Enbridge CEO downplays long-term effects of spill

Enbridge CEO:  “We are fully committed to returning this river back to the way it was before, if not better,” says Daniel.

Enbridge CEO meets the press

By Todd A. Heywood 8/12/10 11:17 AM  of Michigan Messenger

MARSHALL — In a 30-minute interview with the Michigan Messenger, Enbridge CEO Patrick Daniel pledged to return Talmadge Creek and the Kalamazoo River to the way it was prior to the oil spill, but he downplayed any long-term damage from the leak while experts say the effects on both wildlife and human life could be significant and long-lasting.

Over the weekend, local newspapers have reported on the potential long-term effects on the local ecosystems and on the fact that the oil spill has silenced the songs of frogs, which are so key to the web of life on the river. Experts say this is not uncommon with releases of toxic substances into waterways. Frogs, they say, are exceptionally sensitive to the chemicals. But Daniel seemed unconcerned about any long-term dangers.

“I don’t think it is [accurate that the ecology of the river will suffer long term], at least no significant ecological damage,” Daniel, 63, said. “The experts are going to be more believable on this than I, but any experience I have had with any spills that we have had in the past … is that there are few long term impacts.”

In the Detroit Free Press, experts said the rupture of Enbridge’s Lakehead Pipeline 6B in late July has likely decimated smaller animals in the ecosystem. Those smaller animals — frogs, smaller fish, insects — are the bottom to the ecological food chain. They are also most likely to have been negatively impacted by the more than one million gallons of Cold Lake Crude oil that flowed down Talmadge Creek and into the Kalamazoo River, impacting in all about 30 miles of waterway in Calhoun County.

Asked if the reports of the silenced chorus of amphibians concerned him, he responded, “It concerns if that is the case. I also, though, would expect a full recovery from that and fairly quickly.”

But in other cases of major spills, that has not been the case. While the Exxon Valdez spill was much larger than this one, 21 years later the smaller fish that provide food for larger ones and were the basis of the local fishing industry have still not returned to the areas affected by the spill. In reality, the long-term effects from that spill have actually exceeded the predictions of scientists at the time.

And the long-term effects on human health could be severe, though difficult to quantify and pinpoint. Benzene is a known carcinogen, and the tar sands oil that spilled into Michigan waterways is known to contain much higher levels of heavy metals than regular crude oil.

It was on that issue — the type of oil being transported in the pipeline when it ruptured — that Daniel finally reconciled his own previous statements with what experts have said.

“No, I haven’t said it’s not tar sand oil. What I indicated is that it was not what we have traditionally referred to as tar sands oil,” Daniel said when asked about the Messenger’s report identifying it as such. “If it is part of the same geological formation, then I bow to that expert opinion. I’m not saying ‘No, it’s not oil sands crude.’” It’s just not traditionally defined as that and viewed as that.”

Enbridge has said the oil that was flowing through 6B at the time of the rupture was Cold Lake Crude, which must be mixed with a lighter petroleum product called diluent in order to thin it out enough to push through the line. Experts tell Michigan Messenger this mix can lead to various issues with the pipelines, including false readings and alarms from the remote sensing computer system used to control the network of pipelines.

“No, there really shouldn’t be any correlation between the type of crude and the impact on the pipelines,” Daniel said. He said the mixing of the crudes to thin them out makes that issue a non-issue.

What is more important, however, is the issue of corrosion on the line, Daniel said. But experts told the Messenger that the use of diluent does not increase corrosion in the pipes. Still, how the company handles corrosion is an important piece of the puzzle.

Under federal regulations pipelines are regularly inspected by a tool called an “intelligent pig.” The tool is a high tech version of an elongated rubber ball that is used to clean the lines called a “dumb pig.” The intelligent pigs carry ultrasound equipment and “an onboard computer,” Daniel said.

As they go through the lines they record the readings of the ultrasounds on the lines, and that data is then analyzed “much like x-rays or an MRI,” Daniel said.

“[Analysts] say ‘OK, here’s the signature of a potential problem,’” said Daniel. “Then we go in and either reduce the pressure and if it looks like it is threatening the safety of the line based on PHMSA [Pipelines Hazardous Material Safety Administration] standards we proceed with the dig and sleeve program. Or both.”

Anomalies in Lakehead Pipeline 6B were found that way earlier this year and Enbridge, as late as July 15, was negotiating with regulators at PHMSA about what a response to those readings should be. Daniel said that at the time of the Marshall incident, there was a “dig program” underway further up the line. In such situations, the company either places an additional thickness of steel around the line to reinforce it, or if the detected “anomaly” is large enough, they cut out the pipe and replace it.

