Title of paper

7. Conclusion

The voices of workers aired in this paper point to a sense of powerlessness and sheer frustration. When they ask questions about the reasons for their ailing health, they are asked to provide scientific evidence. Many former workers died because their treatment was delayed due to lack of resources, money and information. Due to the increasing unemployment rates in Namibia (currently just below 40%), and widespread retrenchments in the mining sector, job opportunities and possible revenues to be derived from mining companies might be perceived as more important than the health of workers. A worker explained the contradictory position in which many find themselves:
“We keep the job as a security measure, your heart is telling you to work but your mind is telling you to go. We need jobs, we will always work, but the truth is important to know if there is something going to happen to you.”
Workers indicated that they want to experience some sort of justice in their life time. They know it is going to take very long for such a process to take place or justice to be served. They were hoping that someday an open debate about the implications of exposure to radiation will take place, at least for the sake of their children. During our conversations with current and former workers, it was clear they were desperate for answers. The days of apartheid are over. Namibian workers need to enjoy the fruits of independence – that includes honesty and transparency from employers. Employers should not only enjoy the labour of Namibian workers, but they should own up to whatever scars they have caused on Namibian workers. These scars should be remedied through a clear compensation plan. It is high time for Rössing to start asking itself two questions:

How will the company remedy what has been damaged?

How can we prevent further damage?

8. References

Ahmed, J.U. 1993. Report of the IAEA technical co-operation mission to Namibia on the assessment of radiation safety at the Rössing Uranium Mine. IAEA.
Shindondola-Mote, H. 2009. Uranium Mining in Namibia: the mystery behind low level radiation. Windhoek. LaRRI.

9. Further reading recommendations

Shindondola-Mote, H. 2009. Uranium Mining in Namibia: the mystery behind low level radiation. Windhoek. LaRRI.
Dropkin, G. / D. Clark. 1992. Past Exposure: Revealing Health and Environmental Risks of Rössing Uranium. London. Namibia Support Committee.
Radiation Impacts of Uranium Mining

By Bertchen Kohrs

1. Introduction

For 100 years it has been well-known, that uranium mining can cause lung cancer. The German mine workers called it Schneeberger lung disease, but at that time they did not know that it was induced by uranium. Today, kidney diseases and diseases of the respiratory tract are proven to be effects of exposure to uranium and its decay products. A diversity of other diseases as cancers, blood diseases, mental disorders and birth defects were found in health studies on workers in uranium mines over the past years (Lindemann, 2008).

2. Dangers of radioactivity

Uranium is a natural, radioactive and chemo-toxic heavy metal found in traces in rocks, soil, plants and water. When digested with food or liquid or inhaled, uranium is a potential health risk and may affect all forms of life due to the impact of radiation from uranium isotopes and its decay elements and the toxicity of uranium as a heavy metal (Lindemann, 2008).
One has to distinguish between the situation before and after uranium mining. As long as uranium remains buried in the soil, the radiation levels at the surface are considered low. When uranium deposits are mined, the natural situation changes completely and uranium and its decay products become more hazardous to the environment and people due to radioactive and toxic contamination of air, water and soil and the ingestion and inhalation of uranium and its decay products by humans. Especially mine workers are threatened through inhalation of radioactive and toxic dust and radon gas, one of the various decay products of uranium (Chareyron, 2012).
Even decades after shut down of uranium mines and mills, the radioactive contamination of the environment and the danger of exposure to human beings will remain for a long time. This is due to the uranium’s extremely long half-life of 4.5 billion years. The tailings as a waste product from the mills contain all the radioactive metals of the uranium decay chain which have not been extracted during the milling process. Especially thorium 230 with a half-life of 75,000 years and radium 226 with a half-life of 1,600 years, pose a danger to the environment and human beings (Chareyron, 2012).
There is no firm basis of a ‘safe’ level of exposure to radiation above the natural background for stochastic effects.⁴¹ There are many sources emitting radiation below the natural background level. This makes it extremely difficult to isolate the stochastic effects. As a result, there is no firm, scientific basis for a ‘safe’ level of exposure. The assumption consistent with the evidence is that any exposure to radon gas will cause a proportional increase in the incidence of lung cancer (Shriprakash: 12).
In 1973, the International Commission for Radiological Protection (ICRP) made a statement reflecting on exposure to radiation: “Substantial epidemiology information, which has been developing in recent years, will eventually constitute a very solid basis on which exposure limits will be based.” ICRP referred to ALARA which stands for “As Low As Reasonable Achievable”. This is a radiation principle for minimising radiation doses and releases of radioactive materials by employing all reasonable methods. ALARA is not only a sound safety principle, but is a regulatory requirement for all radiation safety programmes.

