Its not so much that its not the popular view thats frowned...

Its not so much that its not the popular view thats frowned upon,(far from it)you have only got to look at some of my discussions with JATZ that I happened to agree with, if you find something negative thats got credit then more than happy to talk about it. But its the content of the view thats lacking and signs that not much self research has been applied first.

Its a little bit like when a poster of PEN that typically looks for negatives to post most of the time, puts out there the ridiculous suggestion that ISR wasn't a proven method of uranium extraction yet. Only something like 28% of the worlds uranium mined is by ISR method, needless to say that poster was shot down very quickly.

But dont think that sulfuric, nitric, hydrofloric acids aren't still used in ISR operations today, they are. Its just that it would be nearly impossible to get an ISR project permitted in the United States using these chemicals to leach the uranium. The water quality division within the states DEQ demands restoration to background, which is about where the ground water was before ISR mining began.

The more you add, the more you have to clean up.

Outside the United States, where environmental regulations may be less restrictive, I can imagine in places like Kazakstan, and Cheq Republic for instance do allow ISRs aquifer to be bombarded with these harsh acids. Which has also caused another problem in that not only has it skyrocketed in price but it quite hard to come by I believe due to the amounts getting used.(acids I'm talking)
But thats another story!!

NK