In Situ Leach Recovery: Weaponised ignorance and proving the ISR advantage
Namibia is currently at a crossroads, and the name “Leonardville” now centres an international debate around a widely used mining method known as In Situ Leaching (ISL).
Dylan Mukoroli
Namibia is currently at a crossroads, and the name “Leonardville” now centres an international debate around a widely used mining method known as In Situ Leaching (ISL).
Having attended a number of consultations on this mining method convened by the mine itself, community organisations, private bodies, and the Uranium Mining Institute, where farmers, water experts, geologists, and hydrological specialists unpacked this method to its core in a bid to demystify and understand what it entails, I rise to add my voice in support of this mining method.
Stampriet Aquifer Uranium Mining Association’s (SAUMA) economic development, 500 jobs vs the risk of widespread contamination
I had no intention of writing about the economic benefits, because they are very prevalent. However, having read an article written in 2024 and republished recently, which draws conclusions on economic benefits for a relatively small community versus widespread contamination, I find it a slap in the face to the hardships the community of Leonardville faces.
That argument comes from a place of privilege and reeks of not understanding the many challenges the community faces. Bluntly put, the colleagues would like the status quo to continue and not consider the possibility that, if strictly managed with uncompromisable protocols in place, agriculture and mining can co-exist.
