Right now, it is mid-December and has been raining all day. Yes, rain—not snow, but that liquid that you drink. No White Christmas, just tropical weather that belongs in Costa Rica, not New England.
This is just one of the millions of environmental disasters—“a spiral of defeat”—as Al Gore would say. Coincidentally, Al Gore, as a prudent environmentalist, has a lot to do with this subject. This subject is the idea of the Pebble Mine in Alaska.
Here are some facts to get started. Bristol Bay—the Pebble Mine’s site—is a major breeding ground for five different types of salmon. 11, 572 people work in the fish industry alone, and it is worth roughly 120 million dollars. The Pebble Mine, on the other hand, could generate up to 500 billion dollars in worth and is estimated to create 2,000 jobs.
I’d like to point out the resources Pebble Mine would use in its 25+ year lifetimes. It would draw over 30 billion gallons of water from nearby rivers and creeks, possibly draining valuable headwaters. This could easily cause a drop in the number of salmon.
“An 86-mile expanded road and pipeline would cross streams and could affect fish swimming to and from spawning areas.”—Edwin Dobb. Again, Pebble Mine’s requirements are outrageous—but this is only the tip of the iceberg (no pun intended).
Mines, as you know, tend to generate toxic waste. Especially this two mile wide, 1,700 feet deep baby. Apparently, tailing ponds are planned to be used to capture lethal toxic by-products of the mine. The ponds cannot be too far away, as this would greatly increase costs, and leaks in the ponds could cause huge unrest in fish populations. The Bristol Bay watershed already houses 30-40 million sockeye salmon during the summer—not to mention Chinook salmon and many other species of fish year-round. This amount has only been maintained through careful tapping and lack of human features (like dams or roads). It’s true, the actual site of the mine is over 50 miles away from Bristol Bay, but the bay is fully downstream of the proposed mine, and is still surrounded by hundreds of rivers, lakes, and tributaries. Regardless of the number of fish, shouldn’t humans protect wilderness? Everything I have said so far applies to all aquatic life living in the region as well as many ground animals—some depend on fish, others not. For instance, roughly 2,000 grizzly bears are sustained by salon in the Bristol Bay area.
Pebble Mine may not have a bright future, either. It is expected to have at least a 25-year lifetime, extracting enormous deposits of gold and copper. Edwin Dobb estimates that no large scale environmental disaster relative to Pebble Mine would occur until at least 2040. No immediate harm then—but what of the longer future? Toxic waste must go SOMEPLACE—and we’ve learned the hard way when we’ve tried to apply “out of sight, out of mind” to dangerous waste. Any polluted water or damaged species MUST be compensated for—but not with money, with restoration. A partnership is being proposed to compensate for all losses—though regardless, losses are losses and they not only take a long time to compensate for, they will take a toll on the wildlife. Damage will most likely be done, though the amount is the question.
As well as the afor mentioned possible calamities, when sulfur-bearing ore—such as the Pebble deposit—get exposed to air, it produces sulfuric acid. Any deposits that get brought up to land will produce the acid. If it gets a chance to build up, from forgotten or unmineable ore, it will become fatal to any nearby wildlife.
Of course, there is a bright side. Pebble Mine is one of the largest deposits of gold and copper, two highly useful metals. Says Mike Heatwole, “copper is one of the building blocks of a green economy.” (Personally, to me, that’s like saying “this card is eco-friendly, so therefore I can buy it and not feel guilty at all because it’s helping the environment.” It’s still made of wood and processed with chemicals, you idiot!). At least 100, and up to 500 billion dollars are estimated to be gained from roughly 40 million tons of copper, 2.8 million tons of molybdenum, and 107 ounces of gold. This amount of raw metal is tempting, yes, but just imagine one ton. Multiply by 42.8 million (and that’s not even including the gold). Transporting and processing this amount of metal is a task that would require an amazing amount of fuel and energy. After refining, lots of this metal will probably go to private owners—used for jewelry and so forth. If we didn’t have the Pebble Mine metal, we’d use other metal, and the metal we wouldn’t be using with the Pebble Mine amount would go towards making other unnecessary objects that would probably take up energy themselves. Any addition of matter to humans’ supply only results in more stuff, more energy use, more waste.