The line in Marshall had no such anomaly detections, Daniel said.

As for the Line 5, which snakes across the state’s upper peninsula, across the straits of Mackinac down the East side of the state and across the St. Clair River to Sarnia, Ontario, Daniel said the line was functionally stable.

“Not that I am aware of,” Daniel said when asked if there were any anomalies detected on Line 5. He also said the spur from 6B to Toledo, Ohio had no issues either. The Michigan Messenger has filed Freedom of Information Act requests with the PHMSA seeking inspection reports for all of the pipelines in the state of Michigan, but has not yet received that material.

Daniel took pains to explain that every piece of metal has anomalies.

“There are anomalies in all pipelines — and in fact in all metal,” he said. The pigs help the company identify those issues, he said, and then the company proceeds to fix those which were identified as likely problems.

With multiple investigations happening as a result of the spill, as well as the release of information from various sources, Daniel was asked if this pipeline spill had been too politicized.

“I haven’t really thought of it as political, in that we all want to rest assured that when we start this line back up, that it’s done safely,” he said. “I have to admit I have focused more on the facts and issues around it than I have on the sequencing of the word coming out. I’m really not that worried about it.”

But sometimes, such as when rumors swirled around that an Enbridge employee had been on the site of the leak on July 25, the night before it was discovered, Daniel admits he is frustrated. The NTSB investigation prevents him from discussing the specific information, such as the location of his company employees and trucks.

Even as some claim Enbridge’s public proclamations of wanting to do right are a public relations ploy, Daniel says he has moved to Michigan for the foreseeable future to continue to meet with residents and leaders and oversee the clean up and remediation of the river.

“We are fully committed to returning this river back to the way it was before, if not better,” says Daniel.

Congressional Hearings scheduled   http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/article/20100806/NEWS01/8060319/-1/RSS?obref=obinsite

Water for Life

U.N. assembly asserts water rights, some disagree

July 28, 2010

By Patrick Worsnip

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) – The U.N. General Assembly asserted a global right to water and sanitation in a resolution on Wednesday, but more than 40 countries abstained, saying no such right yet existed in international law.

Some 884 million people lack access to safe drinking water, more than 2.6 million have no basic sanitation and around 1.5 million children under age 5 die each year from water- and sanitation-linked diseases, sponsors of the resolution said.

The non-binding measure, presented to the assembly by Bolivia, said the right to safe and clean drinking water and sanitation was “a human right that is essential for the full enjoyment of life and all human rights.”

And in a clause that appeared to put the onus of rectifying the situation on rich countries, it called on states and international organizations to “scale up efforts” to provide drinking water and sanitation for all.

The resolution passed with 122 votes in favor, none against and 41 abstentions. The abstainers were mainly developed countries, although European Union members Germany and Spain voted for the measure.

Abstaining countries argued that an independent expert, Portuguese lawyer Catarina de Albuquerque, was due to report to the Geneva-based U.N. Human Rights Council next year on countries’ obligations related to water and sanitation.

They accused sponsors of the resolution of seeking to preempt her findings.

U.S. delegate John Sammis said the resolution “falls far short of enjoying the unanimous support of member states and may even undermine the work underway in Geneva” and charged that sponsors had rushed it through.

British delegate Nicola Freedman said London “does not believe that there exists at present sufficient legal basis under international law to either declare or recognize water or sanitation as free-standing human rights.”

Washington-based advocacy group Food & Water Watch, however, backed what it called a landmark resolution.

“It’s time to reach consensus that the world’s poor deserve recognition of this human right without further delay or equivocation,” it said in a statement that accused the United States of “obstructing recognition of the human right to water.”

(Editing by Eric Beech)

Read more http://www.un.org/waterforlifedecade/reference.html

DNRE reassurances fail to convince environmentalists, skeptics

Will Michigan be able to afford the possible mess?

http://michiganmessenger.com/40044/dnre-reassurances-fail-to-convince-environmentalists-skeptics

By Eartha Jane Melzer 7/26/10 8:13 AM

This first mine to be permitted under Michigan’s non-ferrous metallic mining law — the Kennecott Eagle Minerals Company nickel sulfide mine west of Marquette — continues to draw concerns and criticism.

Michigan has dwindling resources for environmental regulation and its environmental and natural resources divisions are undergoing transformation and downsizing.

