Written for the IWW Environmental Committee by The Primal Collective
14 years ago, a study was published regarding the uranium rush in Namibia. Namibia is a gorgeous, arid country in southern Africa. The majority of its people are nomadic pastoralists, though much like the rest of Africa it is quickly becoming more urbanised. Despite a strong tourism industry, the country has high inequality (Wold Bank, 2015).
The United Kingdom is the 13th largest exporter of enriched uranium. While the UK has several uranium enrichment facilities, its only uranium mine closed in 1930. So all this uranium must come from somewhere…
The Rössing uranium mine is the longest running open pit mine in the world. It is located in the Namib desert and is the largest employer in the Erongo region. They boast about being a “key contributor to Namibia’s mining sector since 1976“, notably it was established prior to the official end of apartheid in the 1990s. The Apartheid regime prohibited unionising and in 1980 closed the main workers’ Union of Namibia, imprisoning much of its leadership without trial.
In 2021, Rössing embarked on a Feasibility Study for the Life of Mine extension to 2036 through the Phase 4 pushback of the existing SJ Pit, fully utilising the 15-year mining license granted by the Ministry of Mines and Energy. It is owned by the Rio Tinto Group, a British-Australian multinational. Unsurprisingly, the British head office is in London. The UK was importing nearly half its uranium from Rössing alone in the early 1980s (Moody, 1991).
Research undertaken by Marta Conde with LaMCA (Laboratorio Multimedia de Conflictos Ambientales or Multimedia Laboratory of Environmental Conflicts) highlighted that uranium mines are the most polluting type of mine as it produces radioactive dust and gas. This has a wide-reaching spread as wind does not respect the concept of borders. Mines also risk seepage of radioactive tailings (materials left over after the process of separating the valuable fraction from the uneconomic fraction of an ore) into underground rivers and other water systems. Said documentary linked asks the question of how long Rössing and other uranium mines would be willing to pump back contaminated water after the mine has closed? How long are they willing to spend on monitoring systems and mitigation measures? Worker health and safety has been a battle long fought in the UK. Namibia doesn’t have this history as this kind of exploitation is relatively new to the land. Workers are endangered by radiation from uranium and tailings. It is known that the risk of cancer increase with the dose. Any dose above 0 increases the risk of cancer.
As the aforementioned documentary notes, Rössing doesn’t recognise that past contamination correlates with the current pathology of workers. Arandis was built by Rio Tinto to house Rössing workers in 1976. The Namibian Union and the 1980s anti-nuclear international campaign hired a black Namibian medical student working in Germany to conduct a health assessment of Rössing‟s workers, who concluded that miners had increased risks of genetic damage and a worrying reduction in testosterone levels (Zaire et al., 1996, 1997). Rio Tinto disputed his findings with two internationally recognised scientists who concluded that there were “no chromosoma aberration” (Lloyd et al., 2001). An ex-Rössing worker named Petrus Hoaeb detailed how there were unsafe conditions in the 70s and 80s. In the early 80s he was told he has been exposed. He and his fellow workers filled out forms and provided urine, but the mine provided no compensation and didn’t even acknowledge the damage they have caused. Petrus spoke of how people he worked with have suffered a number of illnesses such as cancer and breathing issues. Everyone struggled to get compensation from the mine. Most of the people who worked alongside him in 1975-76 are now dead. A concerning detail Petrus highlights is that even people who don’t work in the mine itself have fallen sick. At the time people were not being informed of the dangers. More attention is paid to health and safety today but it is unclear how much as the location of this mine evades UK health and safety law.
Rössing’s website boasts about the mine’s care for health and safety, but this study was the only one I could find on how the mines are studying cancer risk. Results did not find that uranium mining caused cancer, largely due to a lack of records kept on employee health (it’s more complicated than that though, read the study to find out). Some fear that salt and uranium is endangering the farming industry. Rössing claims to be working with Namibian farmers on this. In 2013, the Rössing mine had a catastrophic structural failure of a leach tank resulting in a major spill. The CRIIRAD laboratory reported elevated levels of radioactive materials in the area. At the time of the report it was found that workers were not informed on the immediate dangers and long-term health consequences of working with radioactive materials. According to the 2011 study, many ex-workers die unregistered at their places of origin. Rössing refuses to make public any data related to the health condition of its workers to both researchers and public health authorities.
Water is a crucial aspect source of life for arid regions. At the time of the documentary, the Omdel Aquifer was under stress. Certain boreholes were close to their limit of water supply, they were producing as much as they can. In December 2024, this burden appears to have lifted by the upgrading of the southern extension of the Omdel Ring, and an extension to the local water supply in Henties Bay.
The desert is important both ecologically and spiritually, especially to the indigenous peoples and more-than-human animals of Namibia. Many animals are range-restricted. How many creatures have gone extinct before the international community even had the pleasure of knowing they exist?
One group highlighted by the LaMCA documentary was the Topnaar community who have been living for centuries in what is now Namib Naukluft National Park. They live on the edge of a river bed, enjoying vast grazing areas with good field condition for them and their livestock. Raymond Ani-Mab says that the Topnaar land is where he feels free as there is no violence. Raymond opposes the vehicles and the mines with how they are impacting his home. Water is already a scarce resource for his people. He notes that after prospecting in the park near his settlements there were no more springbok or ostriches. Raymond says the land is part of his culture, it is where they are now and where they are going, mining is throwing all that away. It is something special that is not easily quantifiable in a capitalist framework. The 2011 study also mentioned the Spitzkoppe community who expressed similar disapproval of the mines on their ancestral land. Many indigenous groups expressed that their opinions on mining was not sought out by those who are attempting to develop on their land. Some are even concerned that the leadership in their communities are collaborating with mine owners to allow this development.
Regulation of the mining industry is a herculean task for the underfunded government and for NGOs in the area. No one appears to have capacity to monitor things properly. Cynthia Ortmann who was chief hydrologist in the government at the time of the documentary said that they lacked the capacity and so rely on information given to them by the companies themselves. As a regulator, they are meant to get their own samples to check. But unfortunately the government doesn’t have the capacity to do this as there is not enough staff. For example there would be one person in charge of surveying the entire Erongo region twice a year. And at this survey they don’t check surrounding water supplies. The Ministry of Water has only five people monitor the water quality of all 13 regions of the country.
Tourism is known to employ much more than the mines do in Namibia, however mining threatens tourism as industrial development turns beautiful desert land into toxic wastes. Informal settlements and insecurity is growing due to openings of mines and people come to the mines looking for work. The social impact of this is said to amplify over time. Certain people are afraid of becoming like South Africa where extreme violence is normalised. Wildlife is crucial for tourism which the mines are assumed to be having a negative impact on, but the extent of this in Namibia is currently unknown. Let’s not make the mistake of doubting the impact due to lack of evidence, preliminary research has suggested the effect is massive. And more resourced countries have wider evidence bases on the effect of mining, for example this study on freshwater biodiversity and coal mining.
The UK is taking advantage of what they perceive as a weak civil society, due to it being sparsely populated. Peoples living in Namibia have a limited history of colonial oppression. Within the UK, we have had centuries of organising to build on fighting the power of the British crown and ensuring health and safety regulations for all workers. And still there is much work to be done. Namibia didn’t have deal with European nonsense until 1884. Part of this neocolonialism is deliberately keeping Nambian workers ignorant of dangers associated with working with radioactive material, for fear that they will unionise (See this for more on the history of Namibian labour).