Chris Harris sets out a persuasive argument against uranium mining and the nuclear industry. I'd just like to add to his comments. Firstly, the emphasis on nuclear power not only encourages more consumption of energy, but also diverts attention, research and investment away from truly renewable and truly clean energy sources.
Secondly - with the push to sell more uranium, will inevitably come the push to have Australia store nuclear wastes. The U.S.A in particular has already a tremendous problem with unstored nuclear wastes. For sure, they will pay Australian interests big bucks to have us take back their civilian and military wastes. Not only financial, but also moral pressure will be placed upon Australia to get into the nuclear cycle from cradle to grave. It's truly a grave thought.
Christina Macpherson www.antinuclearaustralia.com

The future is nuclear, of that there can be no doubt. Therefore the sooner we enter and play an Australian part in all aspects of the nuclear industry the better. Clearly uranium mining makes good economic sense. But even more important to my mind is the health and safety record of the nuclear industry. As unpalatable as it may seem to some the record of the nuclear industry in this area is outstandingly good.

How many times does it have to be explained that the Chernobyl accident will not be reproduced. The 13 or so remaining RBMK reactors have been modified and have functioned well in the last 20 years. Other reactors do not suffer the design faults of the original RBMK(positive void coefficient). The newest 4th generation reactors will be even safer when they come on line.

By the way there is a human mortality associated with wind mills, please see
http://www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk/pages/accidentData.htm

Do we Really want another Maralinga in Australia??

It is now over 50 years since the first bomb was detonated!!

When there is an accident (not if, but when) who will foot the bill??

And how long will it take for the Government of the day to accept blame??

Non Liability Health Care Treatment for Australian Participants in British Nuclear Tests in Australia.

It has taken various Governments 50 years to release a "Token Package" for the remaining survivors of the testing (to use the latest term) "WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION".

http://www.dva.gov.au/health/spec_programs/nuctest/index.htm

http://www.dva.gov.au/health/spec_programs/nuctest/faq.htm

For Information:
Australian Nuclear Veterans Association.

users.bigpond.net.au/anva/

Kryptonite lobby out in force I see. What do they have to say... mining uranium is the same as letting off atomic bombs at Maralinga... uranium is bad because it let's us consume energy.

<sigh> Forum mean IQ lower than expected... such is life.

Chris is right when he says that uranium won't last forever, but as other posters have remarked it will last a lot longer than 40 years. If by that time nuclear fusion has been made practicable, our energy resources will be unlimited, as the fuel for nuclear fusion reactors (remember the world's first fusion power station is currently under construction in France) is sea water. If we cannot get fusion to work, mankind is finished.

Another point that no-one seems to mention. Much has been made of the dangers of uranium, but coal contains on average 6 grams of uranium per ton, and the uranium is released into the atmosphere (along with a lot of other nasty chemicals) when it is burnt. Why don't we hear about this?

As far as abandoning our high energy lifestyle, and going back to the 19th century is concerned, that would be OK of we had the 19th century level of population. Most large cities today would be uninhabitable without energy, and millions would die. It is true we are addicted to a growth economy. The alternative, a non-growth economy, was last experienced in the 1930's and called the Great Depression. People didn't like that much either.

Fancy that, an article from a Bob Brownie about uranium without any facts.. who would have thunk it. Uranium mining has been banned in Australia's most geologically prospective States (WA and QLD) for many years under the weird "three mines policy" of the ALP (but meanwhile encouraged in SA - apparently there are good U atoms and bad U atoms depending on which State they are located). ICEBERG is correct. The increase in U price will see lots more exploration and lots more exploration will result in a lot more U being found. Compared to copper and gold, little historic effort has gone into looking for U.