Uranium Mining in Australia: A History of Legislation, Protest, and Political Stalemate

Introduction

Australia is home to some of the world’s richest uranium deposits, supplying nearly one-third of global demand during peak export years. Yet despite its geological endowment and long history of mining uranium, the country has long maintained a curious contradiction: a vibrant export sector and a domestic ban on nuclear energy. Uranium has been a political flashpoint for decades—symbolizing both industrial opportunity and environmental peril. This essay traces the history of uranium mining legislation in Australia, the protest movements that have shaped public discourse, and the present political climate that renders the construction of nuclear reactors almost impossible under a hung parliament. With producing mines still active in South Australia, the future of uranium mining continues to intersect with climate concerns, Indigenous rights, and a divided public consciousness.

Early Uranium Discoveries and Cold War Legislation

Uranium mining in Australia began in earnest during the Cold War. The first major discoveries occurred in the 1940s and 1950s, with the Rum Jungle mine in the Northern Territory and Radium Hill in South Australia emerging as strategic resources. The Australian government, motivated by military alliances with the United States and United Kingdom, encouraged uranium extraction not for energy, but for weapons development.

This era saw the passing of the Atomic Energy Act 1953, which gave the Commonwealth broad control over uranium resources. The Act also established the Australian Atomic Energy Commission (AAEC) to coordinate exploration and manage strategic reserves. Early mining operations were largely government-backed, and the broader public was not yet fully aware of the environmental or ethical implications of uranium extraction.

However, even in these early years, resistance was brewing. Trade unions such as the Builders Labourers Federation (BLF) expressed skepticism, leading to “green bans” that foreshadowed more organized protest movements. Though largely symbolic at first, union resistance would later align with broader environmental and Indigenous rights campaigns to form a powerful opposition.

Environmental and Indigenous Protests (1970s–1980s)

The environmental movement gained momentum in the 1970s, bolstered by growing public concern over pollution, nuclear weapons, and Indigenous land rights. These years saw a transformation in how uranium mining was perceived—not merely as an economic opportunity, but as an environmental and moral issue.

The discovery of uranium in the Kakadu region of the Northern Territory, including Ranger and Jabiluka, ignited national controversy. These sites were located on or near lands of the Mirarr people, a fact that fueled both legal and cultural resistance. In response to growing concerns, the Australian government commissioned the Ranger Uranium Environmental Inquiry, commonly known as the Fox Report (1977). The report acknowledged the significant risks associated with uranium mining but recommended that it proceed under strict environmental and Indigenous safeguards.

Despite this, the ALP’s “Three Mines Policy”, introduced in 1983 under Prime Minister Bob Hawke, limited mining approvals to just three existing projects: Ranger, Nabarlek, and Olympic Dam. This policy was a compromise within the Labor Party, which was split between pro-development factions and a left wing increasingly aligned with environmentalism and Indigenous advocacy.

The Jabiluka campaign in the late 1990s, a landmark protest involving environmental groups, the Mirarr people, and international activists, cemented uranium as a symbol of colonial exploitation and ecological risk. The protests were successful in halting the development of the Jabiluka mine, despite it having received prior approvals. This era left an indelible mark on public memory and solidified the alliance between environmentalists and Indigenous rights advocates.

Deregulation and Expansion: 1990s–2000s

The uranium industry’s prospects improved in the late 1990s with the election of the Howard Government, which scrapped the Three Mines Policy in 1996. Howard’s Coalition government promoted mining deregulation and increased exports, especially to Asia and Europe. This was facilitated by new bilateral safeguards agreements to ensure Australian uranium would only be used for peaceful purposes.

During this period, Olympic Dam in South Australia became one of the world’s largest uranium producers, operated by BHP. Beverley and later Four Mile, both also in South Australia, began production using In-Situ Leach (ISL) technology, a method that reduced surface disruption but raised new concerns over groundwater contamination.

Despite this growth, resistance did not vanish. Environmental groups continued to oppose expansion, and several legal challenges were brought against mines like Beverley, particularly around inadequate consultation with traditional owners and environmental oversight.

Protest momentum, however, began to wane during this era as the environmental movement increasingly shifted focus toward climate change and fossil fuels. Economic rationalism and Australia’s expanding trade relationships, especially with China and India, further normalized uranium exports as part of the national interest. Still, no new domestic nuclear projects were proposed or constructed, and public opinion remained largely opposed to nuclear energy.