Think, too, of the jobs. The Pebble Mine would create 2,000 or more short-term jobs. This would boost Alaska’s economy tremendously, as well as adding to its list of environmental catastrophes.
But think, too, of the morals. No doubt the Pebble Mine will create jobs and money. No doubt many people—native and foreign—will benefit. But really, do we need to suck the earth’s body away? Do we always need more, more, more? With our expanding population, now more than ever it is important to sacrifice, to not always get shiny new mines. Countless people have complained about issues like these. I am not the first, but when will people listen? When will every human on earth be able to sacrifice so that we have the pride to say that we saved the earth from ourselves? It is a measly accomplishment but it would be satisfying all the same to know that we, as a whole—not by the crazed speech-writers like me or the passionate people like Julia Butterfly Hill—that we together did not ruin Alaska, or any wilderness. The Pebble Mines ties to every large scale project in the world. We can’t keep raging, killing the rainforests of Brazil or the Himalayas of Nepal. We must save the bats and the red squirrels, and in doing so must halt human development or interference in their destruction. For, in 1,000 years, the Pebble Mine will be another blight in our history—it gave temporary wealth to private owners, but ruined one of Alaska’s great wildernesses for eons.
The Pebble Mine is a great (I use that term to mean huge) mistake to make. We’ve made large mistakes before, perhaps by older generations. No doubt you all think of earlier cataclysms, “oh, how stupid of that earlier generation. Now we, the younger generation must clean up the mistakes of them.” Who says Pebble Mine will be any different? No man-made disaster was ever thought to become such when it was being designed. Pebble Mine may seem a good option but the risks are way too high. By 2040, most adults and businessmen of today will be dead or retired, leaving the kids of today to clean up. So I, one of the future people of America, am voicing my doubts. We ought to have a say in OUR future, OUR life, OUR world.
We had an old saying in second grade.
Make your mistakes. But learn from them.
This is just one of the millions of environmental disasters—“a spiral of defeat”—as Al Gore would say. Coincidentally, Al Gore, as a prudent environmentalist, has a lot to do with this subject. This subject is the idea of the Pebble Mine in Alaska.
Here are some facts to get started. Bristol Bay—the Pebble Mine’s site—is a major breeding ground for five different types of salmon. 11, 572 people work in the fish industry alone, and it is worth roughly 120 million dollars. The Pebble Mine, on the other hand, could generate up to 500 billion dollars in worth and is estimated to create 2,000 jobs.
I’d like to point out the resources Pebble Mine would use in its 25+ year lifetimes. It would draw over 30 billion gallons of water from nearby rivers and creeks, possibly draining valuable headwaters. This could easily cause a drop in the number of salmon.
“An 86-mile expanded road and pipeline would cross streams and could affect fish swimming to and from spawning areas.”—Edwin Dobb. Again, Pebble Mine’s requirements are outrageous—but this is only the tip of the iceberg (no pun intended).
Mines, as you know, tend to generate toxic waste. Especially this two mile wide, 1,700 feet deep baby. Apparently, tailing ponds are planned to be used to capture lethal toxic by-products of the mine. The ponds cannot be too far away, as this would greatly increase costs, and leaks in the ponds could cause huge unrest in fish populations. The Bristol Bay watershed already houses 30-40 million sockeye salmon during the summer—not to mention Chinook salmon and many other species of fish year-round. This amount has only been maintained through careful tapping and lack of human features (like dams or roads). It’s true, the actual site of the mine is over 50 miles away from Bristol Bay, but the bay is fully downstream of the proposed mine, and is still surrounded by hundreds of rivers, lakes, and tributaries. Regardless of the number of fish, shouldn’t humans protect wilderness? Everything I have said so far applies to all aquatic life living in the region as well as many ground animals—some depend on fish, others not. For instance, roughly 2,000 grizzly bears are sustained by salon in the Bristol Bay area.