In an interview with Michigan Messenger this month state Department of Natural Resources and Environment spokesman Bob McCann — formerly spokesman for the Department of Environmental Quality — offered a dismal picture of how the state would regulate the mine. He said that the controversial nickel sulfide mine, like other businesses in Michigan, might be inspected once a year or less due to dwindling state resources. He also stated that Michigan has no system to pay for regulation though assessing fees, and that the $17 million financial assurance bond put up by Kennecott was expected to be enough to close up the mine if the company disappeared, but that any environmental damages that the mine might produce would have to be pursued in court.

McCann has now left DNRE and current spokeswoman Mary Dettloff says that McCann was mistaken about how the state will treat regulation at the mine.

Dettloff said that Michigan mining law requires that the mine be inspected at least quarterly. She said that these inspections will be carried out by the Office of Geological Survey specialist in the Gwinn office — Joe Maki.

Michigan does assess a “surveillance fee” based on the amount of material mined in order to fund oversight of the mine, she said.

According to the law that fee is equal to, “not more that 5 cents per ton of material mined from the mining area as reported under section 63213(1)(d), but not less than $5,000.00, for each calendar year the mine is in operation and during the postclosure monitoring period.”

Dettloff also said that the $17 million actually is supposed to cover the costs of any environmental remediation work needed after the mine is closed, and her assessment appears to be backed up by the statute.

The new information from DNRE does not reassure critics of the state’s approach to the mine.

It’s not clear what the mining inspections will entail. Those familiar with inspections at other UP mines are not reassured by the state approach, and some don’t trust the state to follow the statute because they feel the state has already violated the statute in issuing permits for the mine.

Michelle Begnoche is spokesperson for U.S. Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Menominee), who represents the Upper Peninsula.

“Regardless of whether that is supposed to cover just the costs of closing the mine, or the remediation, Representative Stupak is concerned that it is not enough,” she said.

Addressing water pollution can be very expensive, as evidenced by other contaminated sites in northern Michigan. In Petoskey, where the Bay Harbor resort development was built atop land contaminated with cement kiln dust, she said, the party responsible for clean up — CMS Energy — has estimated that cleanup costs will require $93 million.

Stupak has also warned that Michigan does not have adequate resources to monitor the mine and that state regulators did not require the company to conduct baseline environmental assessments of the area around the mine. This, he said, will make proving environmental damage very difficult.

Independent mining consultant Jack Parker, has raised numerous concerns about the planned mine.

“I recognize that inspections are meant to be quarterly,” he said, “but given the environmental records of both Rio Tinto and Kennecott Eagle Mineral Company, I would require constant monitoring, daily, with support from other experts on such matters as disposal of waste water at the mine, the mill and the transport system.”

Parker noted that some mines have been known to sprinkle toxic waste along gravel roads as a cheap and effective way to reduce dust.

An appropriate inspection regime for a mine run by Kennecott, he said, should involve at least one technically-oriented inspector who would be stationed at the mine full time.

This is a level of oversight far beyond what is planned by the state.

“I believe that overall our law is pretty good,“ said National Wildlife Fund attorney Michelle Halley. “But a law is only as good as it is enforced. Right now the way the state is applying its part 632 enforcement does not even exist.”

Halley, along with attorneys for the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community, the Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve and the Huron Mountain Club, has filed suit against the DNRE in Washtenaw County, arguing that the permits issued to Kennecott are flawed and should be overturned.

Under Michigan mining regulations, “a permit can be granted only if the applicant demonstrates that the mining operation will not pollute, impair, or destroy the air, water, or other natural resources or the public trust in those resources in accordance with the Michigan Environmental Protection Act.”

Those suing the state argue that during the permitting process the state failed to require Kennecott to conduct an environmental inventory around the mine or address the mine’s cumulative impact.

“[Kennecott’s] permit includes no contingency plans for the most predicted and potentially fatal failures, omitting perhaps the most important mechanism for protecting humans and the environment,” the group writes.

They warn that the permit does not include “discussion of subsidence or crown pillar failure; discussion of catastrophic events or wastewater treatment plant closure for a substantial period of time; contingency for significantly increased inflow to the mine; contingency should the MVAR air filtering system not work; or contingency addressing contaminated water leaking into aquifers from the underground mine.”

