NationStates Jolt Archive

Well a Canadian company has identified a deposit worth by their estimations to be 300 billion dollars. Problem is where it is at. What would you do if you could determine if this project goes forward or not?

Miners eye Alaska's fork in the river


By MARGOT ROOSEVELT
Los Angeles Times Monday, September 10, 2007

NONDALTON, Alaska -- Fly overhead in a bush plane -- there are no roads between native villages -- and marvel: Eight giant rivers braid across hundreds of miles of wetlands, carving cobalt ribbons through snow-coned mountains before emptying into Bristol Bay.

For more than a century, the wealth of this southwest Alaska watershed has sprung from the astonishing volume of salmon nurtured by those wild rivers. Bank-to-bank, gill-to-gill, tens of millions of silver-hued fish thrash upstream to spawn each year, unrestrained by dams, untainted by pollution.

It is the largest sockeye run in the world, accounting for more than a quarter of wild salmon harvested in the United States, feeding millions at a time when fisheries are dwindling across the globe.

But if fish have made the region's past and present fortune, the future sparkles with the promise of precious metal. Beneath the rolling tundra, straddling the headwaters of two of the watershed's most productive rivers, a Canadian company has discovered North America's biggest deposits of gold and copper, worth about $300 billion in today's soaring commodities markets.

The dilemma is whether Alaskans will have to choose between the two -- and whether the watershed, its fish and a host of other wildlife will be casualties of what could likely be one of the world's biggest mines. The project would entail five earthen dams, of which two would be bigger than China's Three Gorges Dam.

Fueled by daily pro and con advertising on Alaska television, the debate is engaging state and federal politicians, commercial fishermen, Eskimo and Indian villages, the international sportfishing community, environmental groups, major foundations and multinational conglomerates in a state that rarely turns down a major mine permit.

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. of Vancouver, British Columbia, and partly owned by London-based Rio Tinto , has already drilled hundreds of exploratory holes, some more than a mile deep, on state-owned land in what's known as the Pebble claim. London-based Anglo American , one of the world's largest mining companies, announced this summer that it would spend $1.4 billion for a 50 percent partnership to mine the metal.

Opponents say a proposed Pebble mine would destroy one of the planet's last sustainable fisheries, dry up spawning streams, and poison lakes and groundwater with acid runoff. Biologists have found that salmon's genetic radar, which enable the fish to return from the bay to the very streams where they were spawned, can be ruined by microscopic particles of copper dust.

And Bristol Bay's other wildlife -- including one of the world's largest brown bear populations, a 45,000-head Mulchatna caribou herd, moose, wolverines, beavers and eagles -- also depends on clean water.

Northern Dynasty officials scoff at what they call an alarmist campaign. "We know Bristol Bay is a sensitive area," said Sean Magee , vice president for public affairs. "But there've been tremendous changes in the mining industry in the past 25 years. These projects can be done safely now: Mining and fishing can coexist."

What is clear is that the mine -- wedged between Lake Clark and Katmai national parks -- would entail a staggering scale of industrialization.

If the full resource were developed, as much as 12 billion tons of earth would be excavated and milled to extract the tiny flecks of metal: about 82 million ounces of gold, 67 billion pounds of copper and 4 billion pounds of molybdenum.

Ten square miles of impoundments would fill two valleys, to store in perpetuity more than 2.5 billion tons of waste rock and toxic residue.

And to transport equipment and ore, a new 104-mile road would cut through undeveloped forest and wetlands, skirting Lake Iliamna , Alaska's largest body of fresh water. The lake is host to rare freshwater seals and is a primary spawning bed for sockeye, the red-fleshed salmon that are among the world's most prized eating fish.

And Pebble may be just the beginning.

Northern Dynasty's exploration has sparked a surge of claim-staking, with eight other companies asserting rights over more than 700 square miles nearby. This month, the U.S. Bureau of Land Management will make a final decision on whether to allow hard-rock drilling on 3,300 square miles of federal land in the area.

"A massive mining district would carve the heart out of the watershed," said Richard Jameson , president of the Renewable Resources Coalition, a statewide anti-Pebble group, which is backing legislation and ballot measures to stop the mine.

Northern Dynasty's environmental studies won't be ready until 2009, and obtaining the 67 required state and federal permits could take three more years. But already, said Magee, "Debate is at fever pitch."

