fuel for america august 3, 2011 jobs for · pdf filefuel for america jobs for southside seven...
TRANSCRIPT
1
August 3, 2011Fuel for America
Jobs for Southside
Seven Guiding Principles
1) Energy Independence
2) Community Development
3) Conservation
4) Historic Preservation
5) Virginia’s Agricultural Traditions
6) Regulatory Benchmarks
7) Virginia Stakeholders
2
Coles Hill Uranium Deposit Location – Pittsylvania County, Virginia
•Discovered in 1978
•Of Undeveloped Resources
•Largest uranium resource in US
•7th largest in the world
•Mining Regulated by States
•Milling and Tailings Regulated by Federal NRC
•What is Uranium?
•Heaviest naturally occurring element
•One of the most common elements on earth
•Average Seawater ~ 2-4ppb U
•Average Granite ~ 2-4ppm U
•Average Coles Hill Ore ~ 600ppm U
•Average backyard has ½ lb of U
•Primary fuel for nuclear power plants
•Safer to transport than common fuels
•This Agreement does not provide for discontinuance of any authority and the Commission shall retain authority and responsibility with respect to the following:
•The regulation of byproduct materials as defined in Section 11e.(2) of the Act;
3
South Coles Hill Deposit
North Coles Hill DepositNorth
Core Shed
Site Office
Defining the Deposits• Historical
– Marline and Union Carbide drilled 210 holes to define the deposits
– 153 rotary percussion; 57 diamond drill holes
• 65,082 ft of core
• 124,799 ft of rotary percussion
– Project advanced to feasibility stage
– $43 million in expenditures (1982 dollars)
• What VUI has done– Received DMME exploration permit
(# 90484-EX) November 27, 2007
• Permit for 40 holes, Drilled 10 holes
– 3 core holes
– 2 new rotary percussion holes
– 5 reconfirmed holes
– 4,510 ft of new core
– 9,137 ft of new rotary percussion
– Canadian National Instrument (NI) 43-101 Resource Estimate, completed April, 2009
Projected to surface represents 34.24 acres
4
Vertical Cross-Section of Coles Hill Deposits, Looking West
(0.1 wt% U3O8 )
Energy Independence• Coal – Net Exporter
• Natural Gas – 16% Imported
• Oil – 57% Imported
• Uranium – 86% Imported
• Virginia is 2nd only to California in amount of energy imported
• 119 Million lbs Uranium
• VA reactors use 1.6 million lbs/yr
• Supply 39.6% of Virginia’s Power
• Over 70 years worth of Virginia’s existing demand
• US Reactors use 55 million lbs/yr
• Supply 20% of US Power
• 119 Million lbs Uranium
• 1.19 Billion tons of Coal
• 3.7 Billion barrels of Oil
• 22 Trillion cubic feet of Natural gas
• Single Largest Energy Resource in Virginia
Energy Equivalent
31 Barrels
Oil
= =
1 lb.
Uranium10 Tons
Coal
Tri
llio
n B
TU
Source: US EIA
5
World Uranium Producers US Uranium Suppliers
•From 1950 -1983 the US was the largest producer of uranium
•The US is currently the largest importer of uranium
Richmond, VA
6
•Coles Hill Water
•110 million gallon/year water requirement
•158 million gallon/year treatment plant
Overburden
Ore Stockpile
Wastewater Treatment Plant
JEB Tailings Management
Facility
Runoff/Monitoring Ponds
JEB Mill
•MILL
•Tailings will be placed both in the mine space, as backfill, and in impoundments
•MINE DECLINE
•TAILING CELL
•MINE •Ground water monitoring
wells
7
Lynchburg, VA
Paducah, KY
Eunice, NM
Metropolis, IL
North Anna and Surry, VA
UF6
U235
UO2U3O8
Nuclear Fuel Cycle
US Navy
8
•Radioactive materials move safely on our roadways everyday
•Photos taken on June 30, 2010 in Tightsqueeze, VA
Lynchburg, Virginia
Mount Athos Facility
9
Financial Assurance• Nuclear Regulatory Commission
“Financial surety arrangements [usually bonds] must be established by each mill operator prior to the commencement of operations to assure that sufficient funds will be available to carry out the…reclamation of any tailings or waste disposal areas….The surety must also cover the payment of the charge for long-term surveillance….”