This lack of contingency planning, they say, is particularly disturbing and dangerous in view of the fact that an expert retained by the state to examine the mine plan, David Sainsbury of HCItasca Consulting, warned that “analysis techniques used to assess the crown pillar stability of Eagle Mine do not reflect industry best-practice.”

The mine opponents also say that the state improperly allowed DEQ policy advisor Frank Ruswick to issue a final approval of the permits as the state Departments of Environmental Quality and Natural Resources were in the process of merging earlier this year.

Kennecott Eagle Minerals General Manager Jon Cherry did not return a call seeking comment for this story, nor did DNRE mine specialist Joe Maki.

Mary Dettloff of DNRE said that because of the ongoing litigation against the state, it would not be prudent to discuss concerns about how the permits were issued.

State has dwindling resources to regulate Kennecott mine

MICHIGAN MESSENGER:

Mining expert says flawed design will lead to safety problems

By EARTHA JANE MELZER 7/14/10 1:53 PM

In the wake of the EPA’s decision that no federal permit is necessary for a controversial new nickel sulfide mine to be located on state land near Lake Superior, state officials and mining experts are questioning the state’s ability to adequately regulate the project on its own.

Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Menominee), the outgoing congressman for Michigan’s Upper Peninsula, recently warned that Michigan is not prepared to regulate Kennecott’s mining project. Stupak said that Kennecott’s parent company Rio Tinto, is known for cutting corners on environmental and safety matters and that a $17 million assurance bond put up by the company would not be enough to deal with damage that the mine could create.

The decision that the company does not require a federal permit for its wastewater system means that the responsibility for regulating operations at this massive project falls entirely to the state.

Staff and funding for environmental programs, however, have taken heavy cuts in recent years and this year’s merging of the Department of Environmental Quality and the Department of Natural Resources, together with more cuts scheduled for next year’s budget, is expected to further erode the capacity of the state to enforce regulations that protect against environmental degradation.

According to state Department of Natural Resources and Environment spokesman Bob McCann, there are no minimum requirements for inspections by regulators and it will be lucky if officials manage to visit the mine once a year.

“For most businesses in Michigan if we inspect them once a year that’s a lot,“ he said. “We don’t have the people to be out in the field a lot and our resources are dwindling.”

MDNRE staff have warned that they do not have enough people to adequately respond to environmental complaints, and a major state environmental group, the Michigan Environmental Council, has asked the EPA to review Michigan’s air quality program to see if the state is fulfilling its duties in carrying out this federally mandated program.

Rio Tinto is expected to invest $469 million to develop the mine which is expected to produce around 30,000 tons of nickel and copper per year for the next six years.

State Rep. Gary McDowell (D-Rudyard) — a candidate for Congress in Stupak’s district — suggested that because of the lucrative nature of the operation Kennecott would be willing to pay for needed regulation by the state.

“I believe that they want those metals badly enough that they will pay for that,” he said.

But according to McCann of the DNRE, there are no provisions in state law that would allow for that arrangement.

Michigan has required Kennecott to set aside $17 million to cover the costs of closing the mine in the event that the company ceases operations before the site is returned to its previous state.

This money is not expected to cover the costs of repairing any environmental damages that may occur during the operation of the mine, McCann said. These expenses the state would have to pursue separately through legal action.

Opponents of the mine argue that the ground and surface water contamination is likely to result from Kennecott’s activities and that the state could be stuck with a decades-long cleanup with costs that could range into the billions.

Mining consultant Jack Parker says that environmental damage is likely if the mine is constructed as designed.

Parker, who holds geology and engineering degrees from Michigan Technical University and has spent several decades working in about 500 mines across the U.S. and abroad, says that flaws in the analysis of the mine’s geology means that the current design is vulnerable to collapse.

“The mine will be unstable,“ he said. “People could get hurt.”

If the mine collapses then the surface is likely to collapse and that would upset the drainage, he said. One of the reaches of the Salmon Trout River comes close to the mine and a collapse could potentially destroy parts of this tributary to nearby Lake Superior.

Parker also warned that the state does not have inspectors with the experience necessary to evaluate the plans for the Kennecott mine and that Michigan has not followed state law by requiring that mine operations consider and limit the impact of blasting on area fish populations.

Kennecott has also failed to conform with state rules by demonstrating that their groundwater discharge system will work as planned, Parker claimed.

Kennecott’s operations have resulted in water contamination elsewhere

In Utah’s western Salt Lake Valley, where another Kennecott subsidiary is involved in copper mining, operations have resulted in groundwater contamination plumes that cover 70 square miles and impact the drinking water of several communities with sulfate, lead, arsenic, cadmium, fluoride, aluminum and nickel.