Opponents are waging an uphill struggle. Because Pebble is on state land, the key decisions will come from the Alaska Department of Natural Resources whose commissioner, Tom Irwin, is a former mining executive and whose mission is to promote development.

"It's the fox guarding the chicken coop," said Norman Van Vactor , Bristol Bay manager for Peter Pan Seafoods, which operates the area's oldest cannery.

The outcome may hinge less on environmental values than on which economic resource Alaskans value most.

"You can't eat gold," says Robin Samuelsen , a commercial fisherman and chief of the Curyung Tribal Council in Dillingham, the region's principal town.

Bristol Bay's fishery, with $450 million in annual economic benefits , employs 10,000 people in seasonal jobs, including 6,800 fishermen. And it could grow in value: Because contaminants in farmed seafood have come to light, consumers are increasingly turning to wild salmon for health benefits and its superior taste.

This time of year, the rivers that feed Bristol Bay are bedecked with racks of drying salmon, ready to be stored for the winter. In an area where imported food is prohibitively expensive, several thousand Athabaskan Indians and Yupik Eskimos depend on fish, moose, caribou, wild greens and berries.

"I'd rather eat porcupine than hamburger," says Jack Hobson, tribal council president of Nondalton, the village closest to the proposed mine. An Athabaskan outpost of about 220 residents, with its homes of weathered clapboard and corrugated steel, scattered along a dirt road, is plastered with anti-Pebble signs.

But mining would mean high-paying, steady jobs at a time when fish prices remain volatile and the North Slope oil that has buoyed the economy is dwindling.

Pebble would run for 50 to 80 years, said Bruce Jenkins , Northern Dynasty's chief operating officer, and "go a long way toward eradicating poverty in southwest Alaska forever."

In the last two years, Northern Dynasty has mounted a massive public relations campaign, helicoptering in nearly 1,000 politicians, business leaders, teachers and other influential Alaskans to the site.

The company has staged 800 presentations, in remote villages as well as in Anchorage, offering residents expense-paid trips. Tribal leaders have been hired as "community outreach people," and more than 120 local residents are on Northern Dynasty's payroll as $17-an-hour drill assistants, bear guards and other mine-related jobs.

Opponents accuse the company of buying influence, but Magee replies: "We don't apologize for hiring local people."

And opponents also have deep-pocket patrons, including Anchorage investor Robert B. Gillam , head of McKinley Capital Management Inc., who has a private lodge 24 miles from the Pebble claim. The foundation of another wealthy angler, Intel Corp. pioneer Gordon Moore , has awarded $5 million to local conservationists, including Earthworks, a Washington-based group organizing jewelers to boycott Pebble gold.

"Most Americans will never get to Bristol Bay," said Brian Kraft , who owns a local fishing lodge and works for the conservation group Trout Unlimited. "But they see our bears playing in waterfalls on the Discovery Channel. They can experience the taste of wild salmon.

"They know that we can destroy places like this, but we can't create them."


I personally don't think it is worth 300 billion to disrupt this area.

Hot diggity!

*grabs shovel*

I always wanted to go there with a camera for my vacation :(

Hell no! There is nothing that would be worth ruining this wild area. The entire area would be absolutely ruined. I hope Alaskans don't allow the mining to go forward.

It would depend on the amount of money slipped to me in a brown paper bag - given it's estimated value is 300 billion, I'd need at least 50 million to sway my decision - I might hold out for more.

Anyone ever accuse you of being a money grubbing whore? I am not suggesting that but just asking. ;)

I'm sure someone will sell out and mining will eventually go ahead.

Well a Canadian company has identified a deposit worth by their estimations to be 300 billion dollars. Problem is where it is at. What would you do if you could determine if this project goes forward or not?



I personally don't think it is worth 300 billion to disrupt this area.

It would depend on the amount of money slipped to me in a brown paper bag - given it's estimated value is 300 billion, I'd need at least 50 million to sway my decision - I might hold out for more.

Hell no! There is nothing that would be worth ruining this wild area. The entire area would be absolutely ruined. I hope Alaskans don't allow the mining to go forward.Correction: the area will be raped like a pedophile in prison. But with that kind of money sitting their, they could force those who are able to mine the area to regrow the area afterwards. It would never be the same for the next century or so, but after that it would be about as natural as central park.

