Great article by Tia Shoemaker in today's Anchorage Daily News opposing Pebble Mine. Most of the debate thus far emphasized negative impacts on salmon but Tia argues the case for impacts on wildlife and wilderness. If developed, the mine would be a disaster for the entire ecosystem in that area with only short-term benefits for investors. Where are the NRA, Safari Club, Alaska Professional Hunters, Alaska Outdoor Council, etc., on this issue?

Without mining our country is weaker.

http://www.freerepublic.com/fo...f-chat/3757763/posts

The recent threats by Beijing to cut off American access to critical mineral imports have many Americans wondering why our politicians have allowed the United States to become so overly dependent on China for these valued resources in the first place.

Today, the United States is 90% dependent on China and Russia for many vital "rare earth minerals."

The main reason for our overreliance on nations such as China for these minerals is not that we are running out of these resources here at home. The National Mining Association estimates that we have at least $5 trillion of recoverable mineral resources.

The U.S. Geological Survey reports that we still have about 86% of key mineral resources such as copper and zinc remaining in the ground, waiting to be mined. These resources aren't on environmentally sensitive lands, such as national parks, but on the millions of acres of federal, state and private lands.

The mining isn't happening because of extremely prohibitive environmental rules and a permitting process that can take five to 10 years to open a new mine. Green groups simply resist almost all new drilling.

What they may not realize is that the de facto mining prohibitions jeopardize the "green energy revolution" that liberals so desperately are seeking.

How is this for rich irony: To make renewable energy at all technologically plausible will require massive increases in the supply of rare earth and critical minerals. Without these valuable metals, there will not be more efficient 21st-century batteries for electric cars or modern solar panels. Kiss the Green New Deal and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Bernie Sanders' utopian vision of 100% renewable energy goodbye.

Yet, for decades now, environmentalists have erected every possible barrier to mining for critical minerals here in America -- which we have in great abundance.

Search far and wide through the grandiose Green New Deal plans and you will not find any call for additional domestic mining for battery-operated electric vehicles and electrified mass transportation systems, nor the underlying energy infrastructure.

Thanks to the extreme environmentalists, we import from unfriendly and repressive governments the critical minerals needed to produce rechargeable batteries (lithium and cobalt), wind turbine motors (dysprosium), thin films for solar power (tellurium) and miniature sensors that manage the performance of electric vehicles (yttrium).

Another irony in the left's anti-mining crusade is that these same groups have long boasted that by eliminating our need for fossil fuels, America won't rely on cartels such as OPEC that have in the past held our nation hostage to wild price swings and embargoes. Greens also complain that fossil fuel dependence requires a multibillion-dollar military presence in the Middle East and around the world to ensure supply. Now we can substitute OPEC with China and Russia.

Here is one simple but telling example of the shortsightedness of the "no mining" position of the environmentalists. Current electric vehicles can use up to 10 times more copper than fossil fuel vehicles. Then, additional copper wire networks will be needed to attach convenient battery chargers throughout public spaces and along roads and highways. Do we really want this entire transportation infrastructure to be dependent on China and Russia?

Of course, it is not just green energy development that will be imperiled by our mining restrictions folly. Innovation and research on new lightweight metals and alloys -- such as those used in life-saving medical devices and tiny cameras in smartphones -- could also become stalled if foreign prices rise prohibitively.

Also, because our mining laws (the ones that don't prohibit mining outright) protect the environment far more than those in places such as China and Africa, by importing these minerals, we are contributing to global environmental degradation.

So, there you have it. The "keep it in the ground" movement demanded by environmentalists against use of almost all of America's bountiful energy and mineral resources is blocking a green future and a safer planet. Do they know this? Do they care?

__________________________________________________

I have never voted Dem in my life and don't plan on it (translated: I am not a lib), but the Pebble mine is a horrible idea. I am not opposed to drilling or oil in AK; wasn't opposed to logging in Tongass, but an open pit mine??