Douglas Bacon, a manager with Utah Department of Environmental Quality’s Department of Environmental Response and Remediation, has worked on supervising clean up of the mining area for the last 12 years.

“In the state’s opinion since 1995 Kennecott has been cooperating with remediation plans supervised by state and federal government,” Bacon said.

Kennecott, the state of Utah and the EPA have entered into a cleanup agreement under federal Superfund law and the company is carrying out and funding cleanup activities.

It took nine years of work by the state to get to this point, however.

Utah first filed suit against Kennecott in 1986 and was unable to get the company to agree to address its pollution until the federal government stepped in with threats of enforcement action.

Jon Cherry, who is now working to develop Kennecott’s nickel mine in the Upper Peninsula as general manager of Kennecott Eagle Minerals, previously worked on the Utah mine — where he coordinated cleanup response plans with the EPA.

In light of this history, opponents of the new UP mine have not yet given up on stopping the project. They have filed suit in circuit court in Washtenaw county, arguing that the permits were issued in violation of state mining law.

Al Gedicks: Chevron should pay for its disaster, too

by Al Gedicks

http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/opinion/column/guest/article_49fb9946-7fed-11df-b8c6-001cc4c002e0.html

While most Americans are familiar with the Exxon Valdez spill, few have heard of Chevron/Texaco’s far more serious oil disaster in the Ecuadorian Amazon rainforest. Chevron, which bought Texaco in 2001, dumped 18 billion gallons of toxic wastewater (known as “produced water”) into the Amazon from 1964 to 1992. According to the Amazon Defense Coalition, that amounted to “about 4 million gallons on a daily basis, or a total of 30 times more crude than was spilled in the Exxon Valdez disaster.”

The area affected by Chevron/Texaco’s contamination is roughly the size of Rhode Island. The toxic wastewater discharged into local streams and waterways contained a variety of toxic metals and cancer-causing petroleum hydrocarbons, including benzene, toluene, arsenic, lead, mercury and cadmium. By dumping the wastewater – instead of the common practice in the U.S. of reinjecting it into the ground – the company saved an estimated $3 per barrel, or about $4.5 billion.

In addition, Chevron abandoned roughly 1,000 open-air unlined waste pits filled with dangerous toxins. Activists describe the devastation as an “Amazon Chernobyl.”

Many Americans breathed a sigh of relief when President Barack Obama pressured BP to set up a $20 billion escrow fund to compensate victims of the Gulf oil disaster. The victims of Chevron’s contamination were not so fortunate. Thirty-thousand indigenous peoples and settlers from Ecuador’s Amazon basin are suing Chevron for contaminating some 1,700 square miles of Amazon rainforest in what the plaintiffs say is the largest contaminated site on Earth. The case, originally filed in 1993, is now being heard in the oil town of Lago Agrio, Ecuador. The suit charges that Chevron/Texaco engaged in “negligent, reckless, deliberate and outrageous acts.” The plaintiffs allege these actions led to the systematic and irreversible destruction of their homelands and provoked a health epidemic. Levels of petroleum byproducts have been found in water used for drinking, washing and bathing that are far in excess of recognized European safety limits. Residents of oil-impacted communities have suffered increased rates of cancer, birth defects, miscarriages, skin disease and nerve damage as documented in recent scientific studies.

The company has argued it already spent $40 million on cleanup and that the Ecuadorian government had already released the company from any liabilities associated with its operations. However, as the trial proceeded it became clear that Chevron’s cleanup consisted of covering some of the waste pits with dirt while the toxins seeped into the groundwater. If Chevron loses this case, as appears likely, the company will face a $27 billion liability for oil damages, cleanup costs and compensation for cancer deaths.

When the U.S. Court of Appeals in New York sent the case back to Ecuador in 2002, it also ruled that any financial penalty imposed against Chevron would be enforceable by U.S. courts. To avoid paying the $27 billion, Chevron has filed a claim under the United States-Ecuador bilateral investment treaty asking an arbitrator to order Ecuador to prevent judgment from being enforced against Chevron pending the outcome of the arbitration. Steven Donziger, a U.S. adviser to the plaintiffs, says Chevron is trying to evade responsibility for its toxic legacy by taking its case to a court where the plaintiffs aren’t represented. The arbitration claim does not affect the Ecuadorian court proceeding.

