Cook County News Herald

Governor challenged to examine hard questions about mining




The Mining Truth Coalition has gathered signatures from citizens of every Minnesota county on a petition asking Governor Dayton to look carefully for the answers to four questions regarding nonferrous mining projects being pursued by PolyMet and Twin Metals.

Significant quantities of copper, nickel, cobalt, platinum, palladium, and gold have been discovered in the Mesabi Iron Range and east into Canada through the Duluth Complex. The four questions asked by the Mining Truth Coalition, which is a combined effort by Conservation Minnesota, Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness, and the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy, are:

. Will Minnesota’s waters stay safe and clean?

. Are there safeguards in place for when things go wrong?

. Will the company leave the site clean and maintenance-free?

. Will Minnesota’s taxpayers be protected?

The coalition believes that the mines should not be allowed to move forward unless the answer to each question is “an unqualified yes.” The Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement

This spring, Environmental Resources Management (ERM), an independent contracting firm, completed a supplemental draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) that analyzed PolyMet’s proposed project, which would be above ground in the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness watershed. In a letter addressed to three “co-lead” agencies—the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the U.S. Forest Service—and also sent to “cooperating” agencies—the Bois Forte, Fond du Lac, and Grand Portage tribal governments— the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) states that information provided during the review “reflects significant progress in designing and clearly documenting the project.”

The Preliminary Supplemental Draft EIS addresses wastewater, storm water, and waste rock management, bedrock fractures in the Duluth Complex, wetland impacts, air quality, and impacts to tribal resources and the 1854 Ceded Territory.

The EPA’s response asks for more detailed explanations and makes some recommendations. For instance, it says that baseline water quality measurements should acknowledge that some humancaused contamination may have already occurred and that the impact of mining should reflect the cumulative effect of contamination caused by humans, including “past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions” other than mining. It states that the plan should include compensation for subdividing wetlands and management of the release of mercury that could take place when peat is moved around to cover the top of the tailings basin to improve soil and water quality and promote the growth of vegetation.

The EPA’s letter states that “the financial assurance requirement, coverage, and process under state law is adequately described at this stage of the NEPA/MEPA [National Environmental Policy Act/Minnesota Environmental Policy Act] process.”

PolyMet’s website states, “PolyMet Mining is dedicated to providing metals that are fundamental to our way of life in an environmentally responsible way.” According to PolyMet, this includes using new “reverse osmosis” technology that captures contaminants that the old smelting methods did not, using sulfur from the ore to generate energy used in processing, and annually updating financial guarantees that the cost of any necessary future mitigation will be covered.

A press release from Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness Communications Director Aaron Klemz states that while PolyMet took the EPA’s letter to be an endorsement of the project, the plan fails to provide “fundamental information about the project,” even after years of environmental review.

Klemz states that the latest draft downplays the potential of toxic metals leaching into the Lake Superior watershed, uses “inadequate standards” to evaluate discharges, fails to consider cumulative impacts when combined with other land uses, and fails to adequately describe financial assurance for perpetual water treatment.

Economic potential

According to the UMD Labovitz School of Business and Economics, the Duluth Complex holds 4.4 billion tons of mineral resources. The U.S. imports 40 percent of the copper it uses each year and 100 percent of the nickel it uses. PolyMet’s “NorthMet Project” that is currently the subject of debate covers 26 square miles. The financial impact of the project on northeastern Minnesota is expected to equal the economic benefit of a 20-year Super Bowl—$500 million a year for 20 years.

This is the second in a multi-part series on mining in the Northland. The next article will focus on local discussions regarding proposed nonferrous mining projects in the Northland. Some opponents of the projects don’t trust governmental regulations to prevent serious environmental degradation, while proponents argue that developments in mining technology will prevent the problems caused by mining processes of the past.

Two websites dealing with two sides of the issue are www.miningtruth.org and www.miningminnesota.com.



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.