PD, have you ever been to Alaska? Ever been to Lake Clark or Iliamna?

quote:

PD, have you ever been to Alaska? Ever been to Lake Clark or Iliamna?

Been to AK 4 times first time was in 74 for the summer.

Never been to those areas.

Still doesn't invalid date the reasons that we should mine in our own country.

If we stop developing our own recourses it leaves us beholding to our enemies. It leaves us weaker.

One of the reasons our country was made great is we could use and develop the natural recourses that where found here.

Think about where we be without the CA. AK. Black hills gold rushes. The great mining companies that gave us the ore to win two world wars.

The great lumber companies that logged the timber to build our great cities.

I hear the same arguments any time a mine is proposed any where.

A very substantial copper mine was stopped because of them just 100 miles away in Crandon Wis. Not wild area at all.

They are yelling the same thing to stop a mine in Northern MN.

I guess we should just go back to the stone age because we might hurt something.

Mining has been going on for thousands of years the land and earth recovers.

Did you know Isle Royal NP. was mined and cut over almost waste land.

Did you know the most of the BWCA was logged and mined before coming a wilderness.

All this sky falling we can not ever do anything. Is just that.

Put me in the "that is a bad idea" camp. Not the place for mineral extraction. Mining is fine in the proper setting with precautions in place. That is a special area in need of preservation not exploitation.

Just a reminder, the developers of the mine are British if that makes a difference. Just saying. Good Shooting.

I don’t know much about the Pebble but I will make a comment on why the Chinese have a near monopoly on rare earth production.

Google rare earths in. Baotao in Inner Mongolia and you will get an idea. Reckless ignorance of the effects of some rare earth production leads to environmental effects that western countries will not tolerate

I used to think it was a steel mill or the like that made the town look like it does then found out about the rare earth refining there. Poisoning the town and the Yellow River flowing through it. Many more examples around the globe too.

I work in the mining industry but am not always 100% behind every mining proposal.

I'm with p dog. I've lived here for 35 years and yes, I have been to the area to hunt. The animals will survive the mine. Look at the pics of caribou, moose, bears, and musk ox that live with the pipeline.

Develop the USA first and use what we have, what God gave us. Mining can be done responsibly. Yes in the past it wasn't. Yes there can be accidents. Valdez and the gulf oil spill are two examples. But we cleaned them up and all is well. The only other option is to buy all of our oil from the Middle East.

One further example. Copper River salmon are the best slamon on the market and the price people pay for them is extreme. It's a great fishery. Why is it the Copper River? 100 years ago a huge copper mine was there. No enviromental rules then. Today it's a wonderful place to look at, fish, etc.

I'd rather use what we have, put our people to work, and be responsible for our own outcome and future than rely on countries that hate everything about us except our money.

If it can't be grown, it must be mined.
Cal

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:

quote:

PD, have you ever been to Alaska? Ever been to Lake Clark or Iliamna?

Been to AK 4 times first time was in 74 for the summer.

Never been to those areas.

Still doesn't invalid date the reasons that we should mine in our own country.

If we stop developing our own recourses it leaves us beholding to our enemies. It leaves us weaker.

One of the reasons our country was made great is we could use and develop the natural recourses that where found here.

Think about where we be without the CA. AK. Black hills gold rushes. The great mining companies that gave us the ore to win two world wars.

The great lumber companies that logged the timber to build our great cities.

I hear the same arguments any time a mine is proposed any where.

A very substantial copper mine was stopped because of them just 100 miles away in Crandon Wis. Not wild area at all.

They are yelling the same thing to stop a mine in Northern MN.

I guess we should just go back to the stone age because we might hurt something.

Mining has been going on for thousands of years the land and earth recovers.

Did you know Isle Royal NP. was mined and cut over almost waste land.

Did you know the most of the BWCA was logged and mined before coming a wilderness.