Pebble Mine may not have a bright future, either. It is expected to have at least a 25-year lifetime, extracting enormous deposits of gold and copper. Edwin Dobb estimates that no large scale environmental disaster relative to Pebble Mine would occur until at least 2040. No immediate harm then—but what of the longer future? Toxic waste must go SOMEPLACE—and we’ve learned the hard way when we’ve tried to apply “out of sight, out of mind” to dangerous waste. Any polluted water or damaged species MUST be compensated for—but not with money, with restoration. A partnership is being proposed to compensate for all losses—though regardless, losses are losses and they not only take a long time to compensate for, they will take a toll on the wildlife. Damage will most likely be done, though the amount is the question.
As well as the afor mentioned possible calamities, when sulfur-bearing ore—such as the Pebble deposit—get exposed to air, it produces sulfuric acid. Any deposits that get brought up to land will produce the acid. If it gets a chance to build up, from forgotten or unmineable ore, it will become fatal to any nearby wildlife.
Of course, there is a bright side. Pebble Mine is one of the largest deposits of gold and copper, two highly useful metals. Says Mike Heatwole, “copper is one of the building blocks of a green economy.” (Personally, to me, that’s like saying “this card is eco-friendly, so therefore I can buy it and not feel guilty at all because it’s helping the environment.” It’s still made of wood and processed with chemicals, you idiot!). At least 100, and up to 500 billion dollars are estimated to be gained from roughly 40 million tons of copper, 2.8 million tons of molybdenum, and 107 ounces of gold. This amount of raw metal is tempting, yes, but just imagine one ton. Multiply by 42.8 million (and that’s not even including the gold). Transporting and processing this amount of metal is a task that would require an amazing amount of fuel and energy. After refining, lots of this metal will probably go to private owners—used for jewelry and so forth. If we didn’t have the Pebble Mine metal, we’d use other metal, and the metal we wouldn’t be using with the Pebble Mine amount would go towards making other unnecessary objects that would probably take up energy themselves. Any addition of matter to humans’ supply only results in more stuff, more energy use, more waste.
Think, too, of the jobs. The Pebble Mine would create 2,000 or more short-term jobs. This would boost Alaska’s economy tremendously, as well as adding to its list of environmental catastrophes.
But think, too, of the morals. No doubt the Pebble Mine will create jobs and money. No doubt many people—native and foreign—will benefit. But really, do we need to suck the earth’s body away? Do we always need more, more, more? With our expanding population, now more than ever it is important to sacrifice, to not always get shiny new mines. Countless people have complained about issues like these. I am not the first, but when will people listen? When will every human on earth be able to sacrifice so that we have the pride to say that we saved the earth from ourselves? It is a measly accomplishment but it would be satisfying all the same to know that we, as a whole—not by the crazed speech-writers like me or the passionate people like Julia Butterfly Hill—that we together did not ruin Alaska, or any wilderness. The Pebble Mines ties to every large scale project in the world. We can’t keep raging, killing the rainforests of Brazil or the Himalayas of Nepal. We must save the bats and the red squirrels, and in doing so must halt human development or interference in their destruction. For, in 1,000 years, the Pebble Mine will be another blight in our history—it gave temporary wealth to private owners, but ruined one of Alaska’s great wildernesses for eons.
The Pebble Mine is a great (I use that term to mean huge) mistake to make. We’ve made large mistakes before, perhaps by older generations. No doubt you all think of earlier cataclysms, “oh, how stupid of that earlier generation. Now we, the younger generation must clean up the mistakes of them.” Who says Pebble Mine will be any different? No man-made disaster was ever thought to become such when it was being designed. Pebble Mine may seem a good option but the risks are way too high. By 2040, most adults and businessmen of today will be dead or retired, leaving the kids of today to clean up. So I, one of the future people of America, am voicing my doubts. We ought to have a say in OUR future, OUR life, OUR world.
We had an old saying in second grade.
Make your mistakes. But learn from them.
Join the Discussion
This article has 3 comments. Post your own!