Yellow Dog River and Marquette (UP) health in jeapordy

A

anonomoose

New member
I never figured that the mine would be run "unsafely" as I am sure they will do that. I am far more concerned about what happens when they decide that the mine is spent, and they hand the operation over to a shell company...sell it, and the shell company is left to button up the thing properly and to protect from seepage in 70 years or so, leaving the EPA holding the bag...and if you don't know who props up the EPA funds....you should...cause it is us!
 
M

Mattarsc

Guest
Someone mentioned it earlier but I think/hope what the main this that happens with all of this hype is that IT IS run and maintained properly. Cleanly. I know cleanly is a stretch when mining, but hopefully with all the scrutiny that will happen. Judging by what that company makes businesses do, that do business with them, they are pretty tough on the keep it clean and do it safely aspect. Not two cents, just eye witnessed. Also.....is there a difference in the way this mine will be buttoned up compared to say the Quincy mine? I mean that is a pretty deep hole in the ground there too. I am sure chemicals and bi products are far deadlier now but back then....I dont know that there was much concern and worry about what ran where and what it was??
 
A

anonomoose

New member
".....is there a difference in the way this mine will be buttoned up compared to say the Quincy mine? I mean that is a pretty deep hole in the ground there too. I am sure chemicals and bi products are far deadlier now but back then...."

While I am no expert WHERE the mine is located in the drainage system around it will determine how much it will leach out. That's why in dryer climates such as AZ, mines can be abandoned and there is virtually no impact on the surrounds because they don't leak much if any at all.

If you dig around in ground that has water traveling over it or thru the ground, it's a whole nother matter.

leaching is leaching....whether it was done a hundred years ago or yesterday they all leak contamination. But what sort of mineral body the mining is "into" surely must play a roll in this issue as well.

We used to be ignorant of the heavy metal contaminations of years past, but we surely know the seriousness of this drainage today. Hopefully we will never need to worry about it, but based upon very recent history, I sort of fear the worste. And the promoters of the mine will fall silent.

WE can't change the past, but to repeat the same mistakes after we know better is worse than had we not known at all.
 
M

Mattarsc

Guest
"WE can't change the past, but to repeat the same mistakes after we know better is worse than had we not known at all."



Agree 100%. Let's hope they continue to make steps towards doing it better.
 
S

snowdancer

New member
Anonomoose, this is definitely something to be concerned about. They did state the acid only leaked into a containment area, whatever that is made of, and it was neutralized immediately. There is always going to be risks associated with any type of industry. When I lived in Kalamazoo I lived pretty much in the "back yard" of Pfizer. Talk about risk, they were always coming around and checking the water for contamination, and they did not offer city water to the neighborhood I lived in until 2006. Pfizer was THE largest taxpayer in the city of Portage- if something would of happened they would have moved the neighborhood first before they did anything to Pfizer! Anyway I guess what I'm trying to get at is this- in this day and age corporations are usually ALWAYS going to win because of the tax base they provide, not to mention the jobs they create. So many companies have left the states to do business overseas that any company that is willing to provide jobs is welcome in any community. We are going to have to take the good with the bad, and we definitely have to keep our eyes on them to try to make sure they run as "safely" as possible, for the people, and for the environment.
 
A

anonomoose

New member
There is not much I can argue about with your statement...it pretty much is straight truth. We need jobs, and we need to NOT mess up the environment....because often times the mess up can cost far more than all the tax money made while the company was in operation.

I worry about the fact that this mine is 9 miles "up-hill" from the big lake, and that polluting that fragile lake for any gains including a short term job, is simply NOT worth it....even if no jobs develop because the risk is too great.

But we always need to balance this equation as carefully as we can. Unfortunately, once a company has gotten a foot hold, they tend to use the threat of leaving to get away with some stuff they should not be taking chances on. So it really is up to the public to police this process and make sure that no advantages are taken.

When I was a young lad, many corporations exhibited personal responsibility for their environment and the personnel that gave their lifetime to working for the company. We have swung way to the other side with the pendulum and corporate profits which pave way for big fat salaries rule the day at the expense of all else. So it is the corporate environment that worries me in conjunction with the oversight of the environment and even the courts of this land are no guaranty that responsibility needs to stay on the top of all CEO minds. Judges are appointed and elected and willing to find some technicality to remove the case.

I have no problem with mining or responsible use of natural resources...so long as we don't lose track of the big picture...we get one shot at it and we will pass this place off to the succeeding residents and leave it a better place then when we found it. The rest all takes a back seat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top