lørdag den 25. juni 2016

Uranminer, Oprydning og Vildledning





På baggrund af ovennævnte slide henvendte jeg mig i april 2015 til oplægsholderen, der er miljøkemiker og rådgiver for den danske og den grønlandske regering, for at få oplyst hvilke steder der er "ryddet godt op" efter uranminedrift. 

Jeg fik dette svar (se hele svaret nedenfor under 2):

"Et eksempel på en oprydning som lever op til myndigheds krav for canadiske uranminer i nyere tid, (bl.a: http://nuclearsafety.gc.ca/eng/waste/uranium-mines-and-millswaste/index.cfm#Closed er Cluff Lake.
Cluff Lake betragtes som en model for rehabilitering af en mine som er blevet planlagt lige fra starten af mineprojektet. Stedet underkastes jævnlig  mijømonitering for at følge udviklingen i miljøtilstanden."



Jeg har nu haft anledning til at kigge nærmere på Cluff Lake og oprydningen. De informationer, jeg fandt om dekommissionerings projektet af Cluff Lake, bekræfter ikke det svar, jeg fik fra oplægsholderen.

Hvis det ikke er muligt at komme med bedre eksempler på uranmine-oprydning, så må konklusionen blive, at der ikke er ryddet ordentligt op nogen steder efter uranudvinding. Oplægsholderen havde da heller ikke slidet med året efter på uran oplysnings-turen i maj 2015. 


Til gengæld blev der i 2015 vist et foto af Bellezane, en tidligere uranmine i Frankrig, fordi det if. eksperten er "et pænt billede der viser overdækning og re-vegetering af tailings. Jeg har ikke vurderet den kemiske effekt af dette. Billedet er taget her frra:




Mon borgerne i Sydgrønland blev oplyst om de store miljøproblemer ved Bellezane?



Dekommissionering af Cluff Lake


Da Commonwealth of Virginia ville ophæve et uranmine moratorium (midlertidigt forbud), blev der nedsat et udvalg (3), der udgav en rapport i 2012. (4) Forbuddet blev ikke ophævet.






Her er hvad udvalget skrev om Cluff Lake Decommissioning Project (min fremhævning med rød)

pp 185-187: 

BOX 6.1

Cluff Lake Decommissioning Project

"Perhaps the best available data on the environmental effects resulting from a modern uranium mine and processing facility are associated with the former Cluff Lake mine and processing facility, located in the Athabasca Basin of northern Saskatchewan, Canada, that treated high-grade ores ranging from 1 to 30 percent U3O8. Unlike most of the other mining operations that have been discussed in this section, uranium mining and processing at Cluff Lake didn’t begin until the 1980s—an era in which environmental concerns were significantly enhanced and regulations were more stringent than in earlier periods.

Two pits at Cluff Lake (“D” and “Claude”) were mined first, followed by an underground mine (“OP/DP”), followed by three other pits (“DJN,” “DJX,” and “DJ”). All mining and processing at Cluff Lake ceased in 2002 after 22 years of operations, and with 62 million pounds of U3O8 produced. In addition to the mill, operational facilities at Cluff Lakealso included a tailings management area with a two-stage liquid effluent treatment system and surface water diversion ditches, a residential camp area, and various other site infrastructure. Although tailings management and water treatment strategies have improved since the 1980s, the environmental assessment performed as part of the Cluff Lake decommissioning project provides a glimpse of what could occur if a modern uranium mining and processing operation were sited in Virginia.

A Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) environmental assessment to guide the decommissioning work was completed in 2003 (CNSC, 2003), and actual decommissioning was initiated in 2004. CNSC (2003) concluded that the primary environmental effects on completion of the decommissioning would be the migration of contaminants from existing sources (e.g., tailings and waste rock piles) to both groundwater and surface water. Most surface waters in the vicinity of the former mine/mill complex received no direct discharge and therefore were negligibly or only slightly affected by previous operations. Island Lake, however, was adversely affected because of its location immediately downstream of the mill effluent treatment systems. Measured mean annual concentrations of total dissolved solids, sulfate, chloride, uranium, and molybdenum in Island Lake in 2002 were two or three orders of magnitude higher than during the baseline (i.e., pre-mining) monitoring period.

Acid mine drainage (AMD) from the Claude waste rock pile caused contamination of the Claude pit, resulting in greatly elevated levels of sulfate, total dissolved solids, uranium, nickel, arsenic, and radium-226. The relatively poor water quality of the Claude pit necessitated pumping water from the pit to maintain a water level below that of the adjacent lake to prevent transport of contaminants off-site. Groundwater has been similarly affected by AMD from the Claude waste rock, which has formed a shallow, acidic (pH < 4) groundwater plume with elevated levels of dissolved nickel (>10 mg/L) and uranium (>100 mg/L) migrating away from the waste rock pile.

