According to the ADN Feb. 7, a foreign mining company is claiming to take a “holistic approach” to offsetting its development impacts on a remote Alaska area that “otherwise likely wouldn’t be cleaned of lost fishing gear and other debris.” It’s a place where “birds and other things that have gotten entangled in the ropes and nets lying around … demonstrate that’s a real threat.”
Also, the company “would focus on replacing damaged or poorly installed culverts,” something that might not be done due to poor economic conditions. Some 7.4 miles of coastline would be cleaned up, and several villages would get expensive multi-million dollar water treatment upgrades.
Pebble is doing its utmost to improve the image of its foot-in-the-door plans. Still, scale alarms are ringing louder than ever for Bristol Bay’s world-level salmon industry. “The scaled-down version of the Pebble mine project would still be a massive undertaking … A large bulk tailings storage facility capable of holding 950 million tons of waste rock would collect most of the milled ore. A smaller, lined tailings storage cell designed to hold 135 million tons of potentially acid generating mine waste would be segregated from the bulk tailings but be behind the same series of tailings dams. The primary tailings embankment would be 600 feet tall and three others would be between 60 and 420 feet tall,” according to the Alaska Journal of Commerce.
The waste may be less liquefied in the new plans and therefore possibly “safer,” but the massive “forever-after” toxicity hazard would still be there. Is the holistic approach adequate compared to the size of the threat? It would be nice if it was, but is it?
— Ken Green
Cooper Landing
Have something on your mind? Send to letters@adn.com or click here to submit via any web browser. Letters under 200 words have the best chance of being published. Writers should disclose any personal or professional connections with the subjects of their letters. Letters are edited for accuracy, clarity and length.