• Current Examples of Surety Bonds for U.S. Uranium Mills: – Pinion Ridge Mill, Colorado: $11,070,890
– Cotter Canon City Mill, Colorado: $20,800,000
– White Mesa Mill, Utah: $18,700,000
– Homestake Grants Mill, New Mexico: $33,000,000
• Required to pay up front to cover anything that might go wrong during the life of the operation, from the first shovel in the ground to the post-reclamation decades of on-site monitoring, including decommissioning of the mill.
• The amount of the surety bonds is reviewed regularly by state agencies and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and modified to account for changing conditions.
• Similar bonds for mining operations must be posted before work begins and held by state agencies until satisfactory reclamation of a mining site.
Uranium Mining Moratorium• Per Virginia Code §45.1-274, Uranium exploration is
permitted
• Uranium Administrative Group formed to study issue
• Per Virginia Code § 45.1-283 (1982)
“Notwithstanding any other provision of law, permit applications for uranium mining shall not be accepted by any agency of the Commonwealth prior to July 1, 1984, and until a program for permitting uranium mining is established by statute.”
10
1981: Virginia General Assembly approved House Joint Resolution No. 324 Requesting Virginia Coal & Energy Commission (“CEC”) to evaluate uranium
1983: Uranium Administrative Group (“UAG”) established in SB-155 that finds that a preliminary study
“…has not identified any environmental or public health concern that could preclude uranium development in Virginia.”
1984: Recommendation by 16 of 18 (89%) UAGmembers “We conclude that the moratorium
on uranium development can be lifted…”
2008: CEC creates uranium mining sub-committee
to evaluate uranium development again
2010: CEC engaged National Academy of Sciences (“NAS”) for evaluation study
2011: NAS study results expected
Virginia’s Uranium Studies
Summary of DosesASSESSMENT OF RISK
FROM URANIUM MINING
IN VIRGINIA
Prepared by
The Coal and Energy Commission
Commonwealth of Virginia
September 1984
SENES Consultants Limited
499 McNicoll Avenue
Willowdale, (Toronto), Ontario
Canada M2H 2C9
Tel: (416) 499-5030
Receptor/Characteristics Annual Whole Body Dose•NRC limit for general population 500 mrem(excluding background exposureand release from mines)
•Exposure to local residents from 210 mremnatural background radiation in vicinity of project prior to mining activity (dose equivalent due to external radiation & inhaled radon daughters
•Coles Hill property (on mining site) 16.4 mrem
•Hypothetical off-site receptor with the 7.8 mremlargest potential exposure
•Hypothetical receptor nearest occupied 3.5 mremdwelling
•Hypothetical receptor living in Halifax 0.15 mrem
•Dose to hypothetical average receptor of the 0.04 mrempopulation currently living w/in 50 miles of project.
Dental x-ray ~ 1 mrem; Living in brick house ~ 7 mrem
Current limit: 100 mrem
11
Health and Safety• Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (Canadian version of the US NRC)
• “Studies demonstrate that present-day uranium workers, and the public living near a uranium mine or mill, are as healthy as the general Canadian population.”
• “A number of studies in Canada and around the world show that uranium mines, mills and refineries do not affect public health.”
• “Studies carried out over several decades have repeatedly demonstrated that people who live near these facilities are as healthy as the rest of the general population. Studies carried out around uranium processing sites in other countries have provided the some conclusion.”
• Dr. John Boice, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine and Director of International Epidemiology Institute
• “This study then provides no evidence that the mining and milling activities increased the rate of any cancer in Karnes County.”
• “In summary, there is no evidence that residents of Montrose County experienced an increased risk of dying of cancer or other diseases because of environmental exposures associated with uranium and vanadium milling and mining activities.”