Additional potential environmental hazards at the Cluff Lake site include the flooded mine workings and the tailings management area (Figure 6.1). The flooded underground mines represent a source of groundwater contamination and, if allowed to overflow, a potential surface water contamination source as well. The tailings management area was constructed as an unlined above grade facility, using an earthen dam to retain both solid and liquid tailings and enable chemical treatment of the mill effluent prior to discharge into Snake Creek and Island Lake. The tailings management area represents the principal on-site source of potential long-term environmental effects, although geotechnical evaluations of the earthen dam determined it to be stable, structurally sound, and in compliance with all design specifications. Given its location in a topographic low, constructed surface diversions were employed to isolate the tailings management area from the erosive effects of inflowing surface water.

A variety of mitigation options were considered as part of the environmental assessment process to address the remaining significant environmental issues at Cluff Lake with the explicit goal of minimizing long-term active mitigation activities (e.g., groundwater pumping, water treatment). Preferred mitigation strategies identified included (1) backfilling the pits with waste rock and capping with compacted till, (2) capping the Claude waste rock pile with a dry cover to minimize infiltration and AMD, (3) sealing of surface openings in underground mines to prevent overflows, (4) covering the tailings management area with a secondary layer of till, and (5) allowing natural recovery of Island Lakewater quality. Although these options are likely to mitigate the remaining environmental problems at Cluff Lake to a significant degree, experience has shown that the environmental legacy of uranium mining is persistent over long periods of time. Monitoring and assessment (including a structured follow-up program to evaluate the performance of the mitigation strategies) will play an important role in guiding implementation of any additional mitigation at the site (CNSC, 2003). "

CITAT SLUT

.........................................................................................


Skrevet af Anne



Henvisninger


1) Mail af 30.6.16

Dear Anne Albinus,

Thank you for all your e-mails and especially questions and more, thank you for the link to the US 2012 publication provided in the below e-mail.

The Cluff Lake information included in the US 2012 publication om Cluff Lake Decommissioning Project  is based on the available CNSC report form 2003: CNSC (Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission), 2003. Comprehensive Study Report: Cluff Lake Decommissioning Project. Available at http://ceaa.gc.ca/41B79974-docs/report_e.pdf - the CNSC 2003 is used as a reference in the US 2012 report.

The CNSC 2013 report include available information prior to the site (Cluff Lake) being assessed and licensed for decommissioning, and thus prior to the decommissioning work actually taking place, and the post-decommissioning monitoring results being tabulated.



-        I have attached a 2011 report provided at an international symposium which is a summary of the decomm. work with pictures, and an explanation of the regulatory oversight


More, I sent a request to Canadian regulatory bodies to provide a current (2016) environmental monitoring results report from Cluff Lake, we will get back to you when we get their response

Med venlig hilsen
Gert Asmund og Violeta Hansen

Anne A: 2011 Report vedhæftet ovennævnte mail kan læses her


From: Anne Albinus 
Sent: 25. juni 2016 09:42
To: Gert Asmund; Violeta Hansen
Cc: 

Subject: Vedr. jeres udsagn om Cluff Lake som godt eksempel på oprydning_se venligst_rapport om Cluff Lake dekommissioneringsprojektet


Kære Violeta Hansen og Gert Asmund,

I skrev i en mail (se nedenfor) til mig 14. april 2015:

"Et eksempel på en oprydning som lever op til myndigheds krav for canadiske uranminer i nyere tid, (bl.a:http://nuclearsafety.gc.ca/eng/waste/uranium-mines-and-millswaste/index.cfm#Closed er Cluff Lake.
Cluff Lake betragtes som en model for rehabilitering af en mine som er blevet planlagt lige fra starten af mineprojektet. Stedet underkastes jævnlig  mijømonitering for at følge udviklingen i miljøtilstanden."

Jeg har nu haft anledning til at kigge nærmere på Cluff Lake og sender derfor t.o. informationer om Cluff Lake dekommissionerings projektet, der desværre ikke bekræfter, hvad I skrev til mig.

----------------------------------------------------------------
The Report of the Committee on Uranium Mining in Virginia; 
Committee on Earth Resources; National Research Council,
MEETING 6—JUNE 6-10, 2011 Saskatoon, Canada

The formal invited presenters were:
Hugh B. Miller, Colorado School of Mines
Dirk van Zyl, University of British Columbia
Kevin Scissons, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
Gary Delaney, Saskatchewan Geological Survey
Cory Hughes, Saskatchewan Geological Survey
Tim Moulding, Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment
James Keil, Saskatchewan Ministry of Labour Relations and Workplace Safety Radiation
Theresa McClenaghan, Canadian Environmental Law Association
Richard Gladue, AREVA Resources Canada, Inc.