All this sky falling we can not ever do anything. Is just that.

I am not opposed to the mine in "da range" - mining is part of that area. I am not opposed to logging. I don't believe not printing things on paper saves trees (most trees used for paper are from tree farms or private holdings and the owners will grow something else if not trees). And I am not against oil drilling. Incidentally, I have customers in all three of these industry groups.

One of the ways the mine has been successfully fought has been to demonstrate the value of the fishery, i.e., the salmon fishing is worth than the mine. The salmon processi g and fishing has been steadily improving the quality of commercially sold fish for a decade or more. No more canned salmon! I don't know if that's good or bad but it seems everything is more expensive fillets these days.

For Dillingham there is no benefit from Pebble. No industry or large employment, no tax revenue or infrastructure improvement. The only influence Pebble would have on my region is the possibility of large scale pollution and poisoning.

Time to stop being a bunch of greenies and develop the largest copper reserves in the world along with massive gold by product.

If one owned stock in NAK one would be all for the mine. But weak backboned politicians will bend over to the greenies.

I never though the mine would go thru and told NAK management that in 2013-2015. Had a nice ride up on trump.

It is a great resource and asset And should be be fully exploited but won’t be.

Mike

The real benefit of pebble is not a local economic impact.

Mining is high capital intensive business unlike a fish cannery.

Modern mining jobs are from $100k to $500k (if one can operate some very specific Bucyrus equipment)

The real benefit is global supply of copper in developed country helps the us and other western countries - japan Korea Europe. Also helps China and India.

Otherwise Indonesia, Mongolia, Africa and Chile will determine the commodity most tied to gdp and economic growth.

Mike

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:
The real benefit of pebble is not a local economic impact.

Mining is high capital intensive business unlike a fish cannery.

Modern mining jobs are from $100k to $500k (if one can operate some very specific Bucyrus equipment)

The real benefit is global supply of copper in developed country helps the us and other western countries - japan Korea Europe. Also helps China and India.

Otherwise Indonesia, Mongolia, Africa and Chile will determine the commodity most tied to gdp and economic growth.

Mike

That's fine, but I guide for fish, live in a fishing town and am poised to either recieved no benefit or more likely suffer the damage from Pebble Mine, so no gracias.
I like the idea of Chile determining the commodity tied to economic growth.

I live near vast reservoirs of natural gas and vast areas of open prairie. We have been trying for 25 +years to permit and build a new clean electric power plant. Simply can’t get it done while usage climbs and climbs. Wind generation everywhere but no base-load power to balance or high voltage dc lines to carry out of state means locked down turbines on many windy days. We as a nation have given over to weak thinking and selfishness at a level that directs our political actions. I hope for better but plan for not.

Something to consider?
Having oil, gas, and minerals in the ground is like having money in the bank. They are not going anywhere and with time they will only be worth more. The American approach has always been to take the short term view and spend it now and not worry about the future. As long as there are other sources why not use up the other guys resources first? Down the road this would give us great bargaining power. China has rare earths, we have copper, lets deal. If we have oil and the other guys are out, we would have an advantage.
Also the history of mining here in Colorado is not all that wonderful. In some areas the American people are now spending far more to clean up the messes left the mining operations than the value of what was mined. That is just corporate welfare for the miners.
So money in the bank for a rainy day or blow it now? It is our choice but you only get to make it once.
C.G.B.

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:
Time to stop being a bunch of greenies and develop the largest copper reserves in the world along with massive gold by product.

If one owned stock in NAK one would be all for the mine. But weak backboned politicians will bend over to the greenies.

I never though the mine would go thru and told NAK management that in 2013-2015. Had a nice ride up on trump.

It is a great resource and asset And should be be fully exploited but won’t be.

Mike

With all due respect, can you provide us with an update on the ongoing oil and gas exploration that is occurring off of Florida's Atlantic coast?

Oh, since we are on the subject of developing energy sources, have they commissioned the wind farm off of Cocoa Beach's coast?