•“Not all areas shown contain uranium in high enough concentration to mine economically”
•Radiometric signal does not constitute:
• Uranium
• Recoverable resource
•Extensive East Coast exploration program:
•Over $60 million in expenses
•Only known viable project is Coles Hill
•VUI only owns land and leases around Coles Hill
•“Coles Hill is the only one that could be called an economic uranium deposit.” William Lassetter, DMME
12
Total Count (K, Th & U) Aeroradiometric Contour Map
Did Not Identify Coles Hill
Uranium is naturally occurring and all around us
13
•25
Engine of Economic Growth• Potentially ~$140 million/year in revenue on 500 acres
– Based on underground mining, producing ~2 million lbs Uranium per year– 1,356 Pittsylvania County Farms produce $63 million/year in revenue on 274,000 acres– Billions of dollars in revenue
• Capital Expenditures– $173 million – Initial– $350-400 million – Total– 250-350 construction jobs to build facility
• 325 Direct Employees– 90% can come from Southside Virginia– Average salary ~ $65,000– 30-35 year mine life– Unemployment ~15% in Southside
• Potentially $6 MM/yr in (4%) excise/severance taxes– Stay in surrounding localities for:
Agriculture, conservation, economic development, education• New business start-up: 1:6 spin off
– Direct and indirect annual economic benefit $240 - $300 million
1,073
14
Employment Opportunities• Walter Anderson
Hampden-Sydney College
Major: Physics
• Erica Galvan
Johnson Bible College
Major: Social Work
• Jonathan Wright
Lynchburg College
Major: Accounting
• Mary Dare Thornton
Roanoke College
Major: Global Business
• Josh Shields
Virginia Tech
Major: Engineering
• Lena Cole
Danville Community College
• Sam Cole
Wheaton College
Major: Geology
Research Opportunities• Virginia Tech
– Completed Work
• Mining Engineering Class Senior Design Project
• James Jerden, Ph.D on geochemistry
• J.P. Gannon, M.S. on hydrology
• John Wyatt, M.S. on geologic mapping
• Josh Whitney, M.S. in geophysics
– Ongoing work
• Denise Levitan, Ph.D on geochemistry
• Three students, M.S. on sediment transport
• Other Research
– Liberty University
– Ferrum College
– Lynchburg College
– Danville Community College
– Averett University
– Florida State University
– University of Virginia
– George Mason University
– Virginia Museum of Natural History
– United States Geological Survey
• John ReutterUniversity of VirginiaMajor: Biology
• Michael Mayhew
Virginia Military Institute
Major: Engineering
• Clayton Moss
Brigham Young University-
Idaho
Major: Geology
• Aaron Jacks
Lynchburg College
Major: Chemistry/Pharmacy
• Mitchell FitzgeraldVirginia TechMajor: Computer Engineering
• Courtney Atkinson
Williams College 2011
Major: Classics
• Alvin Palmer
Longwood University, 2011
Major: Physics
15
Virginia’s Nuclear Heritage• Dominion (North Anna & Surry)
– 4 Nuclear Reactors
– Provide 39.6% of Virginia’s Power
• Babcock & Wilcox (Lynchburg)
– Military Fuel Fabrication
– IST mPower reactor facility, Bedford VA
• AREVA (Lynchburg)
– Commercial Fuel Fabrication
• Naval Fleet in Norfolk
• Nuclear Engineering Curriculum
– Old Dominion, Virginia Commonwealth, Virginia Tech
• All need FUEL = Virginia Uranium– 119 million lbs of Resources
Virginia’s Mining Heritage• Colonist began mining in 1609
• First US Coal mine in Richmond 1748
• 400 different minerals found and
– 30+ different minerals produced in Virginia
– Annual value of nearly $2 billion
• 10th largest producer of coal
• 5th largest producer of crushed stone
• Home to many prominent mining companies
– Alpha Natural, Luck Stone
• One of four companies to manufacture 400 ton mining trucks
– Liebherr, Newport News
• Virginia Tech Mining Engineering & Geosciences
Examples of Uranium Mining & Milling
16
Elliot Lake, Canada • Huge ore body of uranium was discovered in early 1950s
• For the next 40 years, produced most of the world's uranium
• Last 5 mines closed in 1990’s • 27 inches of rain• 98 inches of snow• Between retirement living, tourism and
some logging, the area is thriving
East Coast Phosphate Uranium Production
• Florida– About 20% of US uranium production came from central Florida deposits to
the mid 1990’s
• Historically up to six operating production facilities
• 1981-1992 production averaged over 2,000,000 lbs/year U3O8 www.world-nuclear.org
• 2,000,000 lbs/yr is similar to the amount VUI proposes to produce
• Louisiana– Uncle Sam and Sunshine Bridge facilities in Louisiana
• Processed ore from Florida phosphate mines
• Combined production of 950,000 lbs U3O8 in 1997
