2. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

2.1 The impacts of uranium mining are very broad. There are impacts resulting from the end-use of uranium in energy and weapons production involving risks of radioactive leaks, emissions, melt downs, and nuclear detonations at great risk to the environment and public health. At the end of the uranium cycle, the uranium either ends up as some form of waste or as a weapon.

2.2 There are also the direct environmental impacts of uranium mining in terms of tailings waste, production and mining processes and their impact on the local environment. Tailings from uranium mining contain 80% of the level of radioactivity of the original ore as a result of the presence of uranium decay products such as Thorium 230, Thorium 234 and Radium 226. The environmental impacts of tailings have been well documented for both uranium mines currently in production, the Roxby Downs and Ranger uranium mines, as well as historical mines such as Radium Hill and Rum Jungle. The Rum Jungle mine was abandoned in 1971 after polluting 100 km2 of the Finnis River system following the collapse of its tailings dam.

2.3 The problems at Roxby Downs uranium mine include the Tailings Retention System (TRS) and the depletion of water from the Great Artesian Basin in the Mound Springs area, 100 kms North of the mine. The TRS has leaked a massive 5 million cubic metres over four years and the response from both the State and Commonwealth Governments has been completely inadequate. Evidence presented to the Committee highlighted the ongoing lack of scientific understanding of the source of the leakage and the hydrogeological flow patterns beneath the TRS[1].

2.4 Roxby Downs is the biggest uranium mine in the world and uses a massive 15 million litres per day of water in what it is a sensitive arid region. Mining operations are currently being expanded and this will increase water use to 48-51 million litres per day. To meet this demand a second borefield, Borefield B, has been developed for use until the year 2036.

2.5 The majority report states that the Olympic Dam Operation uses approximately 3% of the water drawn from the South Australian section of the Great Artesian Basin. Even the table included in the Report shows this to be wrong. Of the water drawn from the basin by human activity in 1995, as opposed to natural losses from springs and leakages, 130 ML/d is drawn for pastoral uses, 22 ML/d for Gas/Petroleum and 15 ML/d for Olympic Dam/Roxby Downs. This represents 9% of the water draw from the basin. When these figures are adjusted to take into account the operation of Borefield B from September 1996, and the fall in production from Borefield A, the amount being drawn from the Basin by Olympic Dam/Roxby Downs increases to 48-51 ML/d. This represents approximately 25% of the water drawn from the basin. It is gross inaccuracies such as this in the majority Report which put its whole validity in doubt.

2.6 The impact of this water use has been the long term degradation of the Mound Springs as well as serious depletion of the ground water tables in the Great Artesian Basin and the Mound Springs system. This spring system hosts unique ecosystems of flora and fauna as well as being a significant site to the Arabunna people who are the traditional owners. Evidence presented to the Committee suggests that the demise of at least two spring complexes (Priscilla and Venerable Springs) may have already occurred and that 10 other spring complexes have been affected by reduced flows[2]. This environmental degradation requires urgent investigation by a fully independent scientific body with expertise in the environmental effects of uranium mining.

2.7 The tailings dams at the Ranger mine have been plagued by similar problems of poor design, faulty construction and mismanagement to those at the Roxby Downs mine. The risks of the tailings dams leaking translates into a risk to the environment through contamination of the Magela Creek system as well as the risk to members of the public, indigenous people and workers of exposure to radiation.

(Picture Omitted)

Retention Pond No 2 at the Ranger mine.

2.8 Both Ranger mines, and the proposed Jabiluka and Koongarra mines, exist within the Kakadu National Park region. Although some of the boundaries of the Park have been arbitrarily set or changed, all of these mine sites are part of the same ecosystem of enormous conservation significance. Kakadu National Park is one of only 17 sites in the world listed for its cultural and environmental significance. This imposes international obligations upon Australia. Kakadu is listed on the World Heritage List, its wetlands are meant to be protected under the Ramsar Convention, its birdlife under the China-Australia and Japan-Australia Migratory Birds Agreement, and the area is also listed on the National Estate. Allowing uranium mining to occur in such an environmentally significant area is itself a breach of Australia's international obligations.

2.9 Compounding these concerns is the fact that ERA have a history of mismanagement, tailings dams leaks, releases and accidents. Evidence presented to the Committee included a list of over 40 incidences of authorised or accidental releases of contamination into the environment over the history of the operation of the mine[3]. This reinforces concerns about the present abrogation of Australia's responsibility in relation to one of the most significant pieces of environmental heritage in the world

2.10 The environmental impacts of the proposed Jabiluka and Kintyre mines have not been not fully assessed and the relevant environmental impact assessment processes have only recently been triggered. However, there is great cause for concern over the ability of ERA to design and manage a water management and tailings system at Jabiluka which would be consistent with the need to protect a World Heritage region such as Kakadu National Park.

2.11 The Kintyre uranium deposit was excised arbitrarily from the Rudall River National Park. However, the deposit still remains within the delicate ecosystem of the park. The deposit is situated in a seasonal arid zone river system[4], prone to cyclonic weather conditions, and is also likely to suffer from problems with water management and tailings disposal which will create an unacceptable risk to the environment of the region. Mining at Kintyre would be inconsistent with the need to protect the delicate ecosystem of the Rudall River National Park.

 

Recommendations: