Human Rights and the Environment

Case Study: Uranium Mining

Country: Australia

Region: Island Nations

Issues: Resource Extraction, Toxics, Water, Nuclear, Indigenous People, Public Participation

In South Australia, the byproducts of uranium mining have left aboriginal communities at risk. In 1995, Australia's federal government announced plans to bury nuclear waste from Sydney in the wild desert lands of South Australia near Woomera. A small group of aboriginal elders concerned about local groundwater contamination have resisted the proposed radioactive waste dump. While many of the region's water sources remain unexplored and lack surveyed documentation, they have sustained the aboriginal people and desert wildlife for thousands of years. The risk of nuclear waste contaminating scarce water sources in a region known as the driest state of the country is severe.[1]

In June 2004, an Australian Federal appeals court stopped the forced acquisition by federal authorities, stating that there was no "urgent necessity for the acquisition."[2] The following month, Australia's Prime Minister abandoned the dump plan, facing strong opposition in an election year.[3] Australia's nuclear authorities are now discussing a deal in which the U.S. Department of Energy would take the nuclear waste.[4]

In Northern Australian territories, problems were documented at a Rio Tinto mine in Kakadu National Park, where workers at the mine were exposed to drinking and bathing water with uranium levels 400 times greater than Australia's maximum safety standard. A series of leaks running into a feeder creek system of Kakadu's wetlands was responsible for the severe contamination. The mine was shut down shortly after federal and regional authorities began investigating the incidents.[5]

In September 2004, the Northern Territory's government announced plans to prosecute mine operator Energy Resources Australia (ERA) over the contamination resulting from Ranger mine. Since 1981, there have been more than 120 leaks, spills, and operating breaches at Ranger.[6] The operators of the controversial mine appeared in court in Darwin on February 4, 2005, to answer the charges brought against them. Environmental groups are calling on ERA to abandon further development plans at the mine and instead detail its rehabilitation and exit plans.[7]

[1] See Goldman Prize, Recipients, at http://www.goldmanprize.org/recipients/recipients.html (last visited Jan. 24, 2005).

[2] See Geocities, Australain Court Upsets Government Plan for Desert Nuclear Waste Dump, at http://www.geocities.com/nonucleardump/news12.htm (last visited Jan. 24, 2005).

[3] See Melbourne Indymedia, Federal Government Considering Offshore Nuclear Waste Dump (July 14, 2004), at http://www.melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2004/07/73865.php (last visited Jan. 24, 2005).

[4] See ABC Online, U.S. to Take Nuclear Waste From Australia (Jan. 21, 2005), at http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2005/s1286163.htm (last visited Jan. 25, 2005).

[5] See Australian Conservation Foundation, Kakadu Turns 25 as Uranium Leak Scandal Deepens, at http://www.acfonline.org.au/asp/pages/document.asp?IdDoc=1902 (last visited Feb. 28, 2005).

[6] See Australian Conservation Foundation, Safety Meltdown: ACF Welcomes Historic Legal Moves Against Kakadu Uranium Mine, at http://www.acfonline.org.au/asp/pages/document.asp?IdDoc=2174 (last visited Feb. 28, 2005).

[7] See Australian Conservation Foundation, Uranium Miner Faces Court on Kakadu Contamination Charges, at http://www.acfonline.org.au/asp/pages/document.asp?IdDoc=2322 (last visited Feb. 28, 2005).

Last Updated: 09/09/05