The final report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.

Her er hvad udvalget skrev i om Cluff Lake Decommissioning Project 

pp 185-187:

BOX 6.1

Cluff Lake Decommissioning Project

Perhaps the best available data on the environmental effects resulting from a modern uranium mine and processing facility are associated with the former Cluff Lake mine and processing facility, located in the Athabasca Basin of northern Saskatchewan, Canada, that treated high-grade ores ranging from 1 to 30 percent U3O8. Unlike most of the other mining operations that have been discussed in this section, uranium mining and processing at Cluff Lake didn’t begin until the 1980s—an era in which environmental concerns were significantly enhanced and regulations were more stringent than in earlier periods.

Two pits at Cluff Lake (“D” and “Claude”) were mined first, followed by an underground mine (“OP/DP”), followed by three other pits (“DJN,” “DJX,” and “DJ”). All mining and processing at Cluff Lake ceased in 2002 after 22 years of operations, and with 62 million pounds of U3O8 produced. In addition to the mill, operational facilities at Cluff Lakealso included a tailings management area with a two-stage liquid effluent treatment system and surface water diversion ditches, a residential camp area, and various other site infrastructure. Although tailings management and water treatment strategies have improved since the 1980s, the environmental assessment performed as part of the Cluff Lake decommissioning project provides a glimpse of what could occur if a modern uranium mining and processing operation were sited in Virginia.

A Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) environmental assessment to guide the decommissioning work was completed in 2003 (CNSC, 2003), and actual decommissioning was initiated in 2004. CNSC (2003) concluded that the primary environmental effects on completion of the decommissioning would be the migration of contaminants from existing sources (e.g., tailings and waste rock piles) to both groundwater and surface water. Most surface waters in the vicinity of the former mine/mill complex received no direct discharge and therefore were negligibly or only slightly affected by previous operations. Island Lake, however, was adversely affected because of its location immediately downstream of the mill effluent treatment systems. Measured mean annual concentrations of total dissolved solids, sulfate, chloride, uranium, and molybdenum in Island Lake in 2002 were two or three orders of magnitude higher than during the baseline (i.e., pre-mining) monitoring period.

Acid mine drainage (AMD) from the Claude waste rock pile caused contamination of the Claude pit, resulting in greatly elevated levels of sulfate, total dissolved solids, uranium, nickel, arsenic, and radium-226. The relatively poor water quality of the Claude pit necessitated pumping water from the pit to maintain a water level below that of the adjacent lake to prevent transport of contaminants off-site. Groundwater has been similarly affected by AMD from the Claude waste rock, which has formed a shallow, acidic (pH < 4) groundwater plume with elevated levels of dissolved nickel (>10 mg/L) and uranium (>100 mg/L) migrating away from the waste rock pile.

Additional potential environmental hazards at the Cluff Lake site include the flooded mine workings and the tailings management area (Figure 6.1). The flooded underground mines represent a source of groundwater contamination and, if allowed to overflow, a potential surface water contamination source as well. The tailings management area was constructed as an unlined above grade facility, using an earthen dam to retain both solid and liquid tailings and enable chemical treatment of the mill effluent prior to discharge into Snake Creek and Island Lake. The tailings management area represents the principal on-site source of potential long-term environmental effects, although geotechnical evaluations of the earthen dam determined it to be stable, structurally sound, and in compliance with all design specifications. Given its location in a topographic low, constructed surface diversions were employed to isolate the tailings management area from the erosive effects of inflowing surface water.

A variety of mitigation options were considered as part of the environmental assessment process to address the remaining significant environmental issues at Cluff Lake with the explicit goal of minimizing long-term active mitigation activities (e.g., groundwater pumping, water treatment). Preferred mitigation strategies identified included (1) backfilling the pits with waste rock and capping with compacted till, (2) capping the Claude waste rock pile with a dry cover to minimize infiltration and AMD, (3) sealing of surface openings in underground mines to prevent overflows, (4) covering the tailings management area with a secondary layer of till, and (5) allowing natural recovery of Island Lakewater quality. Although these options are likely to mitigate the remaining environmental problems at Cluff Lake to a significant degree, experience has shown that the environmental legacy of uranium mining is persistent over long periods of time. Monitoring and assessment (including a structured follow-up program to evaluate the performance of the mitigation strategies) will play an important role in guiding implementation of any additional mitigation at the site (CNSC, 2003).

.....................................................................................................
National Research Council. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2012. doi:10.17226/13266.


