Nuclear Monitor #925
Gunter Wippel
The article throws a light on – so far – successful opposition against uranium mining in three African countries: South Africa, Tanzania and Mali. To date, those projects grinded to a halt.
SOUTH AFRICA – Karoo uranium project stopped by locals
South Africa has a strong anti-nuclear movement; in 2018, after a five year legal battle, two women from two NGOs had stopped a deal by then-president Zuma to buy up to 10 nuclear power plants from Russia [1]. It was a black woman, Makoma Lekalakala and a white woman, Liz McDaid who won the court case – and were awarded the Goldman environment prize; they work for Earthlife South Africa and for Southern African Faith Communities’ Environment Institute (SAFCEI) respectively.
In the Karoo, a vast semi-desert area, Peninsula Energy, an Australian company, had acquired a uranium project from AREVA South Africa in 2013. Peninsula planned mining a variety of ore bodies stretching across three provinces: Eastern, Northern and Western Cape, over a range of 7000 square kilometers.
By 2016, an EIA was prepared; public participation in the process was small, the desert-like area is thinly populated, in addition, people were concentrating on rejecting a shale gas project in the area. Residents were divided: some were interested in jobs, others were more concerned about impacts on environment and health [2].
The uranium project would cover some 700,000 hectares (7000qkm) and “ … would have wiped out years of painstaking recovery of the semi-arid plains and threaten the very existence of several rural communities.” [3]
The impact of the use of water in the semi-desert area would be catastrophic: “The Karoo uranium deposits are scattered over a large zone of 200 by 300 kilometers which requires long-haul trucking of ores over poorly constructed dust roads for hundreds of kilometers to reach a planned Central Processing Plant. For this plant alone, the company has already applied for a water licence to abstract 1.3 billion litres of groundwater annually, roughly the total water consumption of the Central Karoo Municipality. It is unclear where that amount of water could come from.”
(For more details see: Uranium Mining threatens South Africas Iconic Karoo
https://theecologist.org/2016/apr/28/uranium-mining-threatens-south-africas-iconic-karoo)
When residents of the Karoo area learnt about uranium mining plans and realized that mining company Peninsula had secured exploration licenses in their backyards, they were upset. Locals, also informed by Southern African Faith Communities’ Environment Institute (SAFCEI) soon understood that large scale uranium mining would present at least as great a danger as fracking.
The environmental assessment office was flooded with statements opposing uranium exploitation. Then it turned out that behind Peninsula a Russian oligarch backed the company, and people got even more suspicious.
By July 2016, the company reduced its project to about 12% of its original size; a new EIA was prepared due to the shortcomings of the previous one.
By April 2018, Peninsula Energy announced its complete withdrawal from the project [4] [5] – a year after the nuclear power plant deal had been finally stopped [6].
The plans to build important parts of a nuclear fuel chain in South Africa had come to an end.
However, in 2023 South Africa’s NECSA signed a Memorandum of Understanding with Russia’ s TVEL re: production of nuclear fuel [7].
In February 2025, a former subsidiary of Peninsula Energy, Lukisa Invest 100 (Pty) Ltd., applied for a mining right for uranium and molybdenum for a period of 30 years. The plans have a similar set-up as Peninsula’s plan, a series of mining pits and a central processing plant near the main ore body [8].
TANZANIA – Civil Society opposes uranium exploitation
From 1885 to 1918, a German colony existed in what is today Tanzania. After WWI, it was transferred to the UK. By 1961, it became independent.
In 1978/79, German Uranerzbergbau GmbH, a company funded in parts by the German government of the time, followed airborne radiometric survey with groundwork. One of the authors publishing results was J. Borshoff, Uranerz Australia (Pty) Ltd. who would later found Paladin and mine uranium in neighboring Malawi [9].
At the time of the 2007 uranium price boom, exploration companies flocked also into Tanzania; they targeted mainly two region: Bahi and Manyoni area in Central Tanzania and Southwest Tanzania, Ruvuma region.
In Bahi region, Australian companies started drilling, often in local peoples’ fields, without informing them or the village authorities, creating confusion. Tanzanians soon realized that uranium was no good news: it might contaminate water, fields and crops and damage peoples’ health. More important, it might lead to people losing their land – their very means of existence as farmers and herders due to the kind of strip mining envisioned by the companies (Australian based URANEX and Mantra).
By 2008, local NGO Foundation for Environmental Management and Campaign against Poverty (FEMAPO) published a booklet in Kisuaheli outlining the risks of uranium exploitation, focusing on Bahi area, often referred to as a ’swamp’, in reality a periodically flooded basin without drain with fishing as well as growing of rice (‘paddy’) in the wet season and cattle grazing and agricultural activities in the dry season.