A victory for the plaintiffs in Ecuador will reinforce and extend the precedent already established in the BP disaster – namely, that Big Oil cannot escape liability for environmental negligence, no matter where the damage occurs.

Gedicks is a sociology professor at the UW-La Crosse and author of “Resource Rebels: Native Challenges to Mining and Oil Corporations.” Posted in Guest on Friday, June 25, 2010 4:45 am ChevronAmazon Rainforest

Is Michigan’s BP Disaster Brewing in the UP?

By Phil Power | Published: June 27, 2010

From   http://www.thecenterformichigan.net/

Today, TV screens, newspapers and the Internet are  consumed worldwide with the horrendous British Petroleum oil leak into the Gulf of Mexico, now believed to be the greatest man-made environmental disaster in our history, if not that of the planet.

But something eerily similar is going on, far from the cameras, in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula near the tiny village of Big Bay.

There, a company with a history as one of America’s greatest polluters is now planning to mine for copper and nickel right under one of Michigan’s most uniquely famous trout steams.

The design for this mine has been attacked by independent mining engineers, who see it as all too likely to cave in. If that happens it will kill the trout, and release a pulse of dissolved copper and nickel into a stream flowing into Lake Superior. It takes only tiny amounts of these heavy metals to wipe out fish and plants.

Michigan needs jobs, true. But under the best of scenarios, the mine would employ maybe 200 workers – many from out of state – for less than 10 years. That would  bring big-time industrial development to one of Michigan’s most pristine wilderness spots and threaten long-term tourism, fishing and hiking resources, perhaps forever. Worse, the mine would also defile Eagle Rock, a site sacred to Native Americans. Members of the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community and local residents are camping there, watching in frustration as crews clear-cut the timber from the surrounding area.

What’s going on here, anyway?

Welcome to the so-called Eagle Prospect mine, a project of Kennecott Eagle Minerals Corp., a subsidiary of Rio Tinto, Ltd., a vast London-based mining company. The Rio Tinto board of directors announced last week it would invest $469 million in the mine. That may sound like a large sum, but it’s a pittance compared with the $5-$10 billion worth of ore they believe is there.

The mine will be dug directly under the headwaters of the Salmon Trout River, one of Michigan’s best trout streams. Perhaps more importantly, it’s also one of the world’s last remaining spawning sites for the Coaster Brook Trout, a variant of the native speckled trout that behaves like a steelhead and comes near it in size.

Recent research suggests there are less than 400 of these iconic fish left in the river. Kennecott plans to blast through the Eagle Rock into the ore body which is located in sulfide rock, which when exposed to oxygen and water produces “acid mine drainage,” including sulfuric acid and dissolved heavy metals.

Every such “sulfide mine” ever opened has produced long-term acid mine drainage – some dating back to Roman times.

What if the mine does, in fact, cave in?

Alas, Kennecott has no known disaster plan for managing the resulting environmental damage. The trout will all die, of course — and that may not be the worst of it. Sound like Michigan’s version of the BP disaster in the making?

How could this have come about?

Approval of the mine was recommended by the Michigan Office of Geological Survey, which used to be a division of the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and is now part of the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). The Survey is our equivalent of the now-infamous U.S. Minerals Management Service that oversaw BP’s operations in the Gulf of Mexico. The head of the Survey Office’s mining team called the Kennecott project “my baby” and identified the company as “my customer.” During the review process, he admitted  suppressing an expert memorandum that spoke to the risk of a mine collapse. Another member of the state’s mining team formed a business partnership with Kennecott employees to offer mining services to the private sector; the partnership was dissolved after it became public. And Governor Jennifer Granholm’s UP representative who helped her formulate her position in support of the mine has left government service to work — you guessed it — for Kennecott.

There have been efforts to stop it, including several lawsuits, one of which came before a state administrative judge who was caught sending a note to a top official at the DEQ asking how he should deal with the resulting appeal.

Permits for the project have been issued by the DEQ and confirmed by the DNR, supposedly in accordance with a newly passed law governing metallic mineral underground mining.

That statute required Kennecott to submit environmental baseline studies on both the actual mine site and also the “affected area,” the nearby land and water that ran the risk of being environmentally compromised if something went wrong.

Kennecott’s permit applications ignored that provision, among others. (Full disclosure: I was a member of the work group that wrote the statute, and I am a member of the Huron Mountain Club, a UP group that is suing to try to halt the mine.)

