Assessment of the Jabiluka Project : report of the Supervising Scientist to the World Heritage Committee
Johnston, A.; Prendergast, J. B.; Bridgewater, Peter
E-Publications; E-Books; PublicationNT; Supervising Scientist Report; 138
Alligator Rivers Region
Main report--Appendix 2 of the Main Report. Submission to the Mission of the World Heritage Committee by some Australian Scientists ... --Attachment A. Johnston A. and Needham S. 1999. Protection of the environment near the Ranger uranium mine--Attachment B. Bureau of Meteorology 1999. Hydrometeorological analysis relevant to Jabiluka--Attachment C. Jones, R.N., Hennessy, K.J. and Abbs, D.J. 1999. Climate change analysis relevant to Jabiluka--Attachment D. Chiew, F and Wang, Q.J. 1999. Hydrological anaysis relevant to surface water storage at Jabiluka--Attachment E. Kalf, F. and Dudgeon, C. 1999. Analysis of long term groundwater dispersal of contaminants from proposed Jabiluka mine tailings repositories--Appendix 2 of Attachment E. Simulation of leaching on non-reactive and radionuclide contaminants from proposed Jabiluka silo banks.
Uranium mill tailings - Environmental aspects - Northern Territory - Alligator Rivers Region; Environmental impact analysis - Northern Territory - Jabiluka; Uranium mines and mining - Environmental aspects - Northern Territory - Jabiluka; Jabiluka - Environmental aspects
Supervising Scientist Report; 138
1 volume (various pagings) : illustrations, maps
https://hdl.handle.net/10070/462403; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/462400; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/462405; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/462406; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/462408; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/462409; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/462411
14 Similarly, uranium in its natural state does not pose a particularly severe radiation threat. Exposure to uranium and its radioactive progeny needs to be controlled but the inherent radioactivity of uranium and its progeny is sufficiently low that ensuring that people do not receive exposures that would be harmful is relatively straightforward. It is only when uranium is used as fuel in a reactor that fission reactions result in a large number of radioactive products which produce high levels of ionising radiation. Thus, on scientific grounds, there is no reason why water collected at Jabiluka could not be discharged into the surface waters of the Magela floodplain under a suitably designed control regime that would protect both people and ecosystems. The proposal by ERA that these waters should be totally contained at the mine site was made in response to social concerns and perceptions, not scientific evidence. The long-term threats to the wetlands of Kakadu arising from the storage of uranium mill tailings at Jabiluka have also been assessed. Because the tailings will be stored at a significant depth below the surface of the land, physical dispersion of the tailings will not be possible for millions of years. The whole land mass would need to be eroded away and by that time the wetlands of Kakadu would no longer exist. Even then, the threat to future generations is insignificant because the residual uranium and its radioactive progeny would be present at low concentrations and would be mixed, when dispersed, with the inert material surrounding the current orebody. Dispersion of radionuclides and other constituents of the tailings in groundwater has been shown to present no threat to the wetlands of Kakadu or the people who live there in either the short-term or the long-term. The conclusion of this review, therefore, is that, contrary to the views expressed by the Mission, the natural values of Kakadu National Park are not threatened by the development of the Jabiluka uranium mine and the degree of scientific certainty that applies to this assessment is very high. There would appear, therefore, to be no justification for a decision by the World Heritage Committee that the natural World Heritage values of Kakadu National Park are in danger as a result of the proposal to mine uranium at Jabiluka.