The FEMAPO team travelled from village to village, informing the local people in ways understandable by people with less formal education. On several occasions, international experts were invited to share scientific information, as well as persons from other African countries with experience of uranium mining from Niger, Namibia and South Africa. They talked in tightly packed spaces to the local people, translation into Kisuaheli was provided [10].
In 2012, Tanzanian NGOs FEMAPO and CESOPE, in cooperation with Germany-based uranium-network.org, compiled another information booklet ”Uranium Mining – what does it mean for Tanzania?” (not available on internet).
In September 2013, a major conference “Uranium-mining: Impact on Health and Environment” and a field trip were organized with participants from IPPNW Switzerland, Germany, France, and the US, from Niger as well as from neighbouring Zambia; a focus was on ensuring that people – particularly from Africa – with experience of uranium mining shared their experiences.
The conference was covered by national media [11]. It also lead to something between an invitation and a summons by the Ministry of Mines to the organizers; the government did not appreciate the independent approach the conference organizers had taken. Late Bob Mtonga, IPPNW Zambia, summarized the outcome of the visit briefly: “They want us to sing from their songbook”.
Contributions and results were published in …
“REPORT OF THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON URANIUM MINING:
IMPACT ON HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT HELD …” OCTOBER 4TH AND 5TH 2013, 2013 [12]
and in
“Uranium Mining – Impact on Health & Environment”, 2014, by Rosa-Luxemburg Foundation which had cooperated, together with Legal and Human Righs Center, in organizing the conference [13] .
Some arguments and insights of the conference were picked in “Uranium Mining In Tanzania: A Stairway to Prosperity or Highway to Impoverishment?” by B. Parasalaw in The Tanzania Lawyer magazine (Vol. 1, 2016, No. 2) [14].
The attention the opponents to uranium plans got, was not always wanted: at times, persons active in the matter were followed around by authorities, had uninvited visits, were questioned; things once got to a point where an active person had to leave the country for some time. Nevertheless, the opposition of local people remained strong [15].
Following the conference, a group of international guests traveled to Songea / Ruvuma region. In the area, Australian company Mantra had defined the Mkuju River deposit – and sold it in 2010 for 1,15 billion US$ to Russian ROSATOM and its subsidiaries[16], creating a great profit for its Australian shareholders.
Local NGOs organized a workshop on uranium mining and its impacts, local people attended. They had never heard about the downsides of uranium exploitation. They had only been told that the mine – Mkuju River Uranium project – would bring jobs and prosperity. Older people were concerned, among other things, in regard to the safety of young girls and women in the face of a major influx of male workers.
Within the next years, CESOPE and other civil society organisations critical of uranium exploitation, cooperated on the issue of uranium mining and educated themselves and others about the impacts of uranium exploitation.
German NGOs repeatedly invited delegates form Tanzania (and other countries affected by uranium exploitation) to Germany and neighboring countries to inform MPs about the impacts of uranium exploitation in their countries; it was clear to everyone that uranium was mined for use in nuclear power plants in industrialized countries – and this needed to stop, too.
On another note:
The Mkuju River project is located in UNESCO World Heritage Site Selous Game Reserve; the area should have been off-limits for exploration and mining activities.
The struggle against uranium mining was taken to another level, addressing the UNESCO World Heritage Committee (WHC) to stop exploration and exploitation of uranium in a World Heritage Site.
At the UNESCO’s 2012 WHC annual meeting in Saint Petersburg, the Russian delegation managed to get – “in an exceptional and unique manner … approve[d] the proposed boundary modification of the Selous Game Reserve” – by the Committee; the application had been made by the Russian WHC delegation; Russia voted in favor of the boundary change – regardless of the conflict of interest they were in. This procedure was highly questionable [17].
In spite strong opposition from IUCN, WWF and other environmental NGOs, the road was open for Russia’s state-owned company ROSATOM to mine uranium.
Environmental protection NGOs continued to protest, among them Rainforest Rescue who collected nearly 60,000 signatures against the boundary change and the mining [18].
In 2014, World Heritage Site Selous Game Reserve was listed as UNESCO World Heritage Sites in danger [19], also due to the fact that roads leading to the mine made access for poachers easier, and elephant population was decimated [20]. Selous remains in the in danger list to date.
The precarious situation was brought to the attention of the UNESCO WHC repeatedly, to little avail. UNESCO watchdog World Heritage Watch published repeatedly on the matter in its annual reports [21].
Since 2012, however, the mining projects, both in Manyoni and Bahi area as well as the Mkuju River Project did not go forward. The price of uranium had fallen as quickly as it had sky-rocketed in 2007.
