{"id":29,"date":"2009-12-26T19:11:04","date_gmt":"2009-12-27T00:11:04","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/elyminnesota.com\/blog\/?p=29"},"modified":"2009-12-26T20:27:02","modified_gmt":"2009-12-27T01:27:02","slug":"29","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/elyminnesota.com\/blog\/29\/","title":{"rendered":"Our View on the Duluth News Tribune Editorial Dec. 20, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"

My View of Our View by the Duluth New Tribune which they first “aired” March 1st and then ran again Dec. 20, 2009<\/strong><\/p>\n

Even for Editorial Comments this “Puff Piece for the Mining Industry” was beyond reason.\u00a0 Why are they trying to Puff and Sell Copper Nickel mining to their readership?\u00a0 What do they gain?\u00a0 Are there Stock Options or mining ownership hidden here for the owners, who by the way live in North Dakota?<\/p>\n

Let\u2019s put the article into a little more open perspective.\u00a0 I’ll offer snipets of their comments with my opinion in parentheses.<\/strong><\/p>\n

PolyMet acquired a massive, long idled processing plant<\/strong> (for less than the scrap value of that asset according to the Northern Miner.) \u00a0PolyMet has spent more than $20 million of investor\u2019s money.\u00a0 (Where did all that money go?\u00a0 Are you an investor, do you know how your money was spent?\u00a0 Person\u2019s I\u2019ve talked to believe about $2 million in expenditures in the state of Minnesota can be accounted for.\u00a0 Where\u2019s the rest, where\u2019s the accounting.\u00a0 They obviously have a LOT of money to spend any way they want.\u00a0 How much would it take to buy YOUR vote? \u00a0Minnesota Taxpayers owned the tailings pond until given away by IRRRB and PolyMet values that tailings pond at $50 million, Minnesota taxpayers got nothing.)<\/p>\n

Public comments are being accepted in writing.<\/strong> Minnesota\u2019s U.S. Senators and Representatives along with \u201cothers in HIGH places\u201d have voiced their STRONG support for PolyMet and copper mining. (And therefore KWITCHURBELIAKIN it\u2019s a done deal and public comments will not be allowed at public meetings such as the recent PolyMet pep rallies in Blaine and Aurora, MN.)<\/p>\n

Iron ore has been mined form our region since the 19th<\/sup> century.<\/strong> (So what? This has absolutely nothing to do with copper mining here and now. \u00a0There are a large number of people who don\u2019t know that there is a VERY significant difference between the two types of mining.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 To say that PolyMet is a different kind of mining is such a gross understatement. \u00a0\u00a0I suppose the mining companies don\u2019t want you to start thinking about it or analyzing it.)<\/p>\n

The deposits are RICH.<\/strong> And not just PolyMet, others are lined up for the riches if PolyMet is permitted.\u00a0 (How rich?\u00a0 So rich you common Minnesotans will be rich the article implies, jobs for everyone, thousands or hundreds of jobs, maybe, if everything goes right and we can get round these pesky individuals interested in clean water.\u00a0 We\u2019re also not sure how many of the better paying jobs will have to come from highly trained foreign mining experts, maybe only a few, maybe, if we\u2019re lucky. \u00a0Then the gates are open for prosperity for someone, we\u2019ll work out the details of who gets what and how much and at what cost later.\u00a0 Let\u2019s just look at the possibility of jobs and the RICHES for now. )<\/p>\n

