Title of paper

4. MUN activities

Leaders of the Mine Workers Union of Namibia (MUN)⁴² also realised that in order to protect the workers, they had to focus on health and safety issues which acquired detailed knowledge of the workplace and the danger the employees were exposed to. Important was to understand the linkage between exposure to dust, toxicity and radiation and the health of the workers. From Rössing they required access to the workers’ medical and personnel records. However, knowledge about production and workers’ exposure was not in Rössing’s interest and tension built up between MUN and the company’s management.
MUN representatives visited uranium mines in Canada learning about international practices. With this knowledge MUN wanted to make an assessment of the Namibian workplace. In 1992, MUN hired Reinhard Zaire, a Herero-speaking medical student from the Free University Berlin, Germany. Zaire chose to do his research on the health status of Rössing’s employees and started his study on ‘epidemiological evaluation of the mine workers at Rössing with specific reference to cancer’. Zaire apparently found chromosomal alterations in workers which increases the risk developing cancer and can cause genetic damage in offspring. Rio Tinto disputed his findings with two internationally recognised scientists who concluded that there was ‘no chromosomal aberration’ (Lloyd, 2001).

5. Conclusion

There is scientific evidence that long-term exposure to low-level radiation can have negative impacts on the health of mine workers. This may occur many years after exposure to radioactive substances, in many casers after retirement. Mine workers are not properly informed about the danger of radioactive exposure and therefore do not realise the linkage between their ill health and former working conditions.
Workers who are ill should be monitored and treated independently. In order to assess the real impact on workers’ health a proper epidemiology study based on all present and past cases should be carried out by independent medical and epidemiological experts.

6. References

Chareyron, B. 2012. Unpublished presentation held at a seminar on uranium mining organised by Earthlife Namibia in Windhoek, Namibia.
Conde, M. / G. Kallis. 2012. The global uranium rush and its African frontier. Effects, reactions and social movements in Namibia. Global Environmental Change; at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2012.03.07; last accessed 22 December 2013.
Earthlife Namibia. 2014. Study on low level radiation of Rio Tinto’s Rössing uranium mine workers. Forthcoming soon.
Hecht, G. 2012. Being Nuclear – Africans and the Global Uranium Trade. Cambridge / London. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Lindemann, I. 2008. Hazards of Uranium. Unpublished presentation held at a workshop on uranium organised by Earthlife Namibia and LaRRI in Windhoek, Namibia.
Lloyd, D.C. et. al. 2001. In Radiation Research, 155: 809-817.
Shriprakash, no year. Information booklet on uranium and radioactivity. New Delhi. Human Rights Law Network.

The Nuclear Fuel Chain – how is Namibia involved?

By David Fig

1. The nuclear fuel chain

When we talk about the nuclear fuel chain, we are describing a process of production from ‘cradle to grave’, all through the necessary stages. The reason why the nuclear fuel chain is of interest to us is that we cannot consider the mining of uranium in isolation. It is only one step in the chain. The other steps also have important consequences for people and the planet. Therefore if we neglect the other steps in the chain we will have a very narrow understanding of uranium’s impacts. It is important to remember that the chain is global, with what we call a division of labour between the different processes. Some of the links in the chain may happen in one country, but other steps will have to be conducted elsewhere. For example, Namibia has uranium mines, but there is a debate about whether other links in the chain – such as energy production - should also occur in the country. There is a debate internationally about whether Iran should be allowed to possess enrichment technology (another link in the chain) because this may enable Iran to build nuclear weapons.
Before we consider the chain as a whole, let’s look at the links which make it up. We will make use of examples of mining from Namibia, and other links in the fuel chain from South Africa and Britain. Some of the nuclear energy generated in South Africa is imported into Namibia.

1.1 Mining and milling

The uranium found in rock formations under the ground can be mined by removing the ore, the mass of rock, and extracting the uranium. There is only a small amount of uranium in the rock, in most cases under 1 kg per tonne of rock. Mining occurs either underground using a series of shafts and tunnels, or it can occur in open pit, when the ore is removed layer by layer to form a massive hole in the ground. In Namibia, both Rössing and Langer Heinrich operate on an open pit basis.
The largest producing uranium mines in 2011

Mine	Country	Main owner	Type		Production (tU)	% of world
McArthur River	Canada	Cameco		underground	7686	14
Olympic Dam	Australia	BHP Billiton		by-product/ underground	3353	6
Arlit	Niger	Somair/ Areva		open pit	2726	5
Tortkuduk	Kazakhstan	Katco JV/ Areva		In situ leaching	2608	5
Ranger	Australia	ERA (Rio Tinto 68%)		open pit	2240	4
Kraznokamensk	Russia	ARMZ		underground	2191	4
Budenovskoye 2	Kazakhstan	Karatau JV/Kazatomprom-Uranium One		In situ leaching	2175	4
Rossing	Namibia	Rio Tinto (69%)		open pit	1822	3
Inkai	Kazakhstan	Inkai JV/Cameco		In situ leaching	1602	3
South Inkai	Kazakhstan	Betpak Dala JV/ Uranium One		In situ leaching	1548	3
Top 10 total					27,951	52%

When the uranium is mined it is in the form of solid rock. In order to market it, it needs to be ground down to a fine powder we call yellowcake (U₃O₈). Usually this happens on site, in a milling plant. The yellowcake is placed in metal drums and transported to its next destination.