In regard to the projects in Bahi and Manyoni area, the IAEA stated that they had not received ‘a social license’; in other words, resistance on the ground was too strong to go ahead.
In 2015, the IAEA slashed Tanzania’s legislation in regard to radiation protection due to a lack of an adequate “legal and regulatory framework” [22].
CESOPE and others met repeatedly with TAEC, pushing for (better) legislation re: uranium mining and radiation protection; in case it should not be possible to prevent uranium exploitation, it should at least be regulated strictly.
In 2016, UraniumOne announced the plan to change from open-pit mining to (cheaper) ISL, or a “world first” combination of both [23]. The current license (of 2012) does not license ISL mining, though.
A year later, 2017, the Mkuju River Project was officially ‘suspended’ by ROSATOM it, referring to the low price of uranium [24]. A pilot project for in-situ-leaching (ISL) was performed nevertheless.
In 2018/19, a review of the Mkuju River Project ESIA was done by an expert from the US to get an independent review of the ESIA; he was invited to Tanzania and spoke about the relevance of a proper ESIA. Although the ESIA is – according to Tanzanian law – a public document, it was extremely difficult to get access to it. It lacks, among other things, appropriate public consultation.
In 2022, ROSATOM said they “plan to start commercial mining of uranium in Tanzania in several years.” [25] In 2024, a Strategic Environmental Assessment was announced by the government of Tanzania. The results remain to be seen.
Conclusion
Local NGOs were strong in their opposition against uranium exploitation; they were supported by lawyers, a human rights NGO in Tanzania and by NGOs from outside Tanzania providing information as well as support for their stance; meeting with other Africans impacted by uranium mining was of key importance.
MALI
As reported in NM921 (page 6), a uranium deposit in the far southwest corner of Mali, close to the border to Guinea, a uranium-silver-copper deposit had been discovered by Cogema in the late 1970s. Due to its remote location, other, easier accessible deposits (in Niger) at hand were preferred, and with a low price of uranium at the time, the deposit had not been developed.
By 2008, Canadian company Rockgate Capital acquired the project, and started drilling despite difficult access to the area; the company also built a small air strip.
Local communities, the 21 villages of Falea, were not welcoming these activities. The area has fertile land, water, forests and agriculture – unlike more desert-like areas of Mali; local people live a traditional life style, supporting themselves.
The procedure of the exploration teams was not helping either: a local spring, important to the villagers, fell dry following the drilling of exploration boreholes; in another place, the run-off from a drilling rig polluted the area, noise from the rigs operating 24/7 right besides houses was bothering people [26].
Falea inhabitants were well connected with personalities in the capital, Bamako, as well as with European NGOs via an agricultural cooperation. Soon, a plan was hammered out to organize a major conference in Mali’s capital Bamako, inviting international experts as well as Africans from neighbouring Niger who knew already about uranium mining and its consequences. ARACF, the Association of the people of the 21 villages, opposed uranium development.
Friends of Falea in Europe created an impressive 23-panel exhibition [27] [28] (in French and English) on the situation, explaining the local culture, the impacts of uranium and the resilient NO of the local community to the mining project. The exhibition was shown in a variety of locations in Germany, Switzerland and France, including the European Parliament in Strasbourg, raising awareness for the issue.
Early in March 2012, Members of the European Parliament Eva Joly and Michelle Rivasi travelled to Mali, visited the community of Falea and the villagers organization ARACF. The two MEPs later also talked to several Mali ministers, highlighting the adverse consequences of uranium mining [29] and asking to re-consider uranium exploitation.
Later in March 2012, the organization of the local communities of Falea, ARACF, organized in cooperation with IPPNW /PSR Switzerland and uranium-network.org, Germany, a three day conference Uranium, Sante et Environnement (Uranium, Health and Environment) in Mali’s capital Bamako, including a 10 person delegation from the villages of Falea and Kenieba (500km from Falea to Bamako) and a 6 person delegation from Niger (who travelled 2500km by 4×4 from Arlit in Niger) as first hand witnesses of the impact of uranium mining.
International guests from the US, Canada, Germany, as well as NGO persons from other African countries (Niger, Gabon, South Africa ,Tanzania, Chad, Zambia, Cameroon) were invited to speak out about their experiences with uranium exploration and mining happening all over Africa at the time.
Local organizers had procured interpreters also for Bambara, the main language in Mali in order to enable local people from Falea region to understand the presentations.
The conference ended with a clear appeal to the authorities, supported by the local council of Kenieba, to not allow uranium exploration to go ahead in Falea.
After the conference, a 10 person group participated in a field trip to Falea, witnessing the impacts of the exploration drillings first hand.