– Accounted for ~16% of US uranium production in 1997 (UI News Briefing 98.49, Dec. 9, 1998)
• Production ceased in 1999
17
Path of Hurricane Katrina and Uranium Recovery Facilities
Sunshine Bridge & Uncle Sam, LA
New Wales & Plant City, FL
New Wales, FL
Uncle Sam, LA
Limousin France Agricultural Economic ImpactDepartment Results 2009
(Million USD)http://agreste.agriculture.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf_R7410C01.pdf
Correze Cruse Haute-Vienne Limousin France
Crop Production $161.84 $179.76 $196.39 $537.99 $49,330.35
Animal Production $253.73 $297.16 $311.64 $862.52 $31,102.22
Production Services $20.21 $22.79 $24.66 $67.80 $5,151.93
Subsidies on Products $53.61 $61.64 $57.48 $172.73 $3,288.40
Total $489.25 $561.35 $590.16 $1,640.76 $88,872.89
18
BUM/DRS/CESAAM
extraction shaft
mining waste
Brugeaud’s open pit
mining waste
tailings
ore treatment plant
ore stock pile
BU-Mines / DRS / CESAAM
Industrial Site of Bessines in 1978
water collector
Industrial Site
mining stripping recovering the tailing storage: Brugeaud open pit
Gartempe river
mining stripping recovering
the tailing storage: Lavaugrasse
water treatment plant
BU-Mines / DRS / CESAAM
Industrial Site of Bessines in 2001
19
Reclaimed Bessines Site
(June 2009)
Bellezane open pit (in operation)
BU-Mines / DRS / CESAAM
20
Bellezane open pit (reclaimed)
BU-Mines / DRS / CESAAM
Puy de l’Age : (in operation)
mining waste
Puy de l’Age’s open pit
BU-Mines / DRS / CESAAM
21
Puy de l’Age : reclaimed site
Landscaped mining waste
Before : Puy de l’Age’s open pitCurrently : fishing lake
BU-Mines / DRS / CESAAM June 2009
Understanding the Virginia Beach Water Study
• From the Baker study:•“The model does not address the issue of whether there will be a
•catastrophe— it only simulates the outcome if one did occur” …“The study is simulating a rare event that regulations are supposed to prevent” (Baker 2011b).
• From the City of Virginia Beach NS Testimony•“Current Regulations might make this a very unlikely event” “This is a worst case catastrophe analysis”
•“This models a very rare event that should never happen, if all the regulators are doing their job, and if the industry is doing their job, and everything works as designed, these facilities are supposed to be able to withstand 100 and 500 year events and even perhaps a PMP storm. Which goes off the charts as far as frequency.”
•“The model does not say there will be a catastrophe…. It doesn’t even attempt to try to model the failure of a confinement cell.”
22
•ASSUMPTIONS AT THE START OF THE MODEL ARE NOT REALISTIC
• The assumed location of the tailing impoundment is not possible
• Assumed design is unrealistic and contrary to current design standards
• Current regulations and guidelines for tailing impoundments were assumed to be disregarded
•Baker Study Assumed Dam Location Here
•THE ASSUMED LOCATION OF THE TAILING IMPOUNDMENT IS NOT
POSSIBLE
• Distance from Mine/ Mill Location
• PMF floodplain
• Wetlands
23
•ASSUMED DESIGN IS UNREALISTIC AND CONTRARY TO CURRENT DESIGN STANDARDS
•Baker didn’t say how this dam would fail.
•Baker’s Assumed Tailing Containment
•Straight sides (a box), all above ground; can’t be built.
• 40 acres
•surface area
•35% of tailings assumed to be released
•Dam
•Tailing Containment Cell per NRC standards
•Cell excavated at or below natural grade with sloping sides
•Below-grade or at-grade tailing impoundment
•Tailings
•Double geomembrane liner with leak detection/collection
•Tailing cover with infiltration, erosion, and radon barriers
•Out of PMF floodplain and
wetlands•Current Requirements for Uranium Tailings
•Sloped Sides
24
THE PROBABILITY OF A CONTAINMENT CELL FAILURE (Based on Baker Assumptions)
• Probable Maximum Precipitation (PMP) storm – once in 1000+ years, 0.001
• Tailings placed in an above-ground impoundment – 0.5
• Tailings are not protected against erosion – 0.01
• Tailing cell located next to a stream channel - 0.01
Probability of release = 0.001 x 0.5 x 0.01 x 0.01 = 5 X 10-8 or one in 10 million
•What other activities have higher risk to VB water quality?
•A PMF analysis was incorporated into the Marline Design
•29 inches of rain in 6 hours (VB cites 27 inches in 8 hours)
•Examples of PMF in Nelson County are very different than Pittsylvania County
•Does not assess risk of PMF storm on other land uses
•Animal waste, Underground/Aboveground Storage Tanks, Other industrial operations, Landfills, Sanitary Sewer, Septic Tanks
Fuel for America
Uranium Resources in VirginiaWorld-Class Deposit
www.VirginiaUranium.com