Contemporary Uranium Production and Policy (2020s)

As of 2025, uranium mining remains active in Australia but geographically limited. Three major projects are currently operational:

• Olympic Dam (South Australia): A polymetallic mine that produces copper, gold, and uranium, managed by BHP. It contains the world’s largest known uranium deposit.
  • Beverley and Four Mile (South Australia): Operated by Heathgate Resources, these ISL mines are smaller but continue steady production.
  • Ranger Mine (Northern Territory): Officially ceased production in 2021. Operated by Energy Resources of Australia (ERA), the site is now undergoing long-term environmental rehabilitation with strict monitoring under the oversight of traditional owners.

Meanwhile, uranium exploration continues in Western Australia and the Northern Territory, but state-level moratoriums, such as in Victoria and New South Wales, continue to block new developments. Even where legal, uranium mining proposals often face stiff regulatory and community opposition.

Exports remain Australia’s sole legal use for uranium. Under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act), uranium projects require federal environmental approval, often involving extensive assessments and Indigenous consultation. Australia continues to refuse domestic nuclear energy generation, although it maintains several research facilities and has committed to building nuclear-powered submarines under the AUKUS agreement. However, this has not shifted policy on civil nuclear power.

Political Landscape and the Future of Nuclear Power

The political debate around uranium and nuclear energy in Australia has evolved dramatically in recent years. While uranium mining has bipartisan support under strict regulation, the question of domestic nuclear power remains hotly contested.

The Liberal-National Coalition has consistently advocated for lifting the nuclear energy ban, particularly in the context of reducing carbon emissions. In 2023, the Coalition proposed a plan to explore Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) as a zero-emission alternative to coal. However, these proposals have faced major hurdles—not only technical and economic, but political.

The Australian Labor Party (ALP), while more ambivalent than in the past, currently maintains a ban on nuclear power. However, Labor does support uranium exports and allows mining under state and federal laws. This reflects a shift from the rigid anti-nuclear positions of the 1980s, although internal divisions remain, particularly among left-wing factions and trade unions.

Crucially, in today’s fragmented political landscape, no nuclear power project is likely to pass through Parliament unless a single party wins a decisive majority. In a hung parliament—a likely outcome given Australia’s increasingly diverse political representation—nuclear energy is effectively a non-starter. That’s because Teal Independents, the Greens, and several progressive crossbenchers hold the balance of power and are firmly opposed to nuclear energy. Their opposition is rooted in concerns over cost, waste, and the potential diversion from renewable energy investment.

The Australian Greens, in particular, have consistently campaigned for a complete ban on uranium mining, citing the dangers of nuclear proliferation and long-term waste storage. The Teals, while more centrist, tend to support renewable energy and have criticized nuclear as costly, slow, and unnecessary. Even many regional independents—often from areas where reactors might be proposed—remain wary.

However, public opinion is slowly shifting, especially among younger Australians. Polls conducted over the last few years reveal a generational divide: while older Australians tend to oppose nuclear power due to fears about safety and legacy issues, younger people are more likely to support nuclear energy as part of a broader decarbonization strategy. For many in this demographic, nuclear is seen not as a danger but as a pragmatic solution to climate change.

Despite this generational change, the economic and political barriers to nuclear development remain steep. No comprehensive waste management plan exists, no regulatory framework for nuclear energy has been implemented, and investment remains wary due to Australia’s historically unstable policy environment. As long as the political crossbench retains influence—and the ALP maintains its ban—the prospects for a reactor remain purely theoretical.

Conclusion

The history of uranium mining in Australia reflects a broader tension between economic potential and social license. From its origins in Cold War geopolitics to the protest-driven policies of the 1980s, uranium has always been more than just a commodity—it has been a proxy for debates around environmental justice, Indigenous sovereignty, and the future of energy.

Today, uranium mining continues under tight regulation, with Australia exporting yellowcake to countries with nuclear energy programs. However, the construction of nuclear power plants on Australian soil remains blocked by political reality. While younger Australians are increasingly supportive of nuclear energy, the presence of the Teals, Greens, and progressive Independents in a hung parliament ensures that no reactor will be built in the near future. In this way, the nuclear debate continues to reflect Australia’s broader democratic complexity—a country rich in resources, yet divided on how best to use them.