February, 19 2010, 12:35pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Taylor McKinnon, Center for Biological Diversity, (928) 310-6713
Sandy Bahr, Sierra Club, (602) 999-5790
Roger Clark, Grand Canyon Trust, (928) 774-7466
Government Study: Elevated Uranium Levels in Grand Canyon's Watershed
Exploration and Mining Sites Consistently Exceed Background Levels
GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK
A series of studies
released today by the United States Geological Survey show elevated
uranium levels in wells, springs, and soil in and around uranium
exploration and mining sites within the watershed feeding Grand Canyon
National Park and the Colorado River. The agency conducted the
monitoring to provide information for an environmental impact statement
that is analyzing a proposed 20-year mineral withdrawal that would
protect nearly 1 million acres of public land surrounding Grand Canyon
National Park from future mining activities.
"These
reports demonstrate unequivocally that uranium mining should not
proceed in these environmentally sensitive lands," said Stacey Hamburg
of the Sierra Club's Grand Canyon Chapter. "Contaminated lands and
waters around the Grand Canyon are not what we want for the future of
northern Arizona. Cleaning up contaminated sites should be the
government's first priority."
Elevated uranium
levels consistently exceed natural background levels in and around
exploration and old mining sites - sometimes, as in the case of the
Kanab North mine, by as much as 10 times. Elevated uranium levels were
also detected near the old "Hack" uranium-mine complex, which the
Bureau of Land Management actively promotes on its Web site as a model of good mine reclamation (see video here).
Reclaimed in the 1980s, the mines are located in Hack Canyon, a
tributary to Kanab Creek and the Grand Canyon and Colorado River.
"Uranium
mining has already contaminated lands and waters in and around Grand
Canyon, and today's research confirms that new uranium mining would
threaten aquifers that feed Grand Canyon's springs, the Colorado River,
and nearly 100 species of concern," said Taylor McKinnon of the Center
for Biological Diversity. "These risks aren't worth taking - and
they're risks neither the government nor industry can guarantee
against."
Elevated uranium levels were also
detected at another nearby old mine that the Bureau has said it will
allow to reopen without updating 1980s-era federal environmental
reviews. The first such opening, of Denison Mines' Arizona 1 mine,
provoked a lawsuit in November from conservation groups seeking updated reviews.
Fifteen
springs and five wells exhibited dissolved uranium concentrations
greater than the Environmental Protection Agency maximum for drinking
water; hydrogeologists have warned that new mining could deplete and
pollute water in aquifers and connected springs. Today's report
concludes that: "Uranium mining within the watershed may increase the
amount of radioactive materials and heavy metals in the surface water
and groundwater flowing into Grand Canyon National Park and the
Colorado River, and deep mining activities may increase mobilization of
uranium through the rock strata into the aquifers. In addition, waste
rock and ore from mined areas may be transported away from the mines by
wind and runoff."
"The USGS research confirms that
mining uranium within Grand Canyon watersheds risks permanently
polluting waning water supplies for 25 million people and arid
ecosystems. There are some places where mining should not occur, and
the Grand Canyon is one of them," said Roger Clark of the Grand Canyon
Trust.
Last week the Center for Biological Diversity sued
the U.S. Bureau of Land Management for illegally withholding public
records relating to uranium mines immediately north of Grand Canyon
National Park. The Bureau is withholding the vast majority of eight
linear feet of responsive records despite directives from the Obama
administration requiring the agency to respond to information requests
"promptly and in a spirit of cooperation" and to adopt a "presumption
of disclosure" (see Obama's Freedom of Information Act memo to federal
agencies here).
All of today's reports can be downloaded here: https://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2010/5025/
Summary of Research Findings (From USGS)
* The area proposed for withdrawal is estimated to contain about 163,000 tons (about 326 million pounds) of uranium oxide (U3O8),
which is about 12 percent of the estimated total undiscovered uranium
in northern Arizona (1.3 million tons or 2.6 billion pounds). For
comparison, the United States consumes about 27,550 tons (55 million
pounds) of uranium oxide each year in its reactors; most of it comes
from Canada, Australia, and Russia.
*
Soil and sediment samples were analyzed for six sites that
experienced various levels of uranium mining in Kanab Creek area north
of Grand Canyon National Park, including mined and reclaimed sites,
mined sites currently on standby, and sites that were exploratory
drilled but not mined. Uranium and arsenic were two elements
consistently detected in the areas disturbed by mining in values above
natural background levels.
