by Duluth News Tribune
June 15, 2012 at 6:55 am in Duluth News Tribune
Tags: updates 16 Comments »
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
“Opponents say sulfuric acid runoff, which occurs when copper-bearing, high-sulfur rock is exposed to air and water, could damage waterways for centuries to come. Iron ore, by comparison, is found in low-sulfur rock that does not cause acid runoff.”
Correction: As an opponent I know that the reality is sulfuric acid runoff WILL damage waterways for all centuries to come.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: 25 41
There is not much to like about this process. Thank’s Crackvack, for doing everything in your power to ram this mess down our throats, further polarizing our communities.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: 23 41
I see it this way. Thanks, Congressman, for assuring that this mine will be run safely and still provide a timely, needed economic boost to a deserving area. The world needs these minerals. Let’s mine it where there’s ore and people who care about doing it right — here on The Range.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 42 26
Um. These projects are not happening on the Range? The propaganda suggesting that there will be any benefit to the Range is unsubstantiated.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: 16 41
I recall a famous republican once said “How many legs does a horse have if I call the horse’s tail a leg?”, many people answered 5 to which he replied “four, just because I said it, doesn’t make it so”. So Mr. Cravack says the mining will be safe, I say I am going to get everyone unicorns to replace their cars to mitigate climate change, we can say all sorts of things. Where are the facts to support the idea that Sulfide Mining is safe enough to perform near one of the largest volumes of freshwater concentrated in one spot on the planet? If the EPA gets changed via politicians voting to change it, then comes out in favor of the mine that does not change safety of the sulfide mining technique. Some people will say anything to get what they want.
Like or Dislike: 0 0
I’m starting to see shades of Oberstar in Mr. Cravaack lately. Meeting with company big shots, not inviting other interested parties to the closed meetings, and finally, not meeting with people (in this case protestors) for a bit before being herded into his transportation to be wisked away. Isn’t that why we all supported Cravaack in 2010…to have more openness with our Congressman?
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: 22 38
Protesters like the infamous felon baby snatcher are nothing but obstacles to the much needed high paying jogs in our region. Last I heard felons are cannot legally vote and the Occufailures are going nowhere positive blocking safe EPA and MPCA approved use of our natural resources.
Hot debate. What do you think? 29 26
1. Keep it civil and stay on topic.
2. No profanity, vulgarity, racial slurs, or personal attacks.
3. People who harass others or joke about tragedies will be blocked.
Tell me about the time the Epa was excited about Polymet’s proposal instead of attacking people whom you disagree with a ad hominem attacks on people. Say the way you speak sounds familiar, almost like that of some character that was making death threats to people online involved in political activism using multiple dummy Face Book accounts as well as using the accounts to bring down Face book pages and to fluff numbers of likes and approvals of his own comments. Don’t spose you know anything about that? All that being said I would like some evidence that this mining business is a safe necessary process. We can find other things for people to do that make them deserving of money if it is not.
Burntsider- move to the White Iron Lake Chain and then see how you feel- the winds blow right up WI from Birch Lake and into Canada- as well as the water flows in that same direction. That entire WI chain will be polluted air and water- not in my life time- but in the future.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: 13 33
Hmmmm….lots of dislikes and no comments, looks like the work of consultants that manage the message. Rude attacks and silencing techniques? Drink more Water!
Hot debate. What do you think? 14 22
There are times when you and I can completely agree. This isn’t always a random access site. Cut to the quick once and the phone lines and group e-mails start burning up the air waves. Feels great when you know you are having an impact…doesn’t it?
Like or Dislike: 10 11
The more scarce that a resource becomes, the more destructive the processes are to extract it. This is fact, not ideology. I’m not against mining, per se… But I am against people who think that companies should be allowed to do anything and everything they want, regardless of the cost. That attitude shuts the door to any reasonable debate.
Perhaps all of you “anything goes” advocates should move to China where that is the prevailing attitude. I hear the air and water quality is fantastic.
Like or Dislike: 14 9
I 100% agree Merv. There is a reason why we have regulations. China is a fine example of what can happen if the environment was deregulated and businesses regulate themselves.
It isn’t anti-business, it isn’t pro-government, it is being able to live in a healthy environment without any fears of having the air we breathe or the water we drink being unsafe.
Like or Dislike: 12 3
To the people that think that 300 jobs over the course of 20 years is going to some how save our economy I say bologna.
The real money here is going to a Florida company that has no vested interest in the long term health of OUR waters. And let’s not forget, this is OUR mineral deposit. If it is jobs you want to fight for; why don’t we process the ore here and ship out metal which is far more valuable than ore, and turn 300 jobs into 3000? And since the estimates of the amount of ore have gone up drastically; has the company in charge also taken into account the extra waste that will be created? Do they also have a fund set aside to clean up any potential spills of waste or to compensate the thousands of people who already have jobs in our resort industry?
I see a lot of people blindly supporting this mine and I see a lot of people blindly objecting to this mine but what I don’t see, is a lot of people thinking critically about what it will really mean to our area.
300 jobs is not worth ruining our waters, but it is worth looking into if it can be done in a responsible manner.
The opposing views on this issue will need to compromise in order to come up with a solution that is best for our region. Unfortunately, neither side will be able to do that if they continue to support their view-point based on gut instinct and not the facts.
Like or Dislike: 6 3
I saw in the RedStarTribune that PolyMet is replacing former U.S. Steel manager Joe Scipioni with another person experienced in environmental affairs. Maybe this is finally a good sign and things can start moving forward. I feel better about this project already. A non U.S.Steel manager now as CEO gives me some comfort and other posters should feel better too.
Like or Dislike: 0 2
Excellent points but the group think by conservatives seems to be…mining and 300 potential jobs making profit for someone else not in Minnesota with potential of contaminating waterways..good. $600 million infrastructure investment for high speed rail from Fed grants that would immediately be circulated here and create potential 13,000 jobs and be green energy project and long term return for infrastructure….that’s bad.
Am echoing you, but it’s great that we have copper and iron ore, but our most precious resource unique to this area is our water and air and they should always trump profits and everything else. There’s no immediate rush for the copper, it’s not going anywhere and only becomes more valuable the longer it sits in fact…but once we contaminate water and air, there’s no going back from that.
Fools rush in, where fools have been before.
Like or Dislike: 2 3
Click here to cancel reply.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
To start connecting please log in first. You can also create an account.
Topics is proudly provided by the Forum Communications Company