Just asking for a friend.

Well, with the attitudes some of you show on this thread it is no wonder Tanzania wants to flood the Selous with dams.

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:
Well, with the attitudes some of you show on this thread it is no wonder Tanzania wants to flood the Selous with dams.

I probably don't fully understand the magnitude and severity of the shortsightedness of my NIMBY attitude, but I do have it.

This is a very wild and remote place that hosts a thriving fishery in a world of failing fisheries.

From a biological perspective, I think it's harder to say, oh to heck with it and dig the mine.

I do not disagree Scott. The point of the fisheries and in fact the business of wilderness has great merit. I also agree that copper in the ground is still of great value some day.
I grew up in a county in Colorado that had; has, enough uranium to erase all electrical power needs in the USA forever. We also had, has, enough Natural Gas and oil to make quite a dent too but it is in shale and we are far from a pipeline infrastructure.
I also know well the cost of defending the free flow of Mideast oil. It was not cheap and we are still paying the cost. My brain is can't quite accept the Pat Buchanan model of isolationism, but my heart sure could.
By the way; we have a decent supply of Rare earth metals in the ground as well. What we don't have is the ability to refine them.

Yeah--Drill Baby, Drill. Oil wells onshore, off shore, even on the Porcupine Caribou Herd's calving grounds in ANWR. Build roads and rail roads into the heart of the wilderness. Dam the rivers (Susitna). Clearcut the old growth forest in Southeast. Dig huge open pit mines with billions of gallons of toxic waste behind dams in earthquake zones putting Bristol Bay wild salmon at risk. No worries.

Let's take what Alaska has--wild life, wild country, abundant fish, clean air and water--and convert it into what the rest of the world doesn't have.

Most hunters have always been conservationists fighting to protect habitat. Pebble wins the trifecta--wrong mine, wrong place, wrong time. It's a no brainer. Ask the people who live in that area.

No argument from me on the Pebble mine. I do leave it to the people in the area.
I ask in a larger sense; what are the costs of our decisions? What is the cost of our demand for Electricity? Who do we expect to pay it? NIMBY is everywhere I have ever been but it grows higher and higher every year as a barrier to development.
Green New Deal for example: did you see a plan in there for new power plants and distribution lines, charging stations to replace Fossil Fuel miles driven? Even wind has to have a place to put a tower. Here on the Prairie, many places have said "no." As mentioned we have been working for 25+ years trying to permit a Natural Gas clean energy fired Power plant in Western KS. If you can't get it done here; where will it be done?

quote:

Originally posted by Cajun1956:

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:
Time to stop being a bunch of greenies and develop the largest copper reserves in the world along with massive gold by product.

If one owned stock in NAK one would be all for the mine. But weak backboned politicians will bend over to the greenies.

I never though the mine would go thru and told NAK management that in 2013-2015. Had a nice ride up on trump.

It is a great resource and asset And should be be fully exploited but won’t be.

Mike

With all due respect, can you provide us with an update on the ongoing oil and gas exploration that is occurring off of Florida's Atlantic coast?

Oh, since we are on the subject of developing energy sources, have they commissioned the wind farm off of Cocoa Beach's coast?

Just asking for a friend.

I am all for offshore oil and gas snd wind power in Florida. Would be great structures to fish off. I may even buy a $200k center console if that happens.

But it won’t. Offshore oil and gas is structurally broken by shale in us and long term low oil prices globally. Look at rig do or any offshore drilling company.

Florida distributed power will be solar. Disney just built a massive solar facility 12 miles from my house.

https://www.orlandosentinel.co...-20190418-story.html


Florida and nimby is probably confined to sex offenders. Everything else is fine.

I am all for drilling, mining and all the good exploitation of resources stuff. All this hunting and fishing and nature and for our children and next generation is do gooder bs. If it is economic stuff should be exploited and utilized.