It would depend on the amount of money slipped to me in a brown paper bag - given it's estimated value is 300 billion, I'd need at least 50 million to sway my decision - I might hold out for more.I am pleased that you are one of my ministers.

On a deposit worth $300 billion surely the company could pay for the environmental restoration of the areas and the most advanced methods of containing the damage due to mining.

No matter what, it's truly worth it. That kind of money could go very far towards benefiting the local community, and a huge deposit of two key metals is very good for the future of our economy. I think the parties involved should be looking for ways to maximize the benefits for both sides rather than try to halt it or go forward with reckless abandon. Both positions are foolish and cause more harm than good in the end.

Of course, worst comes to worst we could just have another Gold Rush...

Hell no! There is nothing that would be worth ruining this wild area. The entire area would be absolutely ruined. I hope Alaskans don't allow the mining to go forward.

There's a strong amount of the populace who have a problem with the deal.
In fact, our public transit has huge banners paid for (by somebody) splashed across the sides in protest.

Also, for note, the "Northern Dynasty" moniker has been altered slightly very recently for certain reasons.

Yes, i know a little bit about it, besides being an Alaskan resident.

Anyone ever accuse you of being a money grubbing whore? I am not suggesting that but just asking. ;)

I print it on my business card.

If there's no illicit money being exchanged here then Bush invaded Iraq for humanitarian purposes.

I want in.

I'm sure someone will sell out and mining will eventually go ahead.Your instincts serve you well.

It would never be the same for the next century or so, but after that it would be about as natural as central park.
Nice of you to put into context.

Nice of you to put into context.Hey, I worked in the oil sands; I know what I am talking about.

Yes, the presidential boat will be a fine boat indeed.

Alas, due to a further need to cook the books, cheaper materials than indicated will be used to build it so, though it may look as fine as Cleopatra's barge, I wouldn't exactly trust it on the high seas.That's ok. Like my wife, the boat is merely a trophy.

I am pleased that you are one of my ministers.

Yes, the presidential boat will be a fine boat indeed.

Alas, due to a further need to cook the books, cheaper materials than indicated will be used to build it so, though it may look as fine as Cleopatra's barge, I wouldn't exactly trust it on the high seas.

That's ok. Like my wife, the boat is merely a trophy.

Oh, so everyone's going to be able to use the boat then?

To the OP - I highly doubt this project will not go ahead - mining companies can make all the promises they want about not harming the environment - hell, they can even pay the paltry fines if they transgress but simply getting the project started will be enough and whatever it takes to achieve that will be done.

It's just too profitable.

Hey, I worked in the oil sands; I know what I am talking about.

Didn't say you didn't.
It's just funny how "natural" and "central park" don't really have much to do with each other :p

I hope that if the mining does go through, the mining company takes the necessary precautions to minimize its ecological impact. I further hope the government holds the mining company responsible for making sure of it (although I don't think I'll hold my breath on that one).

Didn't say you didn't.
It's just funny how "natural" and "central park" don't really have much to do with each other :pVisit the Alberta oil sands and you will find my comparison apt.

On a deposit worth $300 billion surely the company could pay for the environmental restoration of the areas and the most advanced methods of containing the damage due to mining.

No matter what, it's truly worth it. That kind of money could go very far towards benefiting the local community, and a huge deposit of two key metals is very good for the future of our economy. I think the parties involved should be looking for ways to maximize the benefits for both sides rather than try to halt it or go forward with reckless abandon. Both positions are foolish and cause more harm than good in the end.

Of course, worst comes to worst we could just have another Gold Rush...

Do you actually think the mining company will live up to its obligations? When have they ever? Ever heard of the mines up in Montana that have closed, with no work being done to fix the damage done? Also, how would they restore the area? Fill in the hole and plant some trees? This land, and the entire ecosystem, and the local communities would be destroyed. Also, how can you put a price tag on nature? The line has to be drawn somewhere. There is not much remaining unspoiled land. It would be a crime to ruin it for the sake of greed.

I don't see how not despoiling a pristine environment is foolish and causing harm.

Do you actually think the mining company will live up to its obligations? When have they ever? Ever heard of the mines up in Montana that have closed, with no work being done to fix the damage done? Also, how would they restore the area? Fill in the hole and plant some trees? This land, and the entire ecosystem, and the local communities would be destroyed. Also, how can you put a price tag on nature? The line has to be drawn somewhere. There is not much remaining unspoiled land. It would be a crime to ruin it for the sake of greed.

