Uranium Mining, Human Rights and the Environment: They say development, they mean DESTRUCTION

Transcription

1 Uranium Mining, Human Rights and the Environment: They say development, they mean DESTRUCTION by Guenter Wippel, October 2008, Presentation in Windhoek, Namibia 1. Human Rights UN Declaration of 1948 and Covenants Human Rights have many roots in the history of mankind. In following the two world wars, the horror of genocide in Nazi concentration camps and the horror of nuclear bombs dropped on Japan causing more than instant deaths, the global community decided to adopt the a Charta of Human Rights, through the UN General Assembly, Dec. 10 th, Here are two articles relevant for the issue of uranium mining and public health: Article 3 Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person. (UN - Universal Declaration of Human Rights) Article 25 (1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control. (UN - Universal Declaration of Human Rights) Basic Human Rights as adopted by the UN in 1948, were amended later on by two major International Covenants, one of them the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966). These Covenants are binding for the states / governments who adopted them / ratified them. Article 1 1. All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development. 2. All peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligations arising out of international economic co-operation, based upon the principle of mutual benefit, and international law. In no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence. (UN International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights)

2 Article 7 The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to the enjoyment of just and favourable conditions of work which ensure, in particular: (a) Remuneration which provides all workers, as a minimum, with: (i) Fair wages ( ) (ii) A decent living for themselves and their ( ) (b) Safe and healthy working conditions; (UN International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights) Article The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health. 2. The steps to be taken by the States Parties to the present Covenant to achieve the full realization of this right shall include those necessary for: (a) ( ) (b) The improvement of all aspects of environmental and industrial hygiene; (c) The prevention, treatment and control of epidemic, endemic, occupational and other diseases; (UN - International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights) Thus, there are some obligations for states / state governments in regard to health and well-being of their citizens. 2. Uranium mining and Human Rights Uranium mining activities as well as other mining and industrial activities have jeopardized and violated these rights repeatedly and continuously, and are continuing to do so. In the past, 50ies to 60ies, and in some parts of the world, into the 1990ies, in some even today (e.g. India), uranium mining has taken plane / is taking place under circumstances which include relocation / forced relocation of local people, often without or without adequate compensation serious health hazards for the workers, including cancer and other final diseases, partially also endangering their families (e.g. through uranium dust carried into the homes, houses built out of tailings or on tailings, drinking water contaminated through uranium etc.) endangering public health: people living in vicinity of uranium mines, for example through seepage of radionuclides into the water table and into the drinking water, through physical instability of tailings dams, wind blowing dust with radioactive materials into housing areas, ventilation shafts blowing radioactive exhaust air into settlements, agricultural areas contaminated etc.

3 Moreover, the culture and way of life of people has been and continues to be affected adversely by uranium mines: Traditional land use, e.g. hunting and trapping in Canada, cattle raising in Niger etc., have become impossible, depriving people of their livelihood as well as of their culture / way of life, turning some of them into wage workers, and leaving others in poverty. Major disruptions within communities when one part of the community is in favor of a uranium / nuclear development and another part is opposed to it (e.g. Wyhl, Canada / Northern Saskatchewan etc.) Forced developments which are not developments coming from the community itself by its own decisions, but forced onto them by outside powers DESTRUCTION. The decommissioning of uranium mines is in many cases a disaster. 1. financially: Many uranium mining companies have gone bankrupt, leaving the cleanup to the state / taxpayer Result: Privatization of profits, socialisation of costs For countries less capable of paying huge amounts for any kind of remediation, there is an high danger that uranium mining areas will become sacrifice areas. 2. economically: in those cases, where remediation of uranium mining tailings was done, it has turned out extremely expensive. e.g. Germany: approx 7 billion for clean-up of old uranium mines in former East Germany e.g. US: The reclamation of only ONE tailings facility cost 300 million US $ Result: Funds which might be used for other developments (health care, education etc.) need to be spent on u mining remediation. Thus, uranium mining as well as nuclear power plants, are a pre-determination for many many years to come they are not just a decision for today or the near future, they are NOT a decision for the life-time of a mine or a nuclar power plant (NPP) they are a decision for the next years A decision that a state, a community will have to deal with u mining tailings or nuclear waste for all future times. NOTE: The nuclear industry sometimes argues that these arguments are also valid for other developments of mines, industries etc. implying these considerations would be invalid or the like. They ARE probably right for other developments as well and thus, ANY development should be evaluated in these regards.

4 3. Some experiences of people with uranium mining The History of Uranium Mining and the Navajo People This history details how the federal government deliberately avoided dealing with a health disaster among Navajo uranium miners, even though uranium mining was considered very much a federal matter. For up to 2 decades after the harmful effects of uranium mining were known, protective safeguards were not implemented. The position of scientists in the government who were knowledgeable and who often argued for protection was seriously compromised. We are hardly the first to conclude that these delays represent a gross violation of the rights of the miners. (from: Doug Brugge, PUBLIC HEALTH THEN AND NOW in: American Journal of Public Health, September 2002, Vol 92, No. 9) Experience of Closure of Beaverlodge Mine, Uranium City, Northern Saskatchewan, Canada Fourteen years after closure of the mine in 1982, the population of Uranium City had fallen to 201 with 66 occupied dwellings. During its operating life, the Beaverlodge mining complex developed and accumulated: an underground mining complex, plus assorted underground and surface satellite mines with 35 shafts; mill, process chemicals, and support facilities; waste management systems with 10.1 million tonnes of tailings; tailings lines and spills; approximately 40 million tonnes of waste rock; site infrastructure such as roads, electrical distribution, sewage system; townsite; and hazardous wastes such as transformers with polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). The Beaverlodge operation was the first uranium site in Canada to have a planned decommissioning with regulatory approval. ( ) Neither the local communities nor the public were consulted or invited to participate in the closure planning or implementation by either the Company or the government agencies.