There will be little or no risk to the people of Minnesota because we have 37 pages of laws and regulations.<\/strong> (We can\u2019t screw up; they can\u2019t screw up.\u00a0 We would not allow it.\u00a0 Rule 6132 completely has us covered.\u00a0 Go back to sleep and trust your government. \u00a0Minnesota \u00a0Rule 6132.1200 provides for financial assurances for reclamation activities and postclosure maintenance.\u00a0 However \u201call terms and conditions\u00a0 must be approved by the commissioner\u201d or his designated representative.\u00a0 This puts a lot of power in the hands of that person or persons.\u00a0\u00a0 How does that person balance the state dictate to \u201cincrease mining\u201d with the protective clauses, which look good on paper but are entirely up to the commissioner or his delegate.\u00a0 Oh, and by the way, if our laws and regulations are so great why is the old LTV tailings pond still leaking and polluting ground water? It\u2019s fact folks, the Duluth News Tribune likes to add and edit articles that state it leaks to state that it allegedly leaks.\u00a0 Nope, DNR and MPC employees will tell you, \u201cIt leaks\u201d and they just don\u2019t know how badly it leaks.\u00a0 Yes folks the very same pit PolyMet will buy, if they pay for it, and is proposing to use as is, leaks badly.\u00a0 One MPC representative said he doesn\u2019t think it would be any worse, \u201cideally,\u201d with PolyMet but \u201cthere just isn\u2019t money to clean it up.\u201d)<\/p>\n

Frank Ongaro says…and Joseph Scipioni says…<\/strong>(The editorial staff really seems to like Frank Ongaro, executive director of Mining Minnesota and will repeat verbatim anything that he says. I didn\u2019t know he was a Jedi Knight\u2026he seems to be quite accomplished at the Jedi Mind Trick. \u201cThis is an exciting project etc, etc. and my personal favorite \u201cNo additional restrictions are necessary.\u201d I shouldn\u2019t fault you in accepting these since the Jedi Mind Trick is SO powerful.\u00a0 They also seem to like Joseph Scipioni, PolyMet President and Chief Executive Officer.\u00a0 He talked with them and his statements go unquestioned.\u00a0 He also must be a Jedi master.)<\/p>\n

Much of the concern (as it should) has centered on sulfuric acid which has run off at copper mining operations<\/strong>, including countries devoid of environmental laws and concerns.\u00a0 (Oh yes you forgot to mention Wisconsin and the Flambeau River debacle which led to a moratorium in 1989 on copper mining in that state until mining companies could DEMONSTRATE successful and safe mining practices.\u00a0 Isn\u2019t it interesting that no mining companies have returned to Wisconsin to demonstrate such can be done?) \u00a0But, we in Minnesota believe (without proof) that we are better than those other polluting countries and Wisconsin and we \u2013\u201cwill do it right.\u201d (Trick)<\/p>\n

\u201cThe sulfur content of the rock at the PolyMet site is 1 percent or lower.\u00a0 It\u2019s negligible.\u201d<\/strong>(Trick)\u00a0 (Shouldn\u2019t even editors in an opinion piece offer these comments as alleged?\u00a0\u00a0 Because and in fact due to the low copper content also, the amount of sulfur in relationship to the amount of copper is as high or slightly higher than in the Wisconsin mines.\u00a0 So we will end up with the same amount of sulfur to deal with and that IS NOT NEGLIGIBLE!)<\/p>\n

An impressive (but not nearly as reassuring as you might think) group of agencies are attempting to \u201cmake this happen.\u201d<\/strong> (However, as impressive as the group is, the group has no control over human behavior, mine captains behavior and the need for profit and the concomitant expediency of extraction with the necessity to cut corners where ever possible.\u00a0 The mining companies will have as few workers as possible and will cut back jobs when technically feasible or economically necessary.\u00a0 Hiring a few hundred workers is NOT their primary goal.)<\/p>\n

PolyMet would bring back to life the former LTV taconite plant.<\/strong> The massive facility cost $350 million to build in the 50\u2019s, is reportedly worth $2.7 billion in today\u2019s dollars (and was \u201csold,\u201dno money has changed hands yet, for $3.4 million and some stock which is less than the scrap value of the place.\u00a0 So, in other words if PolyMet pays for the plant it will be a gift for stock from Cleveland Cliffs.\u00a0 And what shame is there in not using it, the Duluth News Tribune thinks there is shame involved if we don\u2019t.\u00a0 And, it appears there is plenty of shame to go round, but not where they are trying to put the shame blame.\u00a0 PolyMet brags to shareholders that the plant was worth $200 million and the LTV tailings pond worth $50 million.\u00a0 This is a tailings pond that IRRRB gave to Cleveland Cliffs for FREE who then included it in the agreed upon 3.4 million \u201csale\u201d which has yet to be consummated.\u00a0 Seems to me there is plenty of shame to pass around with the skullduggery involved with this \u201cownership maneuvering\u201d along with the U.S. Forest service swapping of protected lands for the express purpose of circumventing those same protections, \u00a0all for PolyMet, all for a few temporary jobs.<\/p>\n

