EV battery material plant we sold out our minerals

[Retired-Guy]

What is the specific concern with this? Acid-rock drainage?

You should research Super Fund sites such as Niagra, NY, and Libby, MT. Do you, as a taxpayer, want to pay to clean up another mess?

 

[guywhofishes]

What is the specific concern with this? Acid-rock drainage?

https://www.mclanahan.com/blog/dry-stack-tailings-an-alternative-to-conventional-tailings-management

I wonder what their tailings management plan is?

 

[tikkalover]

Pile it by the plant to save on fuel or haul it to a coulee so people can’t see it

 

[Greenhorn]

You should research Super Fund sites such as Niagra, NY, and Libby, MT. Do you, as a taxpayer, want to pay to clean up another mess?

I am well aware of super fund sites. My company got started working the one in Niagara (Love Canal) in the 70s. Most of the super fund sites were results from industries dumping their chemicals into the soil back in the 30s, 40s, 50s before the EPA or any other environmental regulations existed. What makes you think this project will be a future superfund site? What are your specific concerns?

https://www.mclanahan.com/blog/dry-stack-tailings-an-alternative-to-conventional-tailings-management

I wonder what their tailings management plan is?

I’m not familiar with the project, but do we know if there will be significant tailings? These are being brought in from MN, correct? Are these being mined from a sulfur-rich formation, like that in the Duluth Complex (Ely, MN area)? They are bringing ore, not straight up formation rock, correct? So it has already gone through some stage of refining?

It sounds like catastrophizing to me, similar to those who protested DAPL. We have a big oil refinery right along the Missouri River and we are all still here (so are the big walleyes). Numerous coal mines, hazardous waste disposal wells, cow farts, and ND is still thriving economically and environmentally. While ignorant of this particular project, I just want to avoid the false dichotomy between economic gain and environmental catastrophe that many environmentalists make.

 

[Retired-Guy]

I am well aware of super fund sites. My company got started working the one in Niagara (Love Canal) in the 70s. Most of the super fund sites were results from industries dumping their chemicals into the soil back in the 30s, 40s, 50s before the EPA or any other environmental regulations existed. What makes you think this project will be a future superfund site? What are your specific concerns?


I’m not familiar with the project, but do we know if there will be significant tailings? These are being brought in from MN, correct? Are these being mined from a sulfur-rich formation, like that in the Duluth Complex (Ely, MN area)? They are bringing ore, not straight up formation rock, correct? So it has already gone through some stage of refining?

Seems like a lot of fear mongering doomsdayers to me, similar to those who protested DAPL. We have a big oil refinery right along the Missouri River and we are all still here (so are the big walleyes). Numerous coal mines, hazardous waste disposal wells, cow farts, and ND is still thriving economically and environmentally.

 

[Retired-Guy]

I just don't trust industries anymore to control the waste that they generate.

 

[Greenhorn]

I just don't trust industries anymore to control the waste that they generate.

No doubt. But rest assured that whatever work they do will be heavily regulated by the state and the fed on all levels.

 

[Allen]

What is the specific concern with this? Acid-rock drainage?

I would be more concerned with arsenic, mercury, and ???? heavy metals. Yes, some of them can create acid-mine drainage. Often times they put the chems over into a containment structure like a mine tailings pond that is artificial.

And then the rain begins.

 

[Allen]

No doubt. But rest assured that whatever work they do will be heavily regulated by the state and the fed on all levels.

The avoidance of MN regulation is EXACTLY what the company is looking for in the move to ND.

 

[Greenhorn]

The avoidance of MN regulation is EXACTLY what the company is looking for in the move to ND.

Of course. No doubt ND is more industry-friendly than MN in that regard. It doesn’t mean it will be unregulated. EPA, NDDEQ, and Mercer County still have regulations that will be enforced. My argument is more against the narrative that we are selling out ND’s environmental future by constructing a plant like this. We can operate a (seemingly) economically prosperous industry and not cause environmental catastrophe, not unlike a massive oil refinery along the banks of the Missouri River.

 

[Reprobait]

I know that the Stanton power plant that was shut down and demolished few years ago is considered a brownfield site. It has rail access. I sure hope they aren't putting this on the banks of the Missouri.

They may also be hoping for $$$$ from the state. We have the Lagacy fund sitting there and we will be seeing all kinds of requests for a chunk of it with the promise of jobs. Some may be legitimate, but others will be scams and absolute fantasies.

 

[Slappy]

This is the first I'm hearing of this and I don't understand the frustration. Will it generate revenue and create jobs in the state? Even if EVs aren't very practical in ND right now, why would be it bad to sell product in other states, like California?