They've been sued and forced to clean up mines in Pennsylvania and other places before. It would require a definitive, legally binding statement forcing them to clean it up properly and adhere to environmental law; most of these companies got away with mining it without cleaning it up because the mines or the land were approved before stricter laws came in to effect and so were not grandfathered in for any number of reasons.

And you can put a price tag on nature...that's the entire point of environmental damage assessments.

I don't see how not despoiling a pristine environment is foolish and causing harm.

Losing out on $300 billion of copper and gold sounds pretty foolish to me, especially given the benefit it could provide to the local community if properly developed.

It would depend on the amount of money slipped to me in a brown paper bag - given it's estimated value is 300 billion, I'd need at least 50 million to sway my decision - I might hold out for more.

I saw this poster on a supposed American Indian saying.

"Only when the river is poisoned, when the last tree is cut down, and the land burned will you realize that you cannot eat money."

I saw this poster on a supposed American Indian saying.

"Only when the river is poisoned, when the last tree is cut down, and the land burned will you realize that you cannot eat money."


YES!

The perfect quote!

I saw this poster on a supposed American Indian saying.

"Only when the river is poisoned, when the last tree is cut down, and the land burned will you realize that you cannot eat money."

Yeah, with the profile of the old Indian guy with full headdress, smoking a pipe and looking wise and wrinkled,

I hate those posters.

$300 billion??? Really?

That's a lot of money... Probably why the company is so eager to get it... paying Alaskans to be PR for them... *grin*

Wish I was one of them, $17 an hour...


Well, Vetalia seems to have said basically what my first reaction was:

Simply put, the mining operations will allow the development of that area and give the population greater access to imports and other goods. In general, their lifestyle improves (by our standards of course), they get better education, better healthcare, and longer life.

Also, important salmon in the river? How's this, you give the mining company fishing rights to that area and legislate a fair employment to the current residents. Now the company has its own interest in keeping the river unpolluted. Best incentive in my opinion...

I faintly recall something about negative externalities and internalization from my economics class.

Visit the Alberta oil sands and you will find my comparison apt.

Since that's not realistically in my budget just yet, perhaps you have a snapshot or two?

"Only when the river is poisoned, when the last tree is cut down, and the land burned will you realize that you cannot eat money."

Continue to contaminate your bed, and you will suffocate in your own waste.
*jams to Soundgarden's version of "Into The Void"*

Also, important salmon in the river? How's this, you give the mining company fishing rights to that area and legislate a fair employment to the current residents. Now the company has its own interest in keeping the river unpolluted. Best incentive in my opinion...

I faintly recall something about negative externalities and internalization from my economics class.

Ha ha, you're going to give the fishing rights to the mining company as well?

Fantastic idea.

In a package deal. Mining and fishing or nothing.

If you can get them to be concerned with keeping the fish around, they'll do it better than any law can make them...

First off, what's the deal with using a Native American like he's Woodsy the fucking Owl? If sports teams are dickweeds for using Indians on their caps, why do environmentalists get away making Mr. Iron Eyes Cody their token mascot? If the NASDAQ drops below 2000 again will the government find a Jewish actor to cry on TV and tell us all to save money?

Second, not all mining is open pit or strip, there's always another way. Except when diplomacy fails, then the only alternative is violence, force must be applied without apology. It's the Star Fleet way.

I wonder if shaft mining is an option here. And did the last goldrush in Alaska completely destroy the environment? And when the company decides to hire local people both to help the local economy and swo they don't have to bus in work, the opponents of this project object. God anyone get a higher paying job. The environment is huge, people in the US occupy less than 10% of the land here. Alaska is more sparsly populated than any state in the US. And how do you you know that the mine will be a filthy afair? For all you know they could find a way to clean any water used before releasing it.

For all you know they could find a way to clean any water used before releasing it.

You sure about that?
...?

Well a Canadian company has identified a deposit worth by their estimations to be 300 billion dollars. Problem is where it is at. What would you do if you could determine if this project goes forward or not?



I personally don't think it is worth 300 billion to disrupt this area.

Another Alaska Gold Rush, lol.

Another Alaska Gold Rush, lol.

Yay! Stevens and Young are going to be popular AGAIN!

