78
4 Some Case Study on Uranium Mining Impacts
All over the world, 60% of uranium is mined in Australia, Kazakhstan and Canada,
and as per the IAEA report (2013), Kazakhstan is the leading producer of uranium.
The IUCN Red Book mentioned in the World Nuclear Association stated that 31%
uranium resources are located in Australia, 12% in Kazakhstan and 9% in Canada,
whereas 6% and 4% of world’s uranium resources are deposited in South Africa and
the USA, and only 2% of world uranium resources are found in India. Below few
case studies of African countries, Portugal, Canada and India have been discussed.
4.1 Africa
African countries are involved in uranium mining since the nuclear fuel cycle outset. Tanzania, Nigeria, Namibia and South Africa are the major mining countries in
Africa. Uranium mined from the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) was used in
the Manhattan project for the atom bomb dropped on Japan. Uranium mined from
South Africa was used to feed the nuclear programme of the USA and UK during
the 1960s, while Nigerian uranium was fed to the French nuclear programme. South
Africa is the only African country to produce nuclear energy till date; however,
Namibia and some other countries also want to establish the nuclear power plant.
The legacy of earlier mine waste along with the current mining activities are generating huge amount of hazardous waste. The dust generated during mining and milling operations, thereafter, the tailings generated after the production of yellowcake
exhibit low radioactivity; but their mobility gets increased after mined onto the surface. Due to this, the chances of contaminant release and exposure to nuclear radiation get enhanced; hence, uranium mining must be practised under relevant health
and radiation protection codes. Many mining activities have witnessed a long environmental pollution and exposure to gamma radiation and radon gas to both workers and public, which can be taken as the negative side of the uranium mining (Fig
2014; OECD 2014).
In contrast, the direct/indirect job creations in the remote area of the African
countries can be a potential impact on the society to improve the life of the miner,
engineers and labours, more specifically of the local workers. However, this logic
gets diminished when looking at the health impacts on the peoples working in uranium mining. The economic benefits can always be measured against the societal
gain like human health and environmental pollution. There is a broad impact of
uranium mining, but not the financial benefits have a positive effect for the mining
country. For example, the revenue generated from uranium exploitation of all the
mines in Nigeria has accounted for only 5% of the annual budget (2010) of the
country. In the year 2010, the French company AREVA produced 114,346 tons of
uranium worth ~4.5 billion $US, but the Niger government received only the revenue ~460 million $US (Thiam 2014). On that cost, the negative impact on health
R. R. Srivastava et al.
4 Some Case Study on Uranium Mining Impacts
All over the world, 60% of uranium is mined in Australia, Kazakhstan and Canada,
and as per the IAEA report (2013), Kazakhstan is the leading producer of uranium.
The IUCN Red Book mentioned in the World Nuclear Association stated that 31%
uranium resources are located in Australia, 12% in Kazakhstan and 9% in Canada,
whereas 6% and 4% of world’s uranium resources are deposited in South Africa and
the USA, and only 2% of world uranium resources are found in India. Below few
case studies of African countries, Portugal, Canada and India have been discussed.
4.1 Africa
African countries are involved in uranium mining since the nuclear fuel cycle outset. Tanzania, Nigeria, Namibia and South Africa are the major mining countries in
Africa. Uranium mined from the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) was used in
the Manhattan project for the atom bomb dropped on Japan. Uranium mined from
South Africa was used to feed the nuclear programme of the USA and UK during
the 1960s, while Nigerian uranium was fed to the French nuclear programme. South
Africa is the only African country to produce nuclear energy till date; however,
Namibia and some other countries also want to establish the nuclear power plant.
The legacy of earlier mine waste along with the current mining activities are generating huge amount of hazardous waste. The dust generated during mining and milling operations, thereafter, the tailings generated after the production of yellowcake
exhibit low radioactivity; but their mobility gets increased after mined onto the surface. Due to this, the chances of contaminant release and exposure to nuclear radiation get enhanced; hence, uranium mining must be practised under relevant health
and radiation protection codes. Many mining activities have witnessed a long environmental pollution and exposure to gamma radiation and radon gas to both workers and public, which can be taken as the negative side of the uranium mining (Fig
2014; OECD 2014).
In contrast, the direct/indirect job creations in the remote area of the African
countries can be a potential impact on the society to improve the life of the miner,
engineers and labours, more specifically of the local workers. However, this logic
gets diminished when looking at the health impacts on the peoples working in uranium mining. The economic benefits can always be measured against the societal
gain like human health and environmental pollution. There is a broad impact of
uranium mining, but not the financial benefits have a positive effect for the mining
country. For example, the revenue generated from uranium exploitation of all the
mines in Nigeria has accounted for only 5% of the annual budget (2010) of the
country. In the year 2010, the French company AREVA produced 114,346 tons of
uranium worth ~4.5 billion $US, but the Niger government received only the revenue ~460 million $US (Thiam 2014). On that cost, the negative impact on health
R. R. Srivastava et al.