JOnly ten kilometers south of the entrance to the southern edge of the Grand Canyon there is a huge hole in the ground where miners hope to make it big with one of the rarest but deadliest elements on earth – uranium. Despite being only about 17 acres in size, the Canyon mine extends more than 1,400 feet to the earth’s surface, and critics are concerned that it could scar the Grand Canyon itself and contaminate the water of a nearby tribe.
Mining has been occurring in the area around the Grand Canyon since the early 1900s. During the atomic period of the fifties, it was a bit like the Wild West – interest in uranium mining skyrocketed and it developed into a highly unregulated industry, where people walked around with Geiger counters and diggers hoping for it. to sell to the government. for profit.
As the price of uranium fell, so did interest in the region’s mining. In the mid-2000s, however, minerals were a huge increase in the market, and the craze increased again. Although better regulated, by the end of the decade, there were more than a thousand new demands for uranium mining in the Grand Canyon area.
The Interior Ministry imposed a 20-year ban on introducing new claims in 2012 because they were unsure about the environmental consequences of uranium mining in the region. It banned all new mining activities near the Grand Canyon.
Conservationists were ecstatic about this. But there was only one small problem.
Using a 1872 mining law that critics call obsolete, the USFS determined that miners who had established ‘valid existing rights’ to mine before the ban could do so. To have such rights, a miner must have discovered and excavated a “valuable mineral deposit” before the ban – one that can be obtained profitably, removed and marketed.
Beast Travel Digest
Get the whole world in your inbox.
The USFS found that one mine possessed ‘valid existing rights’ and was thus exempt from the ban – Canyon Mine.
The ban in 2012 continued to establish investigation from both sides. Conservationists have argued the ban should be made permanent. Meanwhile, the Trump administration has taken steps to eliminate it and make uranium more profitable as a geopolitical strategy.
Accordingly, on February 26, 2019, Representative Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) introduced the Grand Canyon Centennial Protection Act, a bill aimed at permanently banning all new mining in the region and protecting the Grand Canyon from industry. . interests.
The bill was passed by a partisan vote by the House and was introduced in the Senate, where it is also expected to pass.
While conservationists see it as a good first step, the single issue remains – Canyon Mine, which granted the USFS ruling in 2012, will remain exempt from the permanent ban.
To get to the controversy of Canyon Mine, you do not have to go too far down the shaft. In fact, even the name of the mine itself is a point of contention.
The mine, which has been called Canyon Mine for several years and several decades, was recently renamed the Pinyon Planes Mine by its owner, Energy Fuels.
Outlets have speculated that this was done to draw less attention to the mine. Curtis Moore, the VP of marketing and corporate development for the company, confirmed this when he told The Daily Beast that it was done, “because conservationists make it look like we’re in the Grand Canyon mine, which we are not. “
Taylor McKinnon of the Center for Biological Diversity, a non-profit organization, laughed it off: “They call it Canyon Mine in the first place because of how close it is to the Grand Canyon – not us,” he said. He added – “It’s funny, I do not think Pinyon Planes is a real place at first.”
As you dig deeper into the mine, the story only becomes more complex, obscure and strange.
Get it: in the 35 years it has been in use, no uranium ore has ever been extracted from the mine. Although this is partly due to a lack of demand for uranium, it does not mean that the mine is not filled with other problems – or at least the possibility of catastrophic problems.
To begin with, the mine operates according to a statement from the USFS Environmental Impact Assessment, as required by the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) dating back to 1986, which was originally disputed by the Havasupai tribe in court. Despite the ban and the increase in knowledge about the hydrology of the Grand Canyon, as well as calls from conservationists and local tribes to conduct a new study, the USFS refused to do so. A federal appeals court upheld this ruling by the USFS in 2013.
Moore defends the decision, saying it is unnecessary to have a new study done. “It’s like getting a permit for your house,” Moore told The Beast. “We were already approved – why are you getting a new one?”
McKinnon, of course, sees it differently. He said they had not extracted any uranium, and he laughed: ‘If every CLAIM had taken five years, they would now be able to do all four. The truth is, “he added,” that they do not want to deepen the facts and the truth because they are afraid. “
In 2017, however, the inevitable happened. Despite the original statement for the impact on the environment in 1986, which claims that the mine would have ‘no significant impact’ on the environment or the public interest, and also suggested that ‘floods were almost impossible’, Energy Fuels’ an aquifer in the mine pierced water flowed out.
How “bad” this situation is depends on who you ask.
For environmentalists, it is as close to disaster as it gets. Several groups, including the Center for Biological Diversity, have called for the mine to be shut down and closed due to the floods and the company’s response to it, which according to conservationists and the Arizona Daily Sun spraying polluted water into forests and loading water into trucks to take to Utah. However, energy fuel does not see a problem.
In fact, when The Daily Beast mentioned the flood to Energy Fuels, Moore defended it, claiming it was “done on purpose,” “all part of the plan” and “in accordance with the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ). and the USFS. ”
Moore explained that the aquifer they are piercing is isolated, separate from the aquifers. Environmentalists are most afraid of becoming infected – groundwater aquifers – and that there is ‘no evidence’ and ‘no chance’ that it has an impact at present or in the future. will affect the Grand Canyon.
Of course, environmentalists are already worried that this is happening. McKinnon said: “No one can assure us or them that this pierced aquifer is not connected to the Grand Canyon springs – which could drain the fountains and contaminate the groundwater.”
While Moore said they have monitors to test groundwater, environmentalists are urging more extensive monitoring, especially as ADEQ acknowledged that if uranium leaks into groundwater, there is no plan to fix it. not, ‘McKinnon said. .
‘The bottom line,’ McKinnon argues, ‘is that they’ve created a flood problem. The water flooded and pumped out of the mine exceeds EPA standards for dissolved uranium and arsenic. There are no guarantees in the long run – there are no guarantees that mining will not harm the deep aquifer in the near future, even if it is not harmed now. ”
Moore argues that floods have been drastically reduced over the past few years, and that it is not relevant to compare them to EPA standards for drinking water, as environmentalists regularly do.
“No one suggests you drink the water,” Moore meant.
From now on and as a result of these floods, the ADEQ is actually in the midst of developing a new draft protection permit for the aquifer for the Pinyon aircraft mine, which is expected to be by 26 April.
While this may lead to the end of the Pinyon Planes mine, conservationists are not giving up hope.
“We have requested that they grant a closure permit, but we doubt it will happen,” McKinnon said.
For Moore, shutting down the mine would be a big mistake. He sees uranium as a path to a greener, carbon-free future. “These activists are anti-nuclear for some reason,” he said, adding, “although it’s the best way to address climate change.” He went so far as to claim that ‘all these allegations [made by conservationists] is not based on science or reality. ”
For conservationists, they only hope that this bill passes through the Senate, although it will be the first battle in what they consider a long war.
“The adoption of this legislation will demonstrate the need to handle Canyon Mine even more powerfully,” Taylor McKinnon said. He added: ‘But the bill itself is now. This is important, but much more needs to be done, including a multi-level cleanup and billions of dollars. ”