Uranium mining study is based on wrong date

Commentary

Mike Bowen |

11/7/2008 - 11/8/08

The study conducted by the antimining group, New Mexico Environmental Law Center, and cited in the Nov. 3 article "Economics of New Mexico's uranium mining debated," isn't a question of comparing apples to oranges, it is the academic equivalent of comparing apples to automobiles.

The latest salvo by the Environmental Law Center in an ongoing effort to thwart the mining and use of nuclear fuel refutes the careful and exhaustive study done by New Mexico State University's Arrowhead Center. Arrowhead's non-biased study on the economic impacts of the return of the uranium mining and milling industry in New Mexico is centered on numbers, not emotion.

ELC's study links the costs from past uranium mining cycles to future mining and milling operations. There are several flaws with that linkage. The mining companies that wish to operate in New Mexico are not the same companies that operated decades ago. In addition, state and federal agencies have improved regulations that enforce laws to protect the environment and local communities.

The new companies are on record as acknowledging the legacy issues and have expressed their desire to assist in funding the anticipated mine clean-up. However they are not responsible for creating the problem. As a show of good faith, the growing uranium industry provided monies to the state mining division for an audit of abandoned uranium mines in New Mexico. Does this sound like an irresponsible industry?

Not reported in the AP story are the economic benefits a returning uranium industry will provide. For instance, new capital expenditures of $3.2 billion as the industry prepares for mining to begin in the Grants Mineral Belt. More than 8,300 new jobs will be created during the operations phase of the industry, with an annual economic impact of $856 million. The total economic impact is estimated to be $26 billion over the study's 30-year period.

With lower than expected revenues predicted for the state oil and gas industry, New Mexico will need a new source of funding to keep the state growing. Projected State Tax Revenue (severance tax, resource excise tax, and conservation tax) from uranium production will total $740 million. Coupled with indirect taxes such as personal income, gross receipts and corporate income, NMSU's Arrowhead Center calculates that the total 30-year tax revenue in New Mexico from the return of the uranium mining and milling industry will be $1.03 billion. For residents in Cibola and McKinley counties, the Arrowhead study is welcome news, as the communities are in need of the economic diversity the uranium mining industry will provide.

I also want to point out to the readers and citizens of New Mexico that while the Arrowhead study was conducted specifically to look at the economic impact of future mining, each mine or mill project will also conduct its own environmental impact study, or EIS. The EIS is required by state and federal agencies. Each EIS will have a socioeconomic component that will investigate potential demands on such items as health and social services and local infrastructure. The Arrowhead study may, in fact, become a valuable component of any future EIS.

Despite ELC's attempt at obfuscation and misdirection, it's time to stop the anti-extraction rhetoric. Our state is blessed with natural resources, which will provide for our financial future and which will be carefully managed with respect for our environment and our communities.

Mike Bowen is the executive director of New Mexico Mining Association. He lives in Santa Fe.