On May 1, 2024 Anson Resources was granted the equivalent of about 13,750 acre feet in water rights for their planned lithium wells adjacent to the uranium tailings pile in Elgin. Theresa Wilhelmsen, the state engineer, ruled that the water source located over 10,000 feet underground is not already appropriated, is unconnected to other aquifers in use, and will be a used in a non-consumptive manner because Anson plans to reinject spent lithium brine back into the ground. In her order, Wilhelmsen responded to official protests that had been filed, which can be read in detail here: https://waterrights.utah.gov/docImport/0661/06615548.pdf.
Among those that filed protests, the Great Basin Water Network doesn’t believe that Wilhelmsen gave adequate responses, saying “The decision eludes major questions regarding deep pumping near a radioactive site…[and] downplays potential connectivity with the Colorado River system, relying on a 42-year-old study”.
Regarding the concerns about the uranium tailings pile’s proximity, Cindy Gubler, representing Anson said “The actively monitor the area. Just recently A1 Lithium’s environmental manager participated in [the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) and the Utah Department of Waste Management and Radiation Control’s (WMRC)] annual site walk on the adjacent property, and no concerns were raised.”
A National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review comes next in the lithium well development process, which will cover environmental impacts more comprehensively than the Utah water rights review. A1 Lithium CEO Bruce Richardson said “Our aim is to be a responsible business operator and good community partner”. As always, Anson’s lithium project updates can be found at https://www.ansonresources.com/investor-centre/#asxannouncements.
In other energy news: The planned closures in 2032 of Rocky Mountain Power’s (RMP) Hunter and Huntington power plants on the west end of Emery County have been extended to 2036 and 2042, respectively. RMP also announced that they are no longer considering building nuclear power plants in the county. Their plans likely changed last month, at least in part, because of a couple recently-passed Utah state laws.
One law (SB224) allows RMP to pass along any increased costs of plant maintenance and upgrades to customers without having to prove that coal-fired power plants are the most affordable power generation option. Another law (HB191) directs companies like RMP to favor “dispatchable” energy sources, which includes coal-fired and nuclear power that are available on-demand, but not solar or wind power that depend on weather conditions. Coal power production is a big part of the county’s economy, and it appears that will remain the case for at least the next several years.