3. Health activities by Rössing

The uranium content in the ore mined and milled at the Rössing uranium mine is low ranging between 100 and 300 ppm (0.01 and 0.03%). However, there is no safe dose for radiation and the danger of low-level radiation is a threat to mine workers and the population living in surrounding areas. Diseases induced by low-level radiation may still occur after 10, 20 or more years after exposure. Often workers do not recognize their bad health condition as an occupational disease.
Most workers at Rössing are not well informed about the danger they are exposed to through contaminated dust, radiation and toxicity. Workers’ concerns about negative health effects date back as far as 1978 when they complained about problems of the respiratory system, only two years after the mine started production.
In 1979, Rössing hired a newly trained Namibian medical doctor, Dr Wotan Swiegers, to build a clinic and formulate occupational health guidelines. His expertise was on radiation and nuclear issues. He purchased equipment for performing x-rays, annual check-ups, and urine and sputum analysis. In cooperation with the South African Bureau of Standards, he set up a system to monitor the monthly radiation exposure of workers in the Final Product Recovery area where radiation is by far the highest in the entire mining and milling process (Hecht, 2008: 203-204).
Workers were ordered to wear uncomfortable protective equipment with little explanation of its purpose. They never received results of their medical tests or their monthly exposure to radiation (Hecht, 2008: 304). Naturally, this resulted in suspicion towards the system. The workers increasingly complained about deteriorating health conditions and illnesses they never experienced before working for Rössing.
The Mine Workers Union of Namibia (MUN) became concerned and wanted an independent assessment of the situation. Being approached by Greg Dropkin, a British activist working for PARTiZANS (People Against Rio Tinto Zinc And Subsidiaries – a London grassroots organisation), MUN was afraid of losing many jobs. However, the publication ‘Past Exposure’ by Dropkin and Clark in 1992 exposed that dust levels in some areas considerably exceeded Rössing’s own standards and that dust levels of air-borne uranium exceeded ICRP guidelines. As a response to the publication, experts from IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) were invited by Rössing to inspect the mine. A five-member team spent two weeks taking readings on dust, radiation and other contaminants. Their report concluded that the mine’s medical surveillance programme facilities were outstanding, that Rössing’s data were reliable and that radiation levels were much lower than current international levels (Hecht, 2008: 309).

In 2013, Earthlife Namibia with the assistance of the Labour Resource and Research Institute (LaRRI) conducted a study to better understand the effects of radiation and toxicity on the health of the mine workers due to uranium mining activities. 50 current and former workers employed by Rössing Uranium were interviewed on working, safety and health conditions. Workers employed during the early years of Rössing specified the total absence of safety and health regulations which were only implemented in the 1980s about five to six years after production had started. The workers were totally unaware of the danger they were exposed to. They, however, worried about the deterioration of their health and the strange diseases they never experienced before.

Many workers complained that they are always declared fit for work by Rössing’s medical practitioners although they are hardly able to perform their job because of suffering from respiratory diseases and diverse other ailments. They are never told the truth about their medical condition and lost confidence in Rössing’s medical staff. The older workers all said they know workers who either died or are dying of cancer or other diseases, mainly after retirement. Many workers said they would rather not work for Rössing, however, they have a family to support and due to the high unemployment in the country they have no other choice (Earthlife Namibia, 2014). Nowadays some miners have a better understanding on the effects long-term, low-level radiation can have on their health.

Access to the medical reports repeatedly demanded by the employees was refused by the doctors because it is against “medical ethics, (…) the data belong to Rössing, therefore this information is not to be divulged to any person” (Hecht, 2012: 304).

Rössing’s parent company Rio Tinto in London faced health claims when in 1998 Anne Carlson claimed compensation on behalf of her husband, former Rössing Uranium miner Peter Carlson who died in 1995 of oesophagus cancer. Rio Tinto blocked the claim with the argument that any trial should take place in Namibia rather than in London. Anne Carlson lived in South Africa (The Namibian, 11 May 1998).
In another case the former Rössing mine worker Edward Connelly, diagnosed with cancer, won his long legal battle in 1997 to bring his case for US$ 650,000 compensation to the UK (The Namibian, 25 July 1997). However, the case was dismissed because the time limit had elapsed (Conde, 2012: 9).