I was disappointed to see a fullpage ad by PolyMet, thanking the community for its support, in last week’s News-Herald.
I fully realize that advertising is the lifeblood of a newspaper and that advertisers have every right to purchase an ad. This letter is not to criticize the Herald for printing the ad. My concern? PolyMet is spending large amounts of money in an effort to convince us that sulfide mining can be done safely.
It is no secret that this is a contentious issue and while the ad stated, “Whether you voiced support or registered concerns, we appreciate and value what you had to say,” the general tone of the ad was that there was broad support for mining in Minnesota.
When considering hundreds of jobs for the region they must be weighed against the history of sulfide mining. Sulfide mining produces acid drainage that has the potential of causing great environmental damage.
Minnesota is one of many states that require companies to put up financial assurance before they start digging due to the fact that mining companies have declared bankruptcy and walked away leaving taxpayers to pick up the cost of cleanup. (A mine that generates acid drainage requires a long-term approach.) How much financial assurance might be necessary? No one knows for sure.
The EPA is facing billions of dollars in cleanup costs from mines across the country. Some of the mines have contaminated tens of thousands of miles of streams by exposing sulfide-bearing waste rock and tailings which produce acid when exposed to air and which leach heavy metals and other contaminants into ground and surface water.
In the long run are a few hundred jobs for 20 years or so of higher value than clean water? (I wonder how 300,000 people in West Virginia would answer that question?)
What about the value of this area as the most beautiful corner of the state and a haven for tourists?
Diane Hiniker
Grand Marais
Leave a Reply