Back to the original question… I’m in favor of the projects for the Jobs and for minimizing the environmental impact through existing air, water, wetlands, mine reclamation and environmental regulations.  It seems like most people either work for government or industry, and 50% of Northern Minnesota economy is provided by the mining or forest product industry.  Tourism only accounts for 11% of the economy, and those tend to be lower paying and seasonal jobs like waitresses, maids, and helper jobs as compared to high paid professionals.  The projects would provide additional revenue in the form of taxes to support government and the educational system.

In regards to open pit versus underground; I accept the open pit mining operations. When you drive on interstate 80 around the southern end of Lake Michigan in Indiana you cross a huge open pit mine called Thornton Quarry.  The quarry most likely will end up as a lake when they complete mining the resource.  Where did the rock go?  It’s in the pavement that you’re driving on.  Similarly, the open pit on the Mesabi Range end up in steel that you used in the cars we drive and buildings we live and work in.  There were four mines that are on the outskirts of Ely.  You can see them across from the Grand Ely Lodge.  They are now a lake stocked with lake trout and have a biking and hiking trail around them.  To me the copper-nickel mining area is a continuation of the existing Mesabi Range.  The PolyMet site is farther away than the current iron mines and I’m comfortable with the location and for the benefit it will have on the economy.

starwatcher


  (You need to Login or Register   (You need to Login or Register