Two groups strongly opposed to copper mining are far removed from the Northland.<\/strong> The Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness group is based nowhere near the Boundary Waters, but in Minneapolis. And the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy is based in St. Paul.\u00a0 (No one I\u2019ve met with whom I\u2019ve talked, these groups included, are opposed to copper mining, a myth that for some reason the mining companies want to perpetuate.\u00a0 These groups, like me, are opposed to pollution.\u00a0 I am very surprised that an editorial group could not distinguish the difference.\u00a0 And your inference than someone who is geographically a distance from the pollution doesn\u2019t count, if valid, would disqualify you as your ownership, in North Dakota, is geographically further away.\u00a0 Anyone who knows anything about newspapers knows that even editorial staffs don\u2019t blink unless told to by the owners of the newspapers.\u00a0 In this case an individual \u201cfar removed from the Northland.\u201d)<\/p>\n

Diversifying the economy of the iron ore-dependent Range<\/strong> (is an exceptional idea, one that has been overlooked for over 35 years.\u00a0 So far the best idea we can come with is more mining, mining that is ever so much trickier than iron mining to control from the standpoint of environmental impacts.\u00a0 What if we take a portion of the shameful money we are wasting trying to perpetuate mining and gather all these impressive agencies and individuals together for a new dictate, \u201cdiversify the economy of the iron-ore dependent Range and let\u2019s do it in a way that creates truly long term sustainable businesses and jobs here and gives individuals meaningful, healthy, non-polluting jobs.\u00a0 That could be done but it would take a different focus and commitment.\u00a0\u00a0 YES, let\u2019s put people back to work!\u00a0 And, let\u2019s make sure the air and water are healthy for us and future generations.)<\/p>\n

Yes the economy continues to struggle<\/strong> (and it has nothing to do with the protests of a few as implied by the juxtaposition of those two sentences in the Tribune editoral.\u00a0 It struggles because of the politicians, especially because of the bureaucrats, in spite of proper regulation, and in spite of the best efforts of our citizens.\u00a0 If we are going to do anything other than more of the same but worse scenario with mining, if we do want diversification and long term growth then we must look beyond extractive industries.\u00a0 Nature, clean water and clean air are more valuable now and in the future than all the resource extraction you can imagine, finagle, coerce, or force upon a working population.)<\/p>\n

(I would propose a moratorium on copper mining in Minnesota as the best long term plan.\u00a0 The Wisconsin situation with recent test wells showing abnormally high concentrations of heavy metals should not be ignored.\u00a0 If mining companies can prove to the standards requested by the intelligent and thoughtful people of Wisconsin, then we might also want to reconsider copper mining here.\u00a0 Until then we must demand more of our politicians than the high risk, promises without adequate financial assurances, short term run copper mining presently offered to Minnesota.\u00a0 And, if the foreign mining companies get their way and when they are done with us and we are left with the cost of cleanup and the pollution they will leave behind, we will be exactly where we were 25 years ago and still today, wishing we had diversified and done SOMETHING entirely different.)<\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

My View of Our View by the Duluth New Tribune which they first “aired” March 1st and then ran again Dec. 20, 2009<\/p>\n

Even for Editorial Comments this “Puff Piece for the Mining Industry” was beyond reason. Why are they trying to Puff and Sell Copper Nickel mining to their readership? What do they gain? […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[3],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/elyminnesota.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/elyminnesota.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/elyminnesota.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/elyminnesota.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/elyminnesota.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=29"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/elyminnesota.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":31,"href":"https:\/\/elyminnesota.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29\/revisions\/31"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/elyminnesota.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=29"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/elyminnesota.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=29"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/elyminnesota.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=29"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}