If there are a few unemployed fisherman they can join the unemployed retail store manager displaced by amazon and find a new occupation.

Mike

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:
All this hunting and fishing and nature and for our children and next generation is do gooder bs.

Sad commentary on where we're at.

quote:

Originally posted by vicvanb:

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:
All this hunting and fishing and nature and for our children and next generation is do gooder bs.

Sad commentary on where we're at.

Not really.
" We're" not there, that's not where we're at.
Obviously T Roosevelt, Muir, Leopold and Edward Abbey disagreed with him as do many here on AR.
He can stay in Florida, we'll keep AK and if our lack of development puts him out of a job he can join the store managers in line.

Demand for resources continue to grow, hopefully the price for our resource, ( sockeye) will stay strong.

quote:

Originally posted by vicvanb:

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:
All this hunting and fishing and nature and for our children and next generation is do gooder bs.

Sad commentary on where we're at.

It’s all economics.

The whole Africa hunting as conservation is based on economic value. If it has value it stays - we keep hearing that over and over cause it is true.

Same for all other resources. It’s a trade off between costs and benefits. Florida has been losing s ton of hunting land as developments pop up. End of day the choice was made more economic development over hunting land. Same way as a choice was made for cattle and clearing over sub tropical brush.

I was always do the view pebble would never get approved. Regardless of the quality of copper and gold - other stuff would dominate.

If was in China or west Texas it would be producing by now.

Mike

The primary problem with Pebble is it's location !
It is stated to be the LARGEST gold and copper mine in the world and is situated at the headwaters of the largest and most productive and valuable Wild Salmon fishery in the world.

It's what is at risk that has everybody excited. Massive open pit mines have a well earned reputation for pollution, no matter how much their proponents promise otherwise.

Add to that, the vast majority of the wealth will leave this country .

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
The primary problem with Pebble is it's location !
It is stated to be the LARGEST gold and copper mine in the world and is situated at the headwaters of the largest and most productive and valuable Wild Salmon fishery in the world.

It's what is at risk that has everybody excited. Massive open pit mines have a well earned reputation for pollution, no matter how much their proponents promise otherwise.

Add to that, the vast majority of the wealth will leave this country .

If approved NAK will have to bring in a major as well as sell off interest to Japanese trading house.

China would be the natural buyer of the copper and would help reduce the trade deficit.

The project is tough cause most super major mining projects have 10 year build and multi generation extraction lifespans. Politics in us is on a 2-4-6 year cycle.

Only way this gets done is if army Corp or engineers green lights the project on science and if NAK partners with Native American tribe.

Just like pipelines from Canada these issues are tied up in politics.

But there is an awful lot of copper and gold there.

It cost $120k a barrel to build a green field refinery in Canada. Tough to build new greenfield stuff in the west.

All the guys looking at space mining are not dreamers. You either have to deal with massive environmental opposition in the developed world and inconsistent property rights in countries that allow mining.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/w...he-new-goldrush/amp/

Still end of day everyone will want gold, electronics, batteries, bullets ect that uses copper.

Mike

quote:

The primary problem with Pebble is it's location !
It is stated to be the LARGEST gold and copper mine in the world and is situated at the headwaters of the largest and most productive and valuable Wild Salmon fishery in the world.

Yep. No Pebble Mine.

I am a retired geologist and spent most of my career dealing with mining and doing abandoned mine reclamation. There are several issues that need to be considered with the Pebble Mine. First is that it is an open pit mine. The mining will be done by digging a huge pit to remove the ore. After it is processed the waste, or tailings, will probably be placed in a pond and stored indefinitely. The company will say it is not economic to put the tailings back into the pit during closure. The pit will fill with water that is acidic and full of metals. The tailings impoundment will also have a lot of acid and metals and will probably leach into the surrounding area.