Hot diggity!

*grabs shovel*

I love that IL Ruffino, lol.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marrakech II
Well a Canadian company has identified a deposit worth by their estimations to be 300 billion dollars. Problem is where it is at. What would you do if you could determine if this project goes forward or not?

I personally don't think it is worth 300 billion to disrupt this area.

Another Alaska Gold Rush, lol.

Quote:
Originally Posted by La Habana Cuba
Another Alaska Gold Rush, lol.

Yay! Stevens and Young are going to be popular AGAIN!

The Brevious

Environmental destruction for the sake of gathering gold and copper?! Sounds great to me! When can we start?

May be a bit off topic, but it shows that we're not really running out of mineral products. And that includes oil. We're looking, and finding, and eventually will be extracting these and other resources... Comparing present day practice to that of decades or even centuries ago is about as sensible as comparing a hybrid car to a Model T... I'll believe that you (plural, general, no one in particular) really mean you'll conserve when you (plural, general, no one in particular) really do disconnect your electricity supply, grow all your own food, make all your clothes from raw materials, tote water from a nearby steam or the well you dug, dig your own latrine, and so on and so on...

And why is this going to a Canadian company, rather than an, oh, I don't know, AMERICAN COMPANY???

Jesus, it's our fucking land.

Why don't we just leave the gold there. Its not like it will disapear any time soon. If they ever REALLY need it then they dig it up.

That will give me time to convert my assets out of gold...

Fuck the fish, take the gold! Redirect the river or some shit if it makes the bleeding heart environmentalists STFU. *Telegram to environmentalists?: We're part of nature too, and this part of nature wants the MF gold. Survival of the Fittest demands we nuke the river for the prosperity of man*

And why is this going to a Canadian company, rather than an, oh, I don't know, AMERICAN COMPANY???

Jesus, it's our fucking land. Oh you know.. that thing... whatya call it... the construct that brought your insipid country to dominance.. uhhhhm...

The fucking freemarket.

If you don't want Canadian money, do the world a favour and draw your iron curtains.

They shouldn't. It will not make that part of Alaska rich "forever." It will make it rich for 50 to 80 years. After the mining boom comes the inevitable mining bust.

If there was enough to pay off our national debt, maybe then it would be worth destroying the area, but it's not even close.

Oh you know.. that thing... whatya call it... the construct that brought your insipid country to dominance.. uhhhhm...

The fucking freemarket.

If you don't want Canadian money, do the world a favour and draw your iron curtains.

And I call myself a libertarian. :p

I've just always believed that natural resources of a nation should be controlled by people (read: corporations) of that country, not another.

Well a Canadian company has identified a deposit worth by their estimations to be 300 billion dollars. Problem is where it is at. What would you do if you could determine if this project goes forward or not?



I personally don't think it is worth 300 billion to disrupt this area.

I would tell the companies to kiss my ass and to get the hell out of my office.

And I call myself a libertarian. :p

I've just always believed that natural resources of a nation should be controlled by people (read: corporations) of that country, not another. Well that is directly counter to a transparent and open market. You would be better described as a 'conservative' Something like the Republicans, who are often pro-market, but not always. There are no countries in capitalism, just consumers. Australia doesn't trade with US, millions of Australian consumers trade with millions of US consumers for a mutual benefit.

And I call myself a libertarian. :p

I've just always believed that natural resources of a nation should be controlled by people (read: corporations) of that country, not another.Well, you market system demands that it be controlled for the low low price of $19.95.

Order now and we'll double the value! That's right will give you two $300,000,000,000.00 precious metal deposits for the amazing price of $19.95!

Since that's not realistically in my budget just yet, perhaps you have a snapshot or two?
They did not allow cameras on site, as it made it quite obvious how bad things were to the general public but, look at what Google Maps has:
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=57.261315,-111.495266&spn=0.031703,0.079479&t=k&z=14&om=1
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=57.01887,-111.652679&spn=0.063824,0.158958&t=h&z=13&om=1
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=56.955647,-111.370983&spn=0.063932,0.158958&t=h&z=13&om=1
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=57.250359,-111.379695&spn=0.015856,0.03974&t=h&z=15&om=1
The images they have are quite old too. The last one is an expansion that doesn't even have its mine dug out yet. For those who care, I worked here:
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=57.259798,-111.504579&spn=0.001982,0.004967&t=h&z=18&om=1
It looks nothing like that now...