Supporting the fake green nonsense is bad because it is used to take away our rights to use fossil fuels effectively.

These green washing initiatives are not in addition to fossil fuels. They are replacing reliable technology with more expensive, unreliable junk that creates further environmental problems while fleecing consumers and taxpayers.

Ethanol is a complete boondoggle that has been shoved down our tanks. Wind has decreased reliability of our grid. The carbon capture scheme is expensive on it's own, but will be used as another "carbon offset" mechanism to increase the cost of everything deemed "not green". Find a diesel owner with anything good to say about DEF.

 

[guywhofishes]

I am well aware of super fund sites. My company got started working the one in Niagara (Love Canal) in the 70s. Most of the super fund sites were results from industries dumping their chemicals into the soil back in the 30s, 40s, 50s before the EPA or any other environmental regulations existed. What makes you think this project will be a future superfund site? What are your specific concerns?


I’m not familiar with the project, but do we know if there will be significant tailings? These are being brought in from MN, correct? Are these being mined from a sulfur-rich formation, like that in the Duluth Complex (Ely, MN area)? They are bringing ore, not straight up formation rock, correct? So it has already gone through some stage of refining?

It sounds like catastrophizing to me, similar to those who protested DAPL. We have a big oil refinery right along the Missouri River and we are all still here (so are the big walleyes). Numerous coal mines, hazardous waste disposal wells, cow farts, and ND is still thriving economically and environmentally. While ignorant of this particular project, I just want to avoid the false dichotomy between economic gain and environmental catastrophe that many environmentalists make.

Maybe you can answer why they're doing it in ND rather than MN? If not - why bemoan my asking?

Seems as though you're not sure what it is they're bringing in either - or how monstrous the waste stream is going to be or what it contains. But you seem confident the EPA has a handle on making sure they don't pollute. Like how brine spills don't eff things up out west - even though the EPA says they shouldn't happen?

Does this project seek relief via the Bevill Exclusion? Heck if I know.

The Bevill Exclusion
The Bevill exclusion exempts from RCRA Subtitle C regulation solid waste from ore and mineral extraction, beneficiation, and 20 mineral processing wastes. The 20 exempt mineral processing wastes are: 1. Slag from primary copper processing; 2. Slag from primary lead processing; 3. Red and brown muds from bauxite refining; 4. Phosphogypsum from phosphoric acid production; 5. Slag from elemental phosphorus production; 6. Gasifier ash from coal gasification; 7. Process wastewater from coal gasification; 8. Calcium sulfate wastewater treatment plant sludge from primary copper processing; 9. Slag tailings from primary copper processing; 10. Fluorogypsum from hydrofluoric acid production; 11. Process wastewater from hydrofluoric acid production; 12. Air pollution control dust/sludge from iron blast furnaces; 13. Iron blast furnace slag; 14. Treated residue from roasting/leaching of chrome ore; 15. Process wastewater from primary magnesium processing by the anhydrous process; 16. Process wastewater from phosphoric acid production; 17. Basic oxygen furnace and open hearth furnace air pollution control dust/sludge from carbon steel production; 18. Basic oxygen furnace and open hearth slag from carbon steel production; 19. Chloride process waste solids from titanium tetrachloride production; and 20. Slag from primary zinc processing.


I don't know enough about this project to claim there will be a problem - but based on the track record for this type of thing it might well happen.

What I was saying at the very outset is that this is driven by an EV mandate and big $$$$. Like Solyndra was driven by mandate and $$$$$.

These types of boondoggles often leave projects under bankruptcy - then guess whose problem it becomes? The taxpayers. As per usual. The little guy pays the price for big $$$ making bigger $$$.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solyndra

I'm anything but an environmentalist - but I don't like unnecessary pollution/destruction either.

 

[guywhofishes]

Of course. No doubt ND is more industry-friendly than MN in that regard. It doesn’t mean it will be unregulated. EPA, NDDEQ, and Mercer County still have regulations that will be enforced. My argument is more against the narrative that we are selling out ND’s environmental future by constructing a plant like this. We can operate a (seemingly) economically prosperous industry and not cause environmental catastrophe, not unlike a massive oil refinery along the banks of the Missouri River.

Don't get me wrong - I generally concur that we shouldn't be NIMBY hypocrites.

But enforcement doesn't really prevent problems. Like the brine releases out west or the out of control flaring that wasted untold $$$$$$$$$$ in nat gas. Nope - and those all went against the regulations.

 

[guywhofishes]

Oh... and for what it's worth - there's an absolutely monstrous lake of fuel/petro under the ground at that facility on the banks of the Missouri.
Guess what? There's not supposed to be a monstrous lake of fuel under that facility. It's against regulations - always was.