With the resistance on one hand and a falling price if uranium on the other hand, the project did not go forward; Rockgate then sold it to Denison, some more exploration drilling was done. Finally, Denison sold the project again to GoviEx. GoviEx tried to pass it on to another company – without success. As of 2024, the project is on hold, and with the present unrest in Mali it is unlikely to get restarted soon.
The organizers had also invited filmmaker Sri Prakash from India – who had produced a film on the impacts of uranium mining in India (“Buddha weeps in Jadugoda”) participated in the conference and produced a film “Gere dan” (see: https://www.aidjhu.org/rsvp_for_gere_dan)
Conclusion
Civil society organizations throughout Africa used many methods to resist uranium exploitation following the 2007 uranium price boom. International cooperation with African NGOs and individual as well as with experts from other parts of the world played an important role, too.
The lead was always with African NGOs. Scientists from Europe or the US helped at the request of African NGOs. African NGOs had also formed an African Uranium Alliance which had difficulty getting funding; it remains active as a transnational informal network.
It’s also worth mentioning that European NGOs, mainly in Germany and France, repeatedly invited NGO persons from affected African countries to Europe for tours informing a general public as well as for meetings with MPs in Germany, France and the EP, pointing out the detrimental impact of the use of nuclear power in industrialized countries on countries in the Global South from which the fuel for nuclear power, uranium, is sourced.
[1] www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/23/goldman-prize-awarded-to-south-african-women-who-stopped-an-international-nuclear-deal
[2] https://www.wise-uranium.org/upza.html#KAROO
[3] https://theecologist.org/2018/apr/24/victory-campaign-against-uranium-mining-project-south-africas-karoo-region
[4] https://www.graaffreinetadvertiser.com/News/Article/Local-News/uranium-mining-in-the-karoo-is-dead-201902181007
[5] Further sources: : https://karoospace.co.za/uranium-mining-threatens-the-karoo/ www.circleofblue.org/2016/africa/karoo-uranium-fossil-energy-development-defies-water-scarcity-reason/, https://safcei.org/uranium-mining/
[6] https://www.reuters.com/article/markets/currencies/south-african-court-declares-nuclear-plan-with-russia-unlawful-idUSKBN17S25Q/
[7] https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/articles/russia-and-south-africa-sign-mou-on-nuclear-fuel
[8] https://www.wise-uranium.org/upza.html#KAROO
[9] https://inis.iaea.org/records/a5fbn-cxk54, IAEA-TecDo-322
[10] Personal communication of FEMAPO with the author of this article
[11] https://www.thecitizen.co.tz/tanzania/news/uranium-mining-bad-tz-told-2498120
[12]https://www.academia.edu/32650240/REPORT_OF_THE_INTERNATIONAL_CONFERENCE_ON_URANIUM_MINING_IMPACT_ON_HEALTH_AND_ENVIRONMENT_HELD_AT_BLUE_PEARL_UBUNGO_PLAZA_OCTOBER_4_TH_AND_5_TH_2013_Prepared_by
[13] www.rosalux.or.tz/study-uranium-mining/
[14] https://tanzlii.org › akn › tz › doc › journal › 2016-07-01 › the-tanzania-lawyer-vol-1-2016-number-2 › eng@2016-07-01 › source
[15] Personal communication of FEMAPO with the author of this article
[16] https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2010/12/15/rosatom-buys-australias-mantra-a3770
[17] https://tanzlii.org › akn › tz › doc › journal › 2016-07-01 › the-tanzania-lawyer-vol-1-2016-number-2 › eng@2016-07-01 › source, p. 49,50
[18] www.rainforest-rescue.org/petitions/883/unesco-sacrifices-wildlife-preserve-for-uranium-mine
[19] http://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/6081/
[20] WHC decision based on a 2008 Reactive Monitoring Mission Report: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000389376
[21] Tanzania: Selous Game Reserve at Risk Through Unsustainable Developments, by Günter Wippel, in World Heritage Watch Report, page 39-42, http://world-heritage-watch.de/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/2017-WHW-Report-Krakov.pdf
[22] www.iaea.org/newscenter/pressreleases/iaea-mission-says-tanzania-faces-challenges-radiation-safety-regulation
[23] www.thecitizen.co.tz/News/Business/Uranium-One-to-use-latest-technology-at-Mkuju-River/1840414-3423476-ms8vmi/index.html
[24] www.world-nuclear-news.org/UF-Tanzania-uranium-project-suspended-1007178.html
[25] https://interfax.com/newsroom/top-stories/85232/
[26] Reports of participants in the field trip to Falea, including photo documents; not available on internet.
[27] http://www.falea.info/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Falea-expo-english-web.pdf
[28] https://www.flickr.com/photos/linkeimep/9197859423/in/photostream/