Kennecott has not yet received a federal permit from the Environmental Protection Agency to inject treated water from the mine into area ground water. Yet the company is proceeding full speed ahead, as if no permit was needed.

And no evidence has been produced that Kennecott has a disaster plan in place to cope with the environmental trouble that many experts see as likely, if not certain.

In the BP/Gulf of Mexico oil spill scandal, it has become clear the agency with regulatory oversight of the offshore drilling industry – U. S. Minerals Management Service – had been “captured” by the very industry it was supposed to oversee.

And we now have seen the result. The Kennecott Eagle Prospect mine is exactly the same kind of disaster just waiting to happen … for similar reasons.

This is a true outrage. But so far nobody seems to be noticing.

Mine opponents have tried to talk with DNR director Rebecca Humphries, but she hasn’t been responding. Concerned readers who might want to make their opinions known can email her at humphriesr@michigan.gov.

***

Editor’s Note: Former newspaper publisher and University of Michigan Regent Phil Power is a longtime observer of Michigan politics and economics and a former chairman of the Michigan chapter of the Nature Conservancy. He is also the founder and president of The Center for Michigan, a bipartisan centrist think-and-do tank which is sponsoring Michigan’s Defining Moment, a public engagement outreach campaign for citizens. The opinions expressed here are Power’s own and do not represent the official views of The Center. He welcomes your comments at ppower@thecenterformichigan.net.

One Comment

  1. ken schwartz

Posted June 29, 2010 at 8:32 pm | Permalink

Phil,

I read this article with great interest since I have been blowing this horn around Washtenaw County for over a year and now I’m starting to get a few listeners. Jeff Irwin, Washtenaw County Commissioner and State Rep candidate for the 53th wants to start the process of making much of Marquette and Baraga counties a national park. The Huron Mountain National Park. This new national park in Michigan will complement Sleeping Bear National Lakeshore and Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore. Isle Royale is Michigan’s only national park and it’s a 55 mile boat trip to get there. There’s limited opportunities for seniors or the disabled to enjoy Isle Royale as it is maintained as an undeveloped park. The preservation of the Huron Mountain area will be accessible, and if successfully developed will be enjoyed by all Americans forever.

The positive economic impact of a national park will last generations and Marquette and Baraga will see greatly improved economies. In 1957 the Huron Mountains were selected as the best site along the Great Lakes Shoreline to preserve and some of the most beautiful land east of the Mississippi.

The nickel sulfide mining project in this area will denude and pollute this great part of wild Michigan and will not provide the People of Michigan the economic growth promised and will lose the great cultural and recreational asset of a national park. A few years ago Conde Nast magazine rated the upper peninsula as one of the top ten tourist destinations in the world and last year Liane Hansen of NPR raved about the beauty and food of the U.P. as she toured this vast and unspoiled land.

Phil, I hope you can join Jeff Irwin and myself and push to preserve the Huron Mountains forever. This development will attract thousands each year from Chicago and Minneapolis to spend their money in Michigan admiring this unique world asset. One accident at the Eagle mine could destroy much of Lake Superior just as one accident has despoiled much of the Gulf of Mexico. I hope you continued success to push awareness below the bridge of this potentially devastating mining venture.

Road Forum Scheduled for June 30

Marquette County Road Funding Forum

Are you concerned about:

  • a potential ‘Woodland Road’ through serene northern Marquette County
  • safety issues along US 41 West
  • the lack of a safe N/S truck route through Marquette

Wednesday, June 30th at 3:00 pm at the Negaunee Township Hall located at 42 M-35, Negaunee, MI 49866.

Representatives of local units of government will be on hand along with Mr. Randy Van Portfliet, Superior Region Engineer/Michigan Department of Transportation, and Mr. Jim Iwanicki, Engineer-Manager, Marquette County Road Commission, to provide information about the current status of their budgets and how funding changes might affect residents and businesses in Marquette County.

Topics that will be covered include:

• maintaining the current road system

• planning for future road transportation development

• state/county/and local government budget constraints

Sponsored by the Lake Superior Community Partnership

If you plan to attend, please RSVP via email to lscp@marquette.org or call 226-9658.

You are welcome to share this invitation with other interested parties.

TAKE ACTION: Help Stop New Kennecott Exploration

Proposed Mineral LeaseRecently the DNRE announced a public comment period for leasing over 4000 acres of mineral rights to Kennecott for further exploration. The exploration would take place in Southern Marquette County, Northern Dickinson County, and Southern Houghton County.