Well that is directly counter to a transparent and open market. You would be better described as a 'conservative' Something like the Republicans, who are often pro-market, but not always. There are no countries in capitalism, just consumers. Australia doesn't trade with US, millions of Australian consumers trade with millions of US consumers for a mutual benefit.

But conservatives are traditionally authoritarian, which I am not. I need to do some political searching I think...

May be a bit off topic, but it shows that we're not really running out of mineral products. And that includes oil.
That's not logical. Finding a reserve of minerals that are quite unreactive and that, as elements, don't have to go through the process of forming has fuck all to do with the existence of a natural resource that requires precise conditions to form and to remain intact.

But conservatives are traditionally authoritarian, which I am not. I need to do some political searching I think... Don't get too bugged up about it. All you need to do is drop the nationalism. Countries don't amount to shit from an economic perspective, all they adequate to are arbitrary demographic and geographic categories of consumers which have varying hurdles for the market to jump to reach said consumers.

They shouldn't. It will not make that part of Alaska rich "forever." It will make it rich for 50 to 80 years. After the mining boom comes the inevitable mining bust.

Well, if you can't use that resource to develop a larger economy that can survive and thrive after the mines close...there's clearly something going wrong at some point in the process.

And I call myself a libertarian. :p

I've just always believed that natural resources of a nation should be controlled by people (read: corporations) of that country, not another.

That's not very libertarian of you. Commie.

That's not very libertarian of you. Commie.

Sounds more mercantile to me.

Yes, I know already. I felt like killing the commie joke right now.

:: buys plane ticket ::

It's worth $300B to me LOL!!!

They did not allow cameras on site, as it made it quite obvious how bad things were to the general public but, look at what Google Maps has:
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=57.261315,-111.495266&spn=0.031703,0.079479&t=k&z=14&om=1
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=57.01887,-111.652679&spn=0.063824,0.158958&t=h&z=13&om=1
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=56.955647,-111.370983&spn=0.063932,0.158958&t=h&z=13&om=1
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=57.250359,-111.379695&spn=0.015856,0.03974&t=h&z=15&om=1
The images they have are quite old too. The last one is an expansion that doesn't even have its mine dug out yet. For those who care, I worked here:
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=57.259798,-111.504579&spn=0.001982,0.004967&t=h&z=18&om=1
It looks nothing like that now...
Thank you, for indulging me. *bows*

I really don't think the area should be mined. That kind of damage isn't easy to fix, and dams, while they are technological wonders and very useful, are permanent scars on the environment and deeply affect the Natives of the area.

This (http://www.nwri.ca/threats2full/ch1-1-e.html#table2) is a case study of the Kenney Dam on the Nechako River in British Columbia (scroll down about a page for the text).

This (http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/ch/rcap/sg/sg40_e.html) tells how the same dam affected the Native people living there. (Keep in mind, however, that this took place in the 1950s. I'm not suggesting that the exact same thing will happen, just that something similar could.)

Will the area be mined and dammed anyway? Probably will.

Simply put, the mining operations will allow the development of that area and give the population greater access to imports and other goods.Why people would need more goods?

In general, their lifestyle improves (by our standards of course), they get better education, better healthcare
Why these would cost so much as to need this project?

, and longer life.
Among all the pollution?

Open-pit mining and refining is about as toxic as you can get.

edit:

300 billion might sound much but divided across 30 years it's 10 billions per year....Say, what's the defence budget of the world? Perhaps cutting 10 billion per annum out of that would be more sensible, no?

Sounds more mercantile to me.

Yes, I know already. I felt like killing the commie joke right now.

It's called "kidding." Sometimes people say things they don't actually mean, under the assumption that no one would actually take it seriously because it is so ridiculous.

I know I'm a bit late for any real discussion on this topic, but I hope they do mine it. I mean come on. How funny would it be to watch all those investors who swore gold was going to hit like 2k. All of a sudden conservative capitalists are going to be all about saving the environment.

It's called "kidding." Sometimes people say things they don't actually mean, under the assumption that no one would actually take it seriously because it is so ridiculous.

I think you missed the white text.

I personally don't think it is worth 300 billion to disrupt this area.I agree. Leave it there. If, in the future, mining is no more disruptive than gardening, then they can take it.

