How the population of Greenland regards mining at Kvanefjeld is going to be a battle of information and ideas. As with all politics, perceptions can change dramatically, depending on what people believe, and I think this will be the case at Kvanefjeld. The anti-uranium lobby temporarily have the upper hand, based on a general fear that anything containing the word "nuclear" or "radioactive" is bad. They have led a scaremongering campaign relying on misinformation on the dangers of radiation, which is not based on fact. What we need is a campaign to counter the negative anti-U lobby, and not necessarily led by GGG.
I have mentioned before, the DTU report, which can be found here
https://backend.orbit.dtu.dk/ws/portalfiles/portal/125836613/Radiation_report_20151106_2_.pdfThis report by an established and respectable concern, sets out the actual background radiation figures for the Narsaq area and the estimated levels during the mining process. As already posted, these radiation levels are less than the natural background radiation levels in many parts of the world. The facts in this report are a very useful counter to the anti-U campaigners. I would like to see a concerted effort by the SIK trade union to push the case for Kvanefjeld. The leader of the union Jess G Berthelsen has been a long time supporter of the mine, and with the backing of many of the 5,000 members of the union, representing about 20% of Greenland's workforce, this could make a useful pressure group. Mining would employ a considerable number of their members
What always surprises me about the green lobby, is the objections they have to projects that are actually going to slow climate change. Kvanefjeld being a case in point, as it will hopefully produce, in the West, large quantities of the metals vital for electric vehicles and wind turbines. The fact that Denmark produces nearly half its electricity from wind turbines seems to have passed them by. Other countries are following.
(20min delay)