*
Analysis of historical water-quality data for more than 1,000 water
samples from 428 sites in northern Arizona shows that dissolved uranium
concentrations in areas without mining were generally similar to those
with active or reclaimed mines. Sixty-six percent of the sampled sites
showed low dissolved uranium concentrations (less than 5 parts per
billion). Ninety-five percent of the sampled sites had dissolved
uranium levels of less than 30 parts per billion, the Environmental
Protection Agency maximum for drinking water.
*
Samples from 15 springs and 5 wells exhibited dissolved uranium
concentrations greater than the Environmental Protection Agency maximum
for drinking water. These springs and wells are close to or in direct
contact with mineralized ore bodies, and concentration levels are
related to natural processes, mining, or a combination of both factors.
* Almost 100 plants and animals
identified by the State of Arizona or other land managers as species of
concern inhabit the area proposed for withdrawal. Because uranium and
its byproducts such as radon can affect survival, growth, and
reproduction of plants and animals, USGS scientists identified exposure
pathways (for example, ingestion or inhalation) for these species of
concern.
Background
Spikes
in uranium prices have caused thousands of new uranium claims, dozens
of proposed exploration drilling projects, and proposals to reopen old
uranium mines adjacent to the Grand Canyon. Renewed uranium development
threatens to degrade wildlife habitat and industrialize now-wild and
iconic landscapes bordering the park; it also threatens to deplete and
contaminate aquifers that discharge into Grand Canyon National Park and
the Colorado River. The Park Service warns against drinking from
several creeks in the canyon which exhibit elevated uranium levels in
the wake of past uranium mining.
These threats have provoked litigation; legislation; and public protests
and statements of concern and opposition from scientists, city
officials, county officials - including from Coconino County - former
Governor Janet Napolitano, state representatives, the Navajo Nation,
and the Kaibab Paiute, Hopi, Hualapai and Havasupai tribes, the
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, and the Southern
Nevada Water Authority, among others. Polling conducted by Public
Opinion Strategies shows overwhelming public support for withdrawing
from mineral entry the lands near Grand Canyon; Arizonans support
protecting the Grand Canyon area from uranium mining by a two-to-one
margin.
The Interior Department in July 2009 enacted a land segregation order, now in force, and proposed a 20-year mineral withdrawal,
which is now being analyzed, for one million acres of public land
surrounding Grand Canyon National Park. Both measures prohibit new
mining claims and the exploration and mining of existing claims for
which valid existing rights have not been established. The Bureau of
Land Management has failed to produce any documents demonstrating the
establishment of valid existing rights for the Arizona 1 mine or other
mines around Grand Canyon. The United States Geological Survey's
monitoring results that were released today are to inform the
aforementioned analysis of the proposed mineral withdrawal.
LATEST NEWS
X Suspends Journalist Ken Klippenstein Over Publication of JD Vance Dossier
"The 'free speech absolutist' has once again silenced a journalist he didn't like," said one observer.
Sep 26, 2024
X—the social media platform formerly known as Twitter—suspended Ken Klippenstein's account Thursday after the investigative journalist posted an article containing a link to a dossier on Republican U.S. vice presidential candidate JD Vance that allegedly came from an Iranian hack of former President Donald Trump's 2024 campaign.
Klippenstein, who formerly worked at The Intercept, said on his paid Substack Thursday that his X account was suspended for violating the platform's ban on posting private information.
"I know that it is general practice to delete 'private' information from leaks and classified documents, but in this case, not only is Vance an elected official and vice presidential candidate, but the information is readily available for anyone to buy," he wrote. Vance is also the junior U.S. senator from Ohio.
Klippenstein continued:
We should be honest about so-called private information contained in the dossier and "private" information in general. It is readily available to anyone who can buy it. The campaign purchased this information from commercial information brokers. Those dealers make huge profits from selling this data. And the media knows it, because they buy the data for reporting purposes, just like the campaign. They don't like to mention that though.
According to Klippenstein, the corporate media has "been sitting on" the dossier since June, "declining to publish in fear of finding itself at odds with the government's campaign against 'foreign malign influence.'"