And you can put a price tag on nature...that's the entire point of environmental damage assessments.Perhaps what should have been said was that you can't put an accurate price tag on nature.

That's not logical. Finding a reserve of minerals that are quite unreactive and that, as elements, don't have to go through the process of forming has fuck all to do with the existence of a natural resource that requires precise conditions to form and to remain intact.

Oil isn't really any different than solid minerals. It needs to be formed and not later damaged or released. Around here we extract oil which is both very much older and very similar in age to the potash (found and mined) in massive evaporite beds overlaying the older sediments. The oil is retained in the sands probably deposited at the time of its initial accumulation and the potash hasn't been dissolved by water. This isn't a thread on ore deposits, and my main point, which wasn't really challenged, is that we continue to find major deposits simply because we are now able to look and extract in an ever increasing part of the globe. Check out some of the new deep water oil discoveries in the Gulf of Mexico.

Just wait until the breakthroughs on deep ocean exploration and mining start...

Well a Canadian company has identified a deposit worth by their estimations to be 300 billion dollars. Problem is where it is at. What would you do if you could determine if this project goes forward or not?



I personally don't think it is worth 300 billion to disrupt this area.
As a fly fisherman, I'd hate to see anything ruin a sustainable fishery. If it's true that mining and fish can co-exist as claimed, then some proof is necessary. A small pilot project that will only have limited influence should be the first step. Failing there, would be easier to recover from than building a huge plant and finding out that mining and fishing can't co-exist at all.

It's called "kidding." Sometimes people say things they don't actually mean, under the assumption that no one would actually take it seriously because it is so ridiculous.

It's called "white text". Read it to get more meaning than the black text.

Hopefully they'll leave it. It just helps fuel a bigger demand for something that is finite.

:: buys plane ticket ::

It's worth $300B to me LOL!!!

If there were a mining boom, you could earn $40/h at the McD's, and still not be able to afford a down payment on an apartment! WOW! :p

If there were a mining boom, you could earn $40/h at the McD's, and still not be able to afford a down payment on an apartment! WOW! :p

God bless inflation...

Perhaps what should have been said was that you can't put an accurate price tag on nature.

Mainly because it's subjective. However, I think we all know how important a clean environment is to the wellbeing of our economy and ourselves.

I wonder if shaft mining is an option here. And did the last goldrush in Alaska completely destroy the environment? And when the company decides to hire local people both to help the local economy and swo they don't have to bus in work, the opponents of this project object. God anyone get a higher paying job. The environment is huge, people in the US occupy less than 10% of the land here. Alaska is more sparsly populated than any state in the US. And how do you you know that the mine will be a filthy afair? For all you know they could find a way to clean any water used before releasing it.

Does stupidity hurt? Alaskans are very territorial about nature...like bears..We only allow destruction way up north where the sun never shines..and a lot of people assume we want a big population. We are up here for a reason...mostly cause we don't like all of you. Cheechako go home!!

Does stupidity hurt? Alaskans are very territorial about nature...like bears..We only allow destruction way up north where the sun never shines..and a lot of people assume we want a big population. We are up here for a reason...mostly cause we don't like all of you. Cheechako go home!!

Of course, it's also true you get nearly twice as much money from the federal government as you pay in to it...

Of course, it's also true you get nearly twice as much money from the federal government as you pay in to it...

not for long I am sure our congressional delegation is about to get wiped out by the whole VECO scandal. Apparently we have oil and corruption fueled by said oil. It is so bad that our current governor ran on a ticket of open government. To the point where she turned in her own party for shady dealings...

not for long I am sure our congressional delegation is about to get wiped out by the whole VECO scandal. Apparently we have oil and corruption fueled by said oil. It is so bad that our current governor ran on a ticket of open government. To the point where she turned in her own party for shady dealings...

Hey, anything that gets Ted "Bridge to Nowhere" Stevens out of office is a good thing... I'd rather have Alaskan representatives that represent Alaska as opposed to the corporate interests and lobbyists in Washington.

Of course, it's also true you get nearly twice as much money from the federal government as you pay in to it...

You might consider mentioning how many states are "in the black" and why.

Well in court Bill Allens the former boss of VECO testified that they paid for some of the renovations done on Ted Stevens home. Expect it to hit the fan...we may need a new senator soon...darn still 5 years to young;) Hey Brevious you are about the right age.