Here's my $0.02 as a *hack* geologist...

There are over 100 permits being processed for exploration activities in the SNF, and these include drilling core holes, running geophysical surveys, and soil sampling - none of which leave any permanent scars on the landscape. These activities are permitted and overseen by both state and federal agencies to ensure that the rules get followed.

Those are exploration permits. Mineral exploration has always been going on in the SNF, these activities are nothing new. There are really only a couple of mines being proposed right now, and only one of them is far enough along to be in the permitting process. This one is PolyMet's baby (   (You need to Login or Register), and they're calling it the NorthMet project.

PolyMet has been doing exploration work on the NorthMet deposit for a few years now (they leased the property in 1989). They are proposing a large open pit mine, which should have an operational life of 20 years - of course depending on the commodities markets and the price of metals. The principal targets at the NorthMet site are copper, nickel, cobalt, platinum, palladium, and gold. PolyMet estimates that when the mine and the related facilities are up and running, they will have 400 steady jobs to offer, ignoring the construction phase.

PolyMet is in the beginning stages of the permitting process. The Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) was made public a few weeks back, and it will remain available for review until February 3rd, 2010. An overview of the project, a link to the DEIS, and instructions for public comment are available on the MN DNR website - see the link below.

  (You need to Login or Register


More information about mineral exploration in the SNF can be found here, on the USFS website.

  (You need to Login or Register

For this NorthMet project, PolyMet plans to dig an open pit, located about halfway between Babbitt and Hoyt Lakes. They are in the process of refurbishing the old LTV taconite plant, which was purchased from Cliffs-Erie. All of the ore from the NorthMet pit would be processed at that facility which is six miles away by rail.

Here is a map showing the NorthMet deposit, and others along the same trend. The blue and red zones are known deposits, not mines. The labeling is a bit confusing. The existing iron pits are outlined and shaded in black.

  (You need to Login or Register

Okay. That pretty much sums up the project. Now let's talk about the controversies... I have heard a lot of BS and mis-information thrown around by various groups and media outlets regarding these types of mining operations, so pay attention to the following and decide for yourself.

One of the major causes for controversy is the fact that this mine, and the others targeting the Cu+Ni+etc metals, is the fact that the ore rock contains sulfide minerals. Sulfide minerals basically consist of a metal atom bonded to a sulfur atom. As such, these operations are generally referred to as "sulfide mining." The problem with these sulfide  minerals is once they are exposed to air and water at the surface, they can react to form a weak sulfuric acid.

In the past, there have been some major problems associated with surface and groundwater contamination by these sulfuric acid byproducts. Of course, sulfuric acid is the among the last things you want to enter your water supply or your surface watershed.

But on the other hand, most of these sulfide mines can be operated and eventually reclaimed without issue. The ones that failed were the result of bankrupt companies acting under old rules with outdated techniques. This type of mining can be, is, and has been done responsibly, with little to no risk of a contamination incident. For every contamination incident one can name, I can name a hundred other mines that have gone through the full operational and reclamation cycle without incident.

Simple chemical processing, filtration and settling ponds, and multi-stage impermeable liners are just a few of the ways that potentially harmful byproducts can be contained and neutralized. By the time any water re-enters the local watershed, it is cleaner than when it first arrived.

New governmental regulations require mine operators to post cash bonds, to ensure that reclamation activities and monitoring will be carried out even if the company goes bankrupt down the road. PolyMet has already been putting up cash and assets to satisfy these requirements.

The average sulfur content of these deposits is generally pretty low - under 1%. There is still some potential for creating the weak acids, but the amount of potential acidic byproducts is very low in comparison to other deposits of similar types elsewhere in the world.

It is true, however, that to date, no major sulfide mining of this type has been done in Minnesota. It is something new that should be approached with caution, but it's something that can absolutely be done safely, and it's something that can really benefit the state's economy.

But check it all out for yourself, don't just take it from me.

There ARE five more deposits to the NE of the NorthMet site, optioned by   (You need to Login or Register and   (You need to Login or Register that are actually at the edge of the BWCA. These would be underground mines that would straddle the BWCA border and conduct mining operations underneath Birch Lake.

But in my honest opinion, these two tiny junior companies are only holding on to the properties in the hopes of sending out juicy press releases to drive up their stock. It's an old game. And these are still just exploration leases, no attempts to start the review or permitting processes have been made by these companies. In all likeliness, these properties will change hands 4-5 more times in the next 10-20 years, and they will never become serious mining interests.

At this point, nobody is really trying to open a mine at the edge of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area.


Further reading:

  (You need to Login or Register

  (You need to Login or Register

  (You need to Login or Register

  (You need to Login or Register