"If the document had been hacked by some 'Anonymous'-like hacker group, the news media would be all over it," he contended. "I'm just not a believer of the news media as an arm of the government, doing its work combatting foreign influence. Nor should it be a gatekeeper of what the public should know."
Klippenstein shared a general overview of the contents of the dossier, which he described as "a 271-page research paper the Trump campaign prepared to vet" Vance, pulling out select quotes from the document:
- "Vance has been one of the chief obstructionists to U.S. efforts to providing [sic] assistance to Ukraine."
- "Vance criticized public health experts and elected officials for supporting Black Lives Matter protests while condemning anti-lockdown [Covid] protests."
- "Vance 'embraced non-interventionism."
- "In 2020, Vance criticized President Trump's airstrike killing Iranian General Qasem Soleimani, worrying it would continue to bog down America in the Middle East to the advantage of China."
- "Vance suggested that the country had been entangled in wars in the Middle East so 'financial elites' could profit from the rise of China."
"While the news media has paraphrased some of the contents of the dossier, what they haven't done is provide the American people with the underlying document, in the language in which it appeared, so they can decide for themselves what they think," Klippenstein said. "You decide for yourself."
An X spokesperson toldZeteo's Justin Baragona that "Ken Klippenstein was temporarily suspended for violating our rules on posting unredacted private personal information, specifically Sen. Vance's physical addresses and the majority of his Social Security number."
The Federal Bureau of Investigation is investigating the Trump campaign's claim of an Iranian hack. Iran's government denies any such action.
Numerous observers accused Musk—a self-described "free speech absolutist"—of hypocrisy over X's suspension of Klippenstein's account, although it is not known if the billionaire owner had any role in the decision. Other users also reported punitive action against their accounts over the dossier post.
"I'm old enough to remember when free speech zealot Elon Musk was outraged by Twitter's censorship," journalist Seth Hettena said on X.
Jacobin writer Branko Marcetic posted that "this scenario is actually a good preview of the future none of us want, but that we're heading to currently: A major story breaks, establishment press refuses to cover it, and the indy media that does is throttled by tech censors."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Helene's Catastrophic Potential Stokes Fear Amid Florida Insurance Crisis
Florida already has one of the nation's largest shares of homeowners "who don't have meaningful insurance."
Sep 26, 2024
Hurricane Helene continued barreling toward Florida on Thursday, highlighting the impacts of the fossil fuel-driven climate emergency, including difficulties securing insurance coverage in regions most affected by extreme weather.
"The Air Force Hurricane Hunters found that the maximum sustained winds have increased to near 120 mph," the National Hurricane Center said Thursday afternoon. "This makes Helene a dangerous Category 3 major hurricane. Additional strengthening is expected before Helene makes landfall in the Florida Big Bend this evening."
Federal Emergency Management Agency Director Deanne Criswell said during a White House briefing that forecasts suggest Helene will make a "dead-on hit to Tallahassee" and "this is going to be a multistate event with the potential for significant impacts from Florida all the way to Tennessee."
Although this Atlantic hurricane season hasn't yet been as intense as U.S. scientists expected, trends in extreme weather disasters have led some insurance companies to exit the Florida market in recent years. Farmers Insurance announced last year that it would stop covering property in the state, in an effort to "effectively manage risk exposure."
While the Insurance Information Institute, an industry trade group, said in May that "legislative reforms passed in 2022 and 2023 have created a pathway to a stable Florida market," reporting from this week shows that residents—who aren't ultrarich—are still struggling to get and keep coverage.
"Florida ranks sixth among states with the largest shares of homeowners who don't have meaningful insurance. About 18% of homeowners across the state—about 1 in 6—are without it," NBC Newsnoted Wednesday. "Nearly 20% of Florida homeowners pay $4,000 or more a year for homeowners insurance—the largest share in the country, according to the Census Bureau."
According toThe Palm Beach Post, the global reinsurance broker Gallagher Re said in a Wednesday analysis that "landfall in the Big Bend or Panhandle region of Florida as a major hurricane (Category 3, 4, or 5) has historically translated to insured losses in the low single-digit billions."
"But Helene is not a typical storm," the firm explained. "Given Helene's very large wind radius, this would still bring hurricane-force wind gusts and high storm surge to coastal areas in the heavily populated Tampa Bay area, tropical storm force winds across most of the Florida peninsula, Georgia, the Carolinas, Tennessee, and southern Appalachia."