Another issue is that the dominant minerals to be mined are pyrite (iron sulfide), chalcopyrite (copper-iron sulfide), molybdenite (molybdenum sulfide), and bornite (copper-iron sulfide). These are all sulfide minerals. When the pit and the tailings are exposed to air and water, the sulfide leaches out and forms sulfuric acid. The acid then leaches out the metals into the water. The copper is extremely toxic to fish and other aquatic life.

It is common for the acidic water and metals to infiltrate the groundwater system and ultimately get into the surface water. As the mining company will not put the site back as it originally existed (which is usually impossible to do anyway), the site will require perpetual monitoring and maintenance. No mining company will agree to perpetual monitoring and maintenance and will not be willing to post a bond that will generate enough income for perpetual monitoring and maintenance. It is likely the mining company will declare bankruptcy about the time money quits flowing into the project. That leaves the state or federal government holding the bag for reclamation.

The people of Alaska must consider if the short-term benefits will outweigh the long-term costs.

quote:

Originally posted by Dale:
I am a retired geologist and spent most of my career dealing with mining and doing abandoned mine reclamation. There are several issues that need to be considered with the Pebble Mine. First is that it is an open pit mine. The mining will be done by digging a huge pit to remove the ore. After it is processed the waste, or tailings, will probably be placed in a pond and stored indefinitely. The company will say it is not economic to put the tailings back into the pit during closure. The pit will fill with water that is acidic and full of metals. The tailings impoundment will also have a lot of acid and metals and will probably leach into the surrounding area.

Another issue is that the dominant minerals to be mined are pyrite (iron sulfide), chalcopyrite (copper-iron sulfide), molybdenite (molybdenum sulfide), and bornite (copper-iron sulfide). These are all sulfide minerals. When the pit and the tailings are exposed to air and water, the sulfide leaches out and forms sulfuric acid. The acid then leaches out the metals into the water. The copper is extremely toxic to fish and other aquatic life.

It is common for the acidic water and metals to infiltrate the groundwater system and ultimately get into the surface water. As the mining company will not put the site back as it originally existed (which is usually impossible to do anyway), the site will require perpetual monitoring and maintenance. No mining company will agree to perpetual monitoring and maintenance and will not be willing to post a bond that will generate enough income for perpetual monitoring and maintenance. It is likely the mining company will declare bankruptcy about the time money quits flowing into the project. That leaves the state or federal government holding the bag for reclamation.

The people of Alaska must consider if the short-term benefits will outweigh the long-term costs.

Reminds me of Asarco

Mike

quote:

Originally posted by Dale:
I am a retired geologist and spent most of my career dealing with mining and doing abandoned mine reclamation. There are several issues that need to be considered with the Pebble Mine. First is that it is an open pit mine. The mining will be done by digging a huge pit to remove the ore. After it is processed the waste, or tailings, will probably be placed in a pond and stored indefinitely. The company will say it is not economic to put the tailings back into the pit during closure. The pit will fill with water that is acidic and full of metals. The tailings impoundment will also have a lot of acid and metals and will probably leach into the surrounding area.

Another issue is that the dominant minerals to be mined are pyrite (iron sulfide), chalcopyrite (copper-iron sulfide), molybdenite (molybdenum sulfide), and bornite (copper-iron sulfide). These are all sulfide minerals. When the pit and the tailings are exposed to air and water, the sulfide leaches out and forms sulfuric acid. The acid then leaches out the metals into the water. The copper is extremely toxic to fish and other aquatic life.

It is common for the acidic water and metals to infiltrate the groundwater system and ultimately get into the surface water. As the mining company will not put the site back as it originally existed (which is usually impossible to do anyway), the site will require perpetual monitoring and maintenance. No mining company will agree to perpetual monitoring and maintenance and will not be willing to post a bond that will generate enough income for perpetual monitoring and maintenance. It is likely the mining company will declare bankruptcy about the time money quits flowing into the project. That leaves the state or federal government holding the bag for reclamation.