Venlig hilsen,


Anne Albinus


2) 


---------- Videresendte meddelelser ----------
Fra: Gert Asmund
Dato: 14. april 2015 kl. 14.05
Emne: FW: Forespørgsel vedr. slide i præsentation_kendskab til god uranmine rehabilitation?
Til: "Anne Albinus



Kære Anne Albinus,
Tak for dit spørgsmål om eksempler på uranminer der er blevet nedlukket og rehabiliteret på en ordentlig måde.


Du referer til mit PowerPoint indlæg fra sidste år og til en IAEA rapport nr (IAEA-1630 2014) vedr. ‘environmental remediation’ hvor der i summary står:

“Many of these sites throughout the world have become orphaned, and are waiting for remediation. The publication notes that little progress has been made in the management of some of these sites, particularly in the understanding of associated environmental and health risks, and the ability to apply prediction to future environmental and health standards.”

Det er vores indtryk at der er meget stor forskel på hvorledes uran-mineselskaber gennem tiden har ryddet op og efterladt deres mineprojekt. I nogen tilfælde, specielt de uranminer der startede før 1970, må man sige at de har efterladt området i en miljømæssigt helt uacceptabel tilstand. I andre tilfælde, har selskabet, ifølge relevante myndigheders vurdering opfyldt alle gældende forpligtelse og myndighedes krav og har efterladt mineområdet opryddet i en for myndighederne acceptabel tilstand.
Eksempel på oprydning


Et eksempel på en oprydning som lever op til myndigheds krav for canadiske uranminer i nyere tid, (bl.a: http://nuclearsafety.gc.ca/eng/waste/uranium-mines-and-millswaste/index.cfm#Closed er Cluff Lake.
Cluff Lake betragtes som en model for rehabilitering af en mine som er blevet planlagt lige fra starten af mineprojektet. Stedet underkastes jævnlig  mijømonitering for at følge udviklingen i miljøtilstanden.

−        https://www.ceaa-acee.gc.ca/41B79974-docs/report_e.pdf

−        http://www.nuclearsafety.gc.ca/eng/the-commission/pdf/2009-06-10-Decision-AREVA-e-Edocs3405423.pdf

−        http://kiggavik.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Cluff-Lake-Detailed-Decommissioning-Plan-V2-Feb2009.pdf

−        http://us.areva.com/EN/home-983/areva-resources-canand-activities.html


Med venlig hilsen


Violeta Hansen og Gert Asmund
..........

From: Anne Albinus
Sent: 2. april 2015 06:52
To: Gert Asmund
Subject: Forespørgsel vedr. slide i præsentation_kendskab til god uranmine rehabilitation?

Kære Gert Asmund,
I din præsentation vedr. miljø og uran-minedrift<http://naalakkersuisut.gl/~/media/Nanoq/Files/Publications/Erhverv/uran%20oplysning%202014/DA/6%20Gert%20Uran-miljø-juni%202014-2%20DK.pdf> skriver du i en slide (Fra kampagner mod uranminer) , at "der er blevet ryddet godt op nogen steder".

Jeg er interesseret i at kende til uran-miner, der er blevet godt rehabiliteret, for i IAEA’s viewpoint on uranium mine rehabilitation (IAEA-1630 2014) vedr. ‘environmental remediation’  står der i Summary:

“Many of these sites throughout the world have become orphaned, and are waiting for remediation. The publication notes that little progress has been made in the management of some of these sites, particularly in the understanding of associated environmental and health risks, and the ability to apply prediction to future environmental and health standards.”

“It is noted that remediation objectives will ideally be defined a priori, i.e. before the design of any technical solution, and it is crucial to recognize that remediation activities are not just determined by radiological or health risks. In many cases, other factors will prevail in the definition of the adopted strategy, and public perception will always be a key driver.”


Venlig hilsen,

Anne



3/



National Research Council. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2012. doi:10.17226/13266.





4/ The final report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.


The Report of the Committee on Uranium Mining in Virginia;  
Committee on Earth Resources; National Research Council, 

The formal invited presenters were:

Hugh B. Miller, Colorado School of Mines
Dirk van Zyl, University of British Columbia
Kevin Scissons, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
Gary Delaney, Saskatchewan Geological Survey
Cory Hughes, Saskatchewan Geological Survey
Tim Moulding, Saskatchewan Ministry of Environment
James Keil, Saskatchewan Ministry of Labour Relations and Workplace Safety Radiation
Theresa McClenaghan, Canadian Environmental Law Association
Richard Gladue, AREVA Resources Canada, Inc. 

5/ Oplæg IAs Uran Seminar Narsaq 11.6.16



Ingen kommentarer:

Send en kommentar