Gallagher Re suggested that "Helene's private insurance market losses should be expected to land in the range" of $3 billion to $6 billion, but if the hurricane "unexpectedly" moves toward Tampa, it could be over $10 billion.
Florida isn't the only state facing insurance trouble thanks to climate chaos. Voxreported last year that "insuring property in California has been a dicey proposition," pointing to torrential rainfall that "caused as much as $1.5 billion in insured losses" and "the costliest wildfires in U.S. history, including the 2018 Camp Fire, which led to more than $10 billion in losses."
Amid the intertwined climate and insurance crises, scientists, campaigners, and homeowners have demanded policy action—and elevated criticism of right-wing attacks on crucial programs.
In a June blog post, Rachel Cleetus, policy director with the Union of Concerned Scientists' Climate and Energy program, wrote that "Congress and regulators need to ensure more transparency in the insurance market on how companies are evaluating risks as they make decisions about premiums. There also needs to be better information on what kinds of incentives companies are providing for adaptation measures that would help reduce risks."
"Alongside the necessary but ultimately bounded role of insurance in a warming world, public and private decision-makers must also shift investments away from business-as-usual maladaptive and risky choices to more resilient ones," Cleetus continued. "The nation must scale up resources for climate resilience and ensure they are reaching communities in a just and equitable way. Funding for safe, affordable, and climate-resilient housing must be expanded."
The Climate & Community Institute on Wednesday also shared recommendations in a new report—Shared Fates: A Housing Resilience Policy Vision for the Home Insurance Crisis—using case studies from California, Florida, and Minnesota.
"We propose the creation of Housing Resilience Agencies (HRAs), either by states or the federal government," the institute said. These agencies would:
- Provide public disaster insurance that offers fair and equitable protections;
- Coordinate and oversee comprehensive, community-oriented disaster risk reduction;
- Address existing market failures by providing coverage for oft-neglected sectors such as multifamily housing providers, mobile home dwellers, and heirs properties; and
- Host public risk models, climate risk advisory councils, and diverse governing boards to inform decision-making in a transparent and democratic manner.
"In order to confront the growing housing safety and affordability crisis, we need to understand our fates as shared," the institute added. "We must reimagine our home insurance system for it to reduce risk and provide equitable and fair protection."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Giuliani Permanently Disbarred in DC Over Effort to Overturn 2020 Election
"Imagine once being dubbed 'America's Mayor' and having an illustrious legal and political career, and throwing it all away for Donald Trump," said one observer.
Sep 26, 2024
Former Republican New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani can no longer practice law in the nation's capital after a federal appeals court on Thursday concurred with a disciplinary committee's recommendation for permanent disbarment over his efforts to "undermine the results of the 2020 presidential election" in service of then-President Donald Trump's "Big Lie."
In a one-page ruling, the Washington, D.C. Court of Appeals permanently revoked Giuliani's law license, finding that the former federal prosecutor and personal attorney for Trump failed to explain why he should not be subject to reciprocal punishment after the New York Supreme Court's Appellate Division disbarred him in July for lying about the 2020 election.
The New York tribunal found that Giuliani "repeatedly and intentionally made false statements, some of which were perjurious, to the federal court, state lawmakers, the public... and this court concerning the 2020 presidential election, in which he baselessly attacked and undermined the integrity of this country's electoral process."
Giuliani is also facing criminal charges related to alleged election subversion in Arizona and Georgia. He filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy last December following a $148 million defamation judgment for falsely accusing two former Georgia election workers of engaging in a nonexistent conspiracy to "steal" the 2020 election.
These blows, culminating in Thursday's D.C. disbarment, mark a stunning fall from grace for Giuliani, who, as "America's Mayor" in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States, was named Time's "Person of the Year." Giuliani parlayed his popularity into a 2008 run for president in which he was an early GOP front-runner.
Giuliani spokesperson Ted Goodman slammed the D.C. court's ruling as a "miscarriage of justice."
"Members of the legal community who want to protect the integrity of our justice system should immediately speak out against this partisan, politically motivated decision," Goodman said in a statement.
Some observers linked Giuliani's disbarment to Thursday's indictment of current New York City Mayor Eric Adams, a Democrat, on corruption charges.
"Tough day for New York City mayors,"
quippedDemocracy Docket founder Marc Elias.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular