ABOUT
Smart discussion of the latest science and news on toxins in your food, water, and air, and what government agencies should be doing to protect public health. Written by EWG staff.
DONATE TO EWG!
Help us protect your health and environment! Please donate $5 to EWG today.
GET EWG'S TIPS & ACTION ALERTS
Sign Up here to receive email updates and tips from EWG and stay informed on the issues that matter most to you.

ENVIROBLOG VIA EMAIL
Join EWG's live chat with Chef Ann Cooper
School lunch: More fruits & veggies, please!
Texas Schools are Drilling for Dollars
Why do blowouts take so long to fix?
SEARCH ENVIROBLOG
FEATURED
Support the 2010 Safe Cosmetics Act. It's Urgent.
Why, oh why is there plastic in my aluminum water bottle?
Cell phone radiation series - Part 2: 8 Ways to reduce your exposure
Test Your Knowledge of Cosmetics Safety: 8 Myths Debunked
EWG's Tips for Parents: The Series
EWG's Tips to avoid BPA exposure
EWG on TV
Cutting the Pork from U.S. Farm Bill
Sunscreen safety & DC drinking water
Perchlorate in people, kids' personal care products & plastics, and sunscreen
BPA in baby formula & safe cosmetics
What can I do about fluoride in my water?
What is new carpet treated with? What can I do?
Are stainless steel water bottles safe?
Is mineral-based makeup safer?

PEOPLE TALKING TOXICS
TALK TO US
Did we miss something? Email Enviroblog.
« Matthew leaves Enviroblog | Main | Building the EcoManor »
A uranium free-for-all
According to The New York Times, a private enrichment company is asking the federal government to hand over an old stockpile of partially processed uranium, worth between $750 million and $3 billion. The United States Enrichment Corporation (USEC) doesn’t have the technology to process the uranium efficiently, and they don’t know how to scrounge up the necessary cash to modernize their processing facility. USEC also has a history of mismanaging finances. Still, they insist that the government should give the uranium to USEC to ensure that any new enrichment technology remains in the United States. USEC spokeswoman Elizabeth Stuckle claims that “it would be a win-win situation for everybody.”
Indeed, the nuclear power industry would win killer deals on uranium, the cost of which has risen dramatically in the past decade due to volatile oil prices and surging interest in energy “alternatives." Uranium mining is rapidly expanding in response to these price changes, with new extraction sites mushrooming throughout the western states.
But I don’t see anyone else winning from nuclear expansion. Mining activities are polluting water sources and encroaching upon public lands, and the debate about what to do with radioactive waste rages on. Subsidizing nuclear power might sound like a good idea to USEC, but blindly handing over precious resources on the backs of US taxpayers sure doesn’t sound like a winning solution to me.
Leave a comment