. Living on a farm, the family
naturally gets their drinking water from a well. However, because of the many
radionuclides that escape from the mine everyday only to settle and leach into the
groundwater, the family's well is now contaminated by toxins. The mother does not
know that she is poisoning her baby every time she makes a bottle, but the fact remains
that their well water is irrevocably contaminated. Just think of the effect on the baby. On
the other hand, imagine a future in which people are afraid to go outside to run, bike, or
play with their children because they do not want to be poisoned by the air they breathe.
These scenarios are just possibilities of the nightmare that could become a reality if
Powertech Uranium Corp. is allowed to mine in Northern Colorado.
This does not have to be the future of Northern Colorado. If we get informed and stand
together we can show Powertech that we do not want them here. I urge you to visit
nunnglow.com and the Coloradoans Against Resource Destruction, the primary
opposition to the Centennial Project. Find out more about the effects of uranium mining
before you consider letting Powertech begin operations. I do realize that as a county
commissioner you are not allowed to voice your opinion on this issue until the mining
permit comes up for consideration. I ask that you please deny the permit. Other states and
communities have outlawed uranium mining. If we show Powertech that they are not
welcome here and that we will not tolerate their presence by any means, they will have
no choice but to leave. It will be a long, difficult struggle, but it can be accomplished. I
thank you for taking the time to read this letter and I hope that you will agree with me
and say no to the Centennial Project and uranium mining in Northern Colorado.
Sincerely,
cj—
Matthew Donovan
Hello