New Sulfide Mining Exploration

Proposed Mineral Lease Will Affect

Marquette County:

  • T43n-R25w Sec. 18 & 19
  • T43n-R26w Sec. 1, 6-10, 14, & 18

Dickinson County:

  • T43n-R27w Sec. 1, 3, 4-6, 9, & 13

Houghton County:

  • T47n-R36w Sec. 16

Public Comment Should Be Sent To:

Tom Hoane
FMD DNRE
P.O. Box 30452
Lansing, MI
48909-7952

Rio Tinto Locks Out 500 Union Workers

The LA TIMES reports that over 540 miners have been locked out of a Rio Rinto Mine in southern California. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-boron1-2010feb01,0,362036.story

Rio Tinto locks out over 540 Union Workers at the Borax Mine in California. Read More…
UPDATE Company Can’t Keep Story Straight After Lockout: tells union workers that they must sacrifice to keep company afloat, while company reports to investors that it is flush with cash. Read More…

Protesters Try to Slow Rio Tinto Busses

Protesters Try to Slow Rio Tinto Buses Loaded with Non-Union Substitute Workers

Alger-Delta Threatens Granot Loma Farms Over Utility Easements

For Immediate Release

January 26, 2010

Alger Delta Threatens Granot Loma Over Utility Easements

In an effort to complete Kennecott’s unpermitted power line to Big Bay and the Yellow Dog Plains, Alger-Delta Electric Co-op has filed a lawsuit against Granot Loma Farms for 15 easements along their 4-mile portion of the project. Co-op manager Tom Harrell refers to the lawsuit as a ‘legal complaint’ and is pressuring Loma Farms owner Tom Baldwin to give up his property beyond the legal right of way.

According to Baldwin, “The co-op’s original permit application allows construction within legal utility right of way. However most of the line is outside of the right of way. They (Alger-Delta) threatened to discontinue power to Loma Farms, which was designated an historical landmark in 1991”.  He has been negotiating with Alger-Delta on behalf of Kennecott and the utility is handling the lawsuit.

As compensation Alger-Delta offered Baldwin an undisclosed amount of money for the additional property needed.  “It’s about a property owner signing a fine print ‘contract’ with a utility which allows them to do whatever, wherever they want,” said Baldwin. “Alger-Delta expects me to pay property taxes on my land that  Kennecott is using for free to earn themselves 10 billion dollars”.

Alger-Delta has an alternate plan to re-engineer the utility lines for Granot Loma that could cost Kennecott an additional $75,000. In retaliation, power lines and equipment could be taken off of Loma properties and Baldwin would be forced to pay back to the co-op the costs for reconnecting to the grid in the future. “Basically they are trying to bully me into being a good co-op member” said Baldwin.

Kennecott has financed the entire $8.4 million dollar project, allowing Alger Delta to contract the work and broker the electricity. “Alger-Delta is like Enron – they’re just a broker. A good question to ask is why are we in Powell Township paying some of the highest electric rates in the state?”

One reason, Baldwin said, is that Alger- Delta purchases 100% of their power from companies that sell wholesale electricity and they recently signed a 30-year contract with Wisconsin’s WPPI. The co-op claims that Kennecott’s ‘upgrade’ combined with a reliable power source like WPPI will keep Powell’s electric rates low. Baldwin disagrees, “We all know that’s not going to happen”.

In October Baldwin recommended that Kennecott finance the building of a small community wind farm for Powell Township. “Citizens of the community will not benefit from a mine project on the Yellow Dog Plains, much less the potential ecological disaster that is connected to the Eagle Project. This would give Kennecott a way to somehow payback the community for all the aggravation and distress which goes with what they’re doing here. It would be an environmentally friendly way to provide energy to the township,” Baldwin said.

Baldwin believes that given the current green energy climate the incentives being offered by both the federal government and the USDA for alternative energy projects are excellent. Kennecott could recoup 30% of its multi-million dollar investment if they would connect to an alternative energy source. Matt Johnson, spokesman for Kennecott said, ‘We’ve talked a little bit about this. It’s something we’d be interested in looking into”.

Baldwin has looked into it and recently acquired a zoning permit with Powell Township to install a wind turbine on his own property. “The more wind energy we put into the system, the less carbon we produce, and that’s good for everybody”.

Legal issues with Alger Delta and Granot Loma will be reviewed at a mid-February court hearing. In the meantime the wind continues to blow in Powell Township as Kennecott pushes heavy power lines to Big Bay.