April 7, 2008 - 6:11pm | pebble_blog

check the updated blog post

I have additional information but I can't say for sure why it was canceled. A scheduling conflict was cited but perhaps there were other factors, as well.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  April 7, 2008 - 7:28pm | PuckFebble

Thanks

I do appreciate the update. Thanks a bunch. I will say that I thought bringing Red Dog and that lawsuit into the Pebble arguments in that way wasnt wise, but that is just my 2cents.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  April 7, 2008 - 5:46pm | pebble_blog

hey, you're welcome!

the only way I know if people are reading this thing is if they post comments, so thanks to you and everyone else who is participating!

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  April 5, 2008 - 1:49pm | Sockeyemark

Yes , This is a great tool for everyone

Thanks for getting this going, look forward to seeing information from both sides.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  April 6, 2008 - 1:56pm | ThorZone

Oh Really.....

I am not exactly sure what you mean by "the countries number one! Polluter", but if you mean to infer that the Red Dog mine has somehow polluted the water and air in the area it operates in you clearly do not know what you are talking about.

The water in Red Dog Creek before the mine came along was as toxic as any badly polluted water in the world. It all occurred naturally because the creek flowed right through the mineralization that was on the surface. The water contained all sorts of heavy metals and other pollutants to the point that elders in the area caution their people never to drink out of Red Dog Creek. Of course there were no fish in Red Dog Creek at that time because the water was too toxic to support a fish run.

Today, after the Red Dog mine actually cleaned up Red Dog Creek, there is a fish run right to the mine. That is because the water flowing down Red Dog Creek today is clean enough to support fish runs. Before the mine was in operation there were no fish. Today there are fish.

If Red Dog is the "the countries number one! Polluter" as you claim, how do you explain the fact there are fish coming right up to the mine today? The answer is you can't. The water is cleaner today than it was in its natural state before the mine was built.

Of course greenies never let the facts get in the way of a good story.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  April 20, 2008 - 4:14pm | Sockeyemark

The real story!! From a teck cominco employee

I was director of environmental affairs with Cominco, reporting to the president during the time when this mine was starting up.

Red Dog Creek runs 2 1/2 miles from the Red Dog Mine to Ikalukrok Creek, which, 25 miles later, enters the Wulik River. It was a small stream dependent on precipitation and groundwater, and it was frozen solid in the winter. Based on a handful of samples, collected only after substantial exploration disturbance had occurred, it had low water quality caused by heavy metal and acidic discharge that impacted it as far as the Ikalukrok. This was the greatest extent of any reported natural contamination.

Once mining began this drastically changed. The Red Dog Mine water management plan suffered from inadequate hydrologic, meteorological, and geologic baseline data. For example, no groundwater data were collected for mine planning, and when an aquifer laced with heavy metals was intercepted there were no plans to redirect it from Red Dog Creek.

Combined with unanticipated precipitation and permafrost melt, acid mine drainage flooded into Red Dog Creek, contaminating the Ikalukrok and Wulik River to the sea. In 1991 the Environmental Protection Agency ordered remedial action, but Red Dog management evidently did not take it seriously. The EPA-ordered drainage ditch did not extend the length of the acid generating area, the liner in the ditch was perforated with shot rock and leaked like a sieve, and the water treatment plant did not work anyway. Contamination of the Ikalukrok and Wulik continued.

Several belated years later the EPA again took action. This time a $4.7 million penalty caught the attention of new Red Dog management. Apparently the acid drainage problems have been resolved, the treatment plant works and clean water is routinely discharged into Red Dog Creek. Trout should be there. The stream hydrology has been completely altered in accordance with the EPA order.

But the mystery to me is this: How can clean water opponents and Pebble supporters claim that finally improving stream hydrology in 2 1/2 miles of a little creek is a credit to the mining industry and support for the disastrous Pebble project, when for fifteen or more years the Wulik River with important grayling and Dolly Varden populations, not to mention one of Alaska's largest Arctic char runs, was annually poisoned?

Here's the important point: Teck Cominco has more experience building big mines in the North than any company in the world, and with a better environmental record than most. Cominco discovered the Pebble property in 1986 and conducted extensive exploration on it for several years, including during my tenure. In 2002 Teck Cominco sold it to Northern Dynasty for a measly $10 million and without retaining a position in it. In 2003 Northern Dynasty "discovers" the biggest gold/copper deposit in the world and soon Anglo American is its partner. Northern Dynasty and its parent company, Hunter Dickinson, have never planned, built or operated a mine anywhere. Anglo American has never built a mine in North America let alone in the North.

Now, consider all the problems Red Dog has had and the vastly more difficult environment at Pebble where there is four times as much precipitation, the water table is on the surface, and it overlies the most active seismic area in North America. Then ask this: How can Vancouver stock promoters and inexperienced South Africans protect this environment when the best and most experienced northern mining company had so many problems for so long in the far more benign environment at Red Dog, and, in light of all their experience, walked away from Pebble?

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  April 7, 2008 - 6:57am | pmjusa

Number 1 Polluter?

The reason they can (legally) call Red Dog the no. 1 polluter is because of the EPA's definition of "toxic release," in their annual "Toxic Release Inventory." That includes any tailings material that the mine handles, be it harmless crushed stone, dirt, whatever - even if it is placed in an engineered, permitted tailings containment and cemented over, becoming more stable with time. The real toxic release in my opinion is the mind games the greenies get to play with the public, having framed the issue in this deceptive manner.

login or register to post comments | flag this »

  April 5, 2008 - 5:40pm | rfn

Look at recent news items

then ask yourself who The Village of Kivalina is NOT suing. Or not being urged by outside eco-lawyers to sue over Global Warming.

login or register to post comments | flag this »