The people of Alaska must consider if the short-term benefits will outweigh the long-term costs.

Spot on in all respects. Thank you.

Long-term costs vs. short-term benefits? Not a difficult call.

quote:

Originally posted by vicvanb:

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:
All this hunting and fishing and nature and for our children and next generation is do gooder bs.

Sad commentary on where we're at.

Isn't it? Alaska doesn't need Pebble. The US doesn't need Pebble. It is 100% a money maker for non-AK and non-US interests. Thank God Alaska doesn't look like the gas fields of Alberta or the Williston Basin areas in the US. Areas I flew over 20 years ago were pitch black. Now they are lit up like cites.

"If was in China or west Texas it would be producing by now." Damn right. China is a shithole. West Texas is dry as a bone. It has no commercial fisheries. Bristol Bay is (I think) the largest wild salmon fishery in the world. There is no need to risk the salmon for a low yield, leach pit mine. Because containment lakes never break, right?

https://www.scientificamerican...-ash-pond-collapses/

https://www.wise-uranium.org/mdaf.html

Etc, etc.

Alaska is a gift to the world. Let's use it wisely. Pebble is not worth the risk and the destruction of habitat.

quote:

Originally posted by A7Dave:

quote:

Originally posted by vicvanb:

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:
All this hunting and fishing and nature and for our children and next generation is do gooder bs.

Sad commentary on where we're at.

Isn't it? Alaska doesn't need Pebble. The US doesn't need Pebble. It is 100% a money maker for non-AK and non-US interests. Thank God Alaska doesn't look like the gas fields of Alberta or the Williston Basin areas in the US. Areas I flew over 20 years ago were pitch black. Now they are lit up like cites.

"If was in China or west Texas it would be producing by now." Damn right. China is a shithole. West Texas is dry as a bone. It has no commercial fisheries. Bristol Bay is (I think) the largest wild salmon fishery in the world. There is no need to risk the salmon for a low yield, leach pit mine. Because containment lakes never break, right?

https://www.scientificamerican...-ash-pond-collapses/

https://www.wise-uranium.org/mdaf.html

Etc, etc.

Alaska is a gift to the world. Let's use it wisely. Pebble is not worth the risk and the destruction of habitat.

What I told NAK management - Alaska and Alaskans are not Texas and Texans. All that drill baby drill talk is just cheap political talk when everything is settled out.

NAK has a equity market cap of $150 mil and has to constantly issue equity to try and make Pebble a reality.

Pebble has world’s 12th largest copper and world’s largest gold potential. Pebble as enough gold to equal 2 percent of all gold mined in human history.

Given its $150 mil market cap - there is little chance this every produces.

https://www.northerndynastymin...ty_june_2019-web.pdf

Want to invest in new copper mines and do some site visits - get yellow fever shots and be prepared to travel to Congo or Mongolia. When one spends enough time looking at Mongolia - congo will seem like Switzerland to invest in

Mike

Why not stimulate US companies to appropriate rare earth minerals outside the US? China-style. That's how the US became so reliant on China for minerals, because Chinese companies have bought up an developed mines all across the world. Save your own hunting backyard, and save your minerals until they become really rare and needed. I'd rather see US companies owning and operating copper mines than Chinese.

There are some interesting comments here with additional information.

Beretta682E: Your information on the financial resources of NAK show they have financial resources that are extremely marginal at best for a project like the Pebble Mine. Regardless of the stipulations in their permits to protect the environment, the operator will be constantly trying to cut corners. Their entire market cap is not enough for a bond that will ensure perpetual monitoring and maintenance after the mine is closed. This is a Superfund site just waiting to happen. The company is likely to make as much profit as possible and then declare bankruptcy. They will walk away leaving the people of Alaska and the US holding the bag for cleanup that should have been a cost to the company of doing business.