5 The decline of Uranium City left a long-term legacy of very high social, economic, and human costs in the form of unsafe and derelict abandoned buildings, as well as education facilities, without any provision of either policing or medical support. They remain a public safety hazard to this day. (Graham F. Parsons and Ron Barsi; Chapter 7. Uranium Mining in Northern Saskatchewan: A Public- Private Transition (Part 2)) An observation from the Mirarr experience and from Yvonne Margarula from the excellent publication Yellowcake Country. This is available via and I commend it to you: 'Uranium mining has completely upturned our lives. Uranium mining has also taken our country away from us and destroyed it billabongs and creeks are gone forever, there are hills of poisonous rock and great holes in the ground with poisonous mud where there used to be nothing but bush. 'Everyone seems to be only concerned with what is happening today or next year, yet no scientist can tell us properly what will happen at the mine site in a hundred years time when they are all gone and no-one cares. 'None of the promises last but the problems always do.' from: 4. U mining Nuclear Fuel Chain and Human Rights Uranium has only two uses: nuclear bombs und nuclear power plants (NPPs). (Use of radioactive materials for medicinal purposes is on one hand questionable and on the other hand would need only very small amounts of U compared to the mines of today). The whole nuclear fuel chain inevitably leads to the production of nuclear waste - be it tailings from uranium mining, be it depleted uranium from the enrichment process, be it spent fuel rods from nuclear power plants, i.e. high level nuclear waste. The longevity of these wastes uranium mining tailings stay radioactive and toxic / poisonous for hundreds of thousands of years (e.g. due to the half-life of U-234 of ca yrs) poses a serious burden on future generations. We are dealing with Time Horizons which are far beyond any human experience so far but companies and some scientists try to make us believe to be able to store these wastes safely for hundreds of thousands of years.

6 Making a decision for uranium mining, nuclear power plants or nuclear waste storage means to make a decision NOT for a few years, not for the lifespan of a nuclear installation, not for hundreds of years it is a decisions for thousands and thousands of years. AND it pre-determines ANY future development of an area, a region or a state. Big amounts of money will have to be spent on clean-up (as far as that is possible at all), and these monies and resources are NOT available for other developments such schools, health care etc. It is highly questionable whether putting such burdens on future generations is compatible with Human Rights Human Rights of future generations. In our systems, future generations do not have a voice. 5. Human Rights and Radiation Protection 5.1. The ALARA principle Radiation protection as performed by the government agencies and committees, is based among other things on the ALARA principle. What means ALARA? As Low As Reasonably Achievable It does NOT say: as low as POSSIBLE. What does this mean: According to ALARA, radiation levels, be it for miners, be it for people living around the mines, should be limited to levels which can be achieved reasonably, i.e. which would not be a hinderance for nuclear installations, be it U mines, be it NPPs or others. In short, the protection from radiation is only performed to an extent to which it is economically feasible NOT to a level which would be, for example, be technically POSSIBLE. Basicly, this should not really be called protection. It is a trade-off between human health and economic development, at the disadvantage of human health which is protected only weakly to the extent where it does not pose an obstacle to the economic development of nuclear power. This may be seen as a violation of basic Human Rights (right to life / health) IAEA and the WHO

7 The WHO which is supposed to work to monitor and promote health worldwide has an agreement with the IAEA that the WHO is not allowed to publish anything on the health effects of nuclear installations without consulting the IAEA first. This fact has meanwhile lead to major protests in Europe and a campaign against this practice. What does it mean? The WHO cannot do independent research on the effects of radiation, and if it should do so, it would not be able / allowed to publish results which the IAEA does not like to be published. Independent research into the effects of radioactive materials be it through radiation, be it through their chemical toxicity is hindered on an international level Data The data of uranium mine workers are not released from the companies to the workers themselves, nor to trade unions or other institutions, nor to the scientific community for independent screening and research. Holding back these data is a violation of the right to one s own data ( informationelles Selbstbestimmungsrecht ). The claim of some doctors and company representatives that these data would be property of the doctor / of the company cannot be accepted, and is not compatible with international standards. 6. A New Nuclear Frontier? The nuclear industry is on the decline since a number of years. Please note that NONE of the Central European countries which are looked upon as some of the technically most advanced and economically most powerful countries - has built a new nuclear reactor since approx 15 yrs. The same holds true for the US and Canada. There ARE a number of declarations of intention from governments, government officials, companies etc. FACT is, however, that the installed capacity of nuclear power has declined, and it will decline further since new NPPs are not being built at the rate as old ones are phased out. Looking at the U mining industry, the U mining industry is pushing for new mines in al parts of the world preferably in so-called Third-World-Countries.

8 The uranium industry is trying to open up a new nuclear frontier. And the frontline will be right in what is called Third-World -countries - where the level of information is comparatively low - where unemployment is high and people tend to take any job just to be able to feed their families - where regulations through Government / state agencies are either not existent or not enforced. In the light of - the history of uranium mining - the failure of the uranium industry to a large extent to clean-up after themselves - the dangers for the health for workers, for people in the vicinity, for the environment - the fact that uranium mining has the capacity to destroy peoples means of existence and way of life on a long-term basis - the fact that the uranium mining is the beginning of the nuclear chain which inevitably leads to nuclear waste dangerous for hundreds of thousands of years, with the capacity to endanger seriously future generations - we conclude that uranium mining as a beginning step of the nuclear chain is not compatible with human rights. They say: "development" - they mean: DESTRUCTION