Dude, Bambi, others who understand the technical aspects of mining....
What do you make of this? It is a pre-feasability study produced by/for Duluth Metals in 2014…
You have every right to be concerned. Like I said, I'm not here to change minds. Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion. Being pragmatic, I like to hear all sides of an issue, and as an engineer like to believe we can design and construct things that will function properly with little to no risk to the environment and life. If I lived in the area I would also be concerned and want to know everything.
As far as the first link, you got it, it’s a Pre-feasibility Study and financial report/analysis (NI-43 101)required by the security exchange in Canada in order for a company to raise money for a project through the sale of shares. Its way of standardizing information and presenting it to shareholders. The plan laid out in the report is a very basic concept but "realistic" based on very specific assumptions and exclusions included in the report. A pre-feas plan usually has very limited and basic baseline information, some of which can/will change substantially in just a few more years of study. The plan will likely be changed to make it more economical as its refined, but the overall concept will remain the same due to the site constraints. One thing to keep in mind is that due to the complex nature of such a project, and the engineering/studies required, many design iterations are required to come up with a plan that meets regulatory requirements, and financial goals.
Regulatory requirements include public comment and hearings, including addressing valid public concerns. “I don’t want it,” is generally not a valid public comment, but could be acted on administratively. Generally mob rule does not win, and will be challenged in court.
It's been my experience that pre-feasibility studies are at best a skeleton plan for what will eventually be constructed. The next step would be a feasibility level study, which will require much more in-depth review and studies and design changes. The feasibility design will be pretty close to the final design, but could still change. This is usually the go/no go part of a project. In the current investment climate, the “go” for a new mine needs a very solid return on investment, especially when approaching the Billions, and the regulatory climate needs to be somewhat stabil.
For the rest of the questions.
1- That's a very good question. I’m not a hydrogeologist, but would suspect that all the information from the mining district, will be quite valuable. From what I know of this project, the team working on it are some of the best in the world. If not the best working on it, then is the only other option to not study, and cancel the project? Certainly a valid question/answer. From the closure aspect, underground workings flooded and plugged properly, generally have very little potential for generating acid/metal leaching.
2- I have very little knowledge of Antofogasta, and know little of this particular operation. The link you sent seems like a pretty small infraction on the surface. I’m not sure I would jump straight to terrible track record. Would you be considered a terrible driver if had a speeding ticket?
Pulling water out without a permit is pretty serious in a desert, but I have no idea why they did it. Could have been to keep their mill running, or for dust suppression, or to water the reforested area. Who knows? As an example, people collecting rain in rain barrels in most of the western US are essentially doing the same thing. Its illegal in most states west of the Mississippi. Chile has some of the strictest mining regulations in the world, especially when it comes to water. Also, the report does not state if its dollars or peso for the fines. It could be a lot of money, or it could be cost of a new pickup… They are still in operation so I presume it wasn’t that bad. Chile is a very complicated place to operate, in terms of regulatory and more so in terms of politics.
3- What industry outside of the state and federal government provides jobs for eternity? I’ve never understood the argument against more jobs, whatever they may be. Its pretty silly to want to rely on any one industry, diversifying an economy isn’t a bad thing, especially when those jobs typically pay 2-3x as much. They will go away at some point (just like those jobs at Kmart and Sears), but the local economy should know that and use the time to diversify, not sit back and complain once the jobs are all gone.
.
?