BushPeter: I agree that we would be better off as a nation to import minerals when we can and save ours. As far as rare earth minerals, the US (California) was the top world producer at one time. There is an active rare earth mine proposal for the western portion of the Black Hills in northeastern Wyoming. Rare earth minerals are not really rare, but they are not found as concentrated as some minerals. It takes lots of processing to remove them from the ore. The site in Wyoming has the highest concentration of rare earth minerals known in the US.


I am a geologist and don't want anyone to think I am opposed to minerals production. Minerals operations will always have environmental impacts. However, it is possible to minimize the impacts, and that is often not done. The operator is often only interested in the financial bottom line. I support RESPONSIBLE development. It sounds like responsible development is unlikely at the Pebble Mine.

Folks,

Regardless of environmental impact I think there should be some places just off limits to industrial development of any kind. Bristol Bay is close to my heart and as wild and wonderful as it was when I left in '04. It is not a place for a huge open pit mine.

Mark

The fundamental problem is the Mining Act of 1872 that declares mining and mineral extraction the highest use of PUBLIC lands. No bonding of the mining company to assure clean-up. The mining claim becomes a 'patent' equivalent to passing the land title to the mining company AT NO CHARGE. No mineral loyalties are paid to the US Govt.

This is a 150 year old mistake that was passed by greedy politicians - bought and paid for by the mining interests.

It is high time that we re-write the mining give-away laws and move into the 21st century.

The Pebble Mine proposal is a BAD idea.

quote:

Originally posted by BushPeter:
... I'd rather see US companies owning and operating copper mines than Chinese.

The companies developing and mining copper in the USA are largely Canadian (Hudbay for example) and Australian(BHP/South32). Cheaper for them to mine here.

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:
...I am all for drilling, mining and all the good exploitation of resources stuff. All this hunting and fishing and nature and for our children and next generation is do gooder bs. If it is economic stuff should be exploited and utilized.

If there are a few unemployed fisherman they can join the unemployed retail store manager displaced by amazon and find a new occupation.

Mike

Have you been to the wasteland that is modern day China? Williston, ND? The examples of poorly conceived development are legion. Your cynicism is astounding.

We have enough 'resource development' without finding new places to destroy.

quote:

Originally posted by Alec Torres:

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:
...I am all for drilling, mining and all the good exploitation of resources stuff. All this hunting and fishing and nature and for our children and next generation is do gooder bs. If it is economic stuff should be exploited and utilized.

If there are a few unemployed fisherman they can join the unemployed retail store manager displaced by amazon and find a new occupation.

Mike

Have you been to the wasteland that is modern day China? Williston, ND? The examples of poorly conceived development are legion. Your cynicism is astounding.

We have enough 'resource development' without finding new places to destroy.

Problem is everyone wants the Greenwich, CT lifestyle - big houses, big cars and suvs and trucks, a lot of resource consumption but no one wants anything that generates those resources in their backyard.

So drill the oil elsewhere, refining it elsewhere, mine the the copper elsewhere - just make sure my 20k square foot house has all the copper wiring and plumbing.

All that drill baby drill is bs.

At least in Texas they will run the gathering pipeline thru some fancy neighborhoods in Tarrant county. They will build refineries and chemical plants outside of Houston.

I personally would bring out mr Peabody shovel, dig the mine and mark it all to the progress of man.

But in the world as it is this resource will probably sit unused.

Copper is tied to gdp so it will come from somewhere. If the price gets highly enough the market will find a way to get it. Maybe all of the Selous gets strip mined.

Yes I have been to China - Shanghai is pretty cool. In 2007 I stayed at the 90 floor and woke up at night when I heard some banging sound. They were welding in the Shanghai world financial center at 2am. It was the 100 plus floor building then under construction. That was eye opening. I have seen the same in India - guys working all thru the night on construction. All this will need copper.

I prefer Hong Kong - I like staying at Pacific Place.

I have been to too many shale oil fields - I will skip the Bakken - Hong Kong is nicer.

Mike