Counterpoint: No holes in PolyMet mine report

  • Article by: Frank Ongaro
  • Updated: December 11, 2013 - 6:10 PM

Minnesota regulations are specific about what must be looked at for adequate financial assurance coverage.

  • 31
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
luzhishenDec. 11, 13 6:39 PM

Does Mr. Ongaro disagree with the length of time required to treat waste water from the mine, 200-500 years?

27
9
supervon2Dec. 11, 13 7:18 PM

Well written article. I'm glad to see Polymet moving closer to point where America can provide for ourselves. We should be taking pride in that and not raping other countries that don't do nearly as good a job as we do.

12
34
sek2undrstndDec. 11, 13 8:18 PM

What happens if a company, rather than filing for bankruptcy, simply folds and ceases to exist? Who covers the costs then?

29
10
sek2undrstndDec. 11, 13 8:23 PM

On another note, people should also know that Marc Rich founded Glencore. He is most famous for being indicted in the United States on federal charges of tax evasion and illegally making oil deals with Iran during the Iran hostage crisis. He was in Switzerland at the time of the indictment and never returned to the United States. He received a controversial presidential pardon from Clinton on Clinton's last day in office.

22
13
thedanmanDec. 11, 13 8:24 PM

Nice explanation, especially given the word count allowed and the complexity of the overall evaluation.

13
10
capsule2Dec. 11, 13 9:44 PM

A totally unbiased opinion........BWAHAHAHAHAHA

21
9
elmore1Dec. 11, 1310:44 PM

Frank, this sounds like Obamacare all over again. If you put together a big enough document the politicians will think it is too much work to read and will just sign off on it. Ask Al and Amy...

4
20
checkfactsDec. 12, 13 1:24 AM

The bio line for Mr. Ongaro implies an executive position in mining. But isn't he a lobbyist who contributes big time to local legislators? He said the same line three years ago when the Draft Environmental Impact Statement was rated with the lowest rating possible. This is an irreversible decision that should be proven first.

21
6
texas_technomanDec. 12, 13 4:57 AM

Go to Google Earth and look at Sudbury Ontario, or the missing mountain tops in West Virginia...then explain to me again how you hold mining companies responsible? Corporations will change identities, armies of lawyers will tie up issues for years, and in the end you and I...the taxpayer will be left holding the bag.

24
6
tmrichardsonDec. 12, 13 6:07 AM

To sum up Mr. Ongaro's statement--unlike the EIS, where the people of the state that are affected for this mine--looking out for their children, and their children's children given the clearly stated length of impact--don't get a chance to review financial assurances. That's a government regulation decision made by government employees who report directly to politicians. I sure feel better now!

7
7

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT