VK3AUU. I'm unclear about your claim that the tailings dam will be "covered over" at the end of the mine life. How do they propose to do that? I understood that these radioactive compounds must be submerged in water at all times to prevent toxic releases, therefore, monitoring must still be performed for perpetuity.

The UIC for some reason, fails to allude to Radium 226 which has a greater half life (1622 years) and continually produces its daughter product, Radon-222 during its much longer half life.

Uranium mining can never be viewed frivously as it is also responsible for significant releases of carbon based chemicals and other pollutants including radioactive emissions.

U mining also requires massive amounts of water and energy for its operations which is quite obscene given the current crisis we are now facing.

Mr Switowski's failure to discuss the environmental impacts of U mining has not gone unnoticed, whilst he endeavours to sell his heinous "clean and green" package of nuclear energy.

Messrs Bush and Howard can find billions of dollars to support the the war in Iraq but refuse to budget immediately for expansive renewable energy programmes.

Population explosions remain one of the largest threats to our remaining eco systems and to the survival of this planet. It is a problem beyond my capacity to offer any constructive solutions.

The fundamental problem with solar and wind power generation is that when running will not have the benefit of continued economic growth of the enormous calibre that fossil fuels have. Sun and wind are free.

You'll find that countries that do not rely on minerals for economic growth are more willing to utilize and develop non-fossil fuel for power generation.

Also, there are people, especially in Europe, who couldn't give a toss about the arguments between scientists on environmental degradation/climate change. They personally cannot avoid the effects on a daily basis, unlike us lucky 'head in the sand' Australians.

Europeans are also not so inclined to dismiss what happened at Chernobyl. The financial costs alone were enormous.

Our current economic philosophy is that without 'growth' we'll slide backwards. Many cannot imagine anything other than what went before. Therefore, progress means growth which means more of the same. Progress does not seem to be able to mean doing things differently, let alone significantly differently. Our pioneering forefathers met the same attitude way back when: it can't be done! You'll fall off the end of the Earth! It is wrong, God/the Economy is sure to punish you with hell/deprivation.

What is intelligent anyway, if it only means we can rationalize anything away?

Great article Marko. To expand on what you said, once said by someone else: 'All error and evil have within themselves the seed of their own destruction'.