Tag Archives: Mining

Clark Government Fast-Tracks Prosperity Mine

Share

Read this story from Pacific Free Press, including a press release from the Tsilhqot’in National Government on the BC Government’s issuing of fast-tracked permits for Taseko Mines to begin drilling and building roads for its proposed Prosperity Mine.

“The proponent has
already submitted a proposal for “New” Prosperity, a mine alternative
that it has described in the past as even more environmentally damaging.
At the same time, British Columbia recently issued approvals that
authorize the proponent to extensively drill, build roads and clear
trees throughout this area of such critical importance to our people.

The Tsilhqot’in Nation considers the approvals issued by British
Columbia unlawful because of the Province’s failure to meaningfully
consult or accommodate our Nation or to justify the impacts on our
proven Aboriginal rights to hunt and trap throughout those lands. We
remain confident that the Federal Government will continue to do the
right thing and once again reject this clearly unacceptable mine
proposal.” (Nov. 2, 2011)

Read full story: http://www.pacificfreepress.com/news/1-/10083-british-columbia-grants-go-ahead-for-once-denied-qprosperity-mineq.html

Share

A Tale of Two BC Mining Fiascos

Share

There are two mining stories out of last week in Lotusland.

For openers, let’s deal with “Prosperity” Lake which, before the corporate flacks got involved, was called Fish Lake.
 
The short story is that this is a mine prospect held by Taseko Mines. While the Provincial government approved it, it was turned down by the feds who then gave the company time to put in a new proposal, which they did. With the speed of light the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency received the new application last February and hasn’t yet decided anything. This delay brought a fire and brimstone editorial from the Fraser Institute’s house paper, the Vancouver Sun, which threw unsourced “facts” at us, including a promise of 71,000 jobs with 5,400 new residents for the nearby town of Williams Lake. We’re not told where those figures come from but clearly they’re from the large sack of extravagant statements the Fraser Institute keeps on hand for whenever their definition of capitalism is called to account.
 
Since the Sun doesn’t state otherwise, we must assume that the 71,000 jobs are for construction of the mine, which is preposterous. Whatever jobs it does take will, based upon long experience, come from outside the province. And are these 5,400 new arrivals necessary to run a mine?
 
Mr. Mihlar, the Fraser Institute’s editor of The Sun, the think tank’s poodle, should visit an operation of a modern, computerized mine before throwing numbers around.
 
A neat line in the editorial refers to outside agitators, I can only hope that I and fellow environmentalists are amongst them. The thought that environmentalists are outside agitators brings a sense of deep pride; how rewarding it is to be compared to the “freedom fighters” in the American South in the Sixties.
 
It’s so much like the Fraser Institute’ poodle, the Sun, to pretend they are not “outside agitators”.
 
The Sun’s call for putting the Taseko Prosperity Mine on the fast track is code for “approve at once” and ignores the fact that First Nations people and we outside agitators have yet to be heard from on the new proposition.
 
If I were able to cross-examine the company and their flacks my question would be: Why didn’t you submit your amended proposal in the first place? (The proposal existed, in fact, but the company insisted it wasn’t “economically viable”, before suddenly changing its tune the day after the first proposal was rejected). Can we assume that if you’re turned down for proposal #2, you have “proposition 3” in your ass pocket?
 
It’s interesting that Mr. Milhar doesn’t deal with the environmental concerns that remain, with attention be paid to the threats of damage to other waters especially to migrating salmon streams. Even though the company’s latest proposal seeks to avoid destroying Fish Lake, it still threatens Fish Creek, Taseko Lake and the Taseko River – important salmon habitat that eventually connects with the Fraser River.
 
It’s also interesting that the Fraser Institute/Sun combination believes that where development and the environment clash development must carry the day.
 
This infomercial of Mr. Milhar should help us start the great debate, namely, what do British Columbians want to be – one of the blessed lands where commercial intrusion is secondary to environmental preservation or a place where when a conflict occurs, industry holds all the trumps?
 
Then there’s the Boss Power case – a uranium property which has cost the taxpayers $30 million to settle. If the Liberals had continued the no uranium policy brought into force by the excellent Environment Minister in 1979 (name provided upon demand) this issue would not have come up.
 
As Mike Smyth of the Province stated in a column last week, this case has the same stench the BC Rail case had – gross negligence of staggering proportions that, as with the BC Rail case, best not let a judge with an open courtroom sniff around.
 
There is another angle to this story not given sufficient attention.
 
First a bit of background.
 
Ministers have the right to have their policies implemented by the public servants however much they may not want to; what ministers cannot do is interfere with a public servant who’s doing as a statute compels him to do. Registrars under various different statutes are usually under a statute which sets the rules he must administer – he has no options.
 
For a minister to try to influence the administration of a statutory obligation would, in a decent government, be forced to resign.  
 
In this case the company was making an application to The Chief Inspector of Mines for a permit to drill. The chief inspector has a statutory obligation to receive and pass judgments – ministerial interference is highly improper.
 
The then Minister of Mines, Kevin Krueger, instructed the Inspector to ignore the company’s application to drill. This is so improper that the minister should have resigned or, failing that, been fired forthwith.
 
What this case shows is that the Campbell/Clark government has the morality of an alley cat (with apologies to the feline community). Read alongside the BC Rail cover-up we see tawdry, sloppy ministers with no clue about what ministerial impropriety means and with a contempt for process an integral part of their modus operandi.
 
These two stories, read together, show an alarming disinterest in real values and respect for the public’s right to know the facts and the ability to be heard. The Vancouver Sun editorial, when you think on it, takes the breath away – process means let’s get on with it! Corporation “facts” must be considered holy writ and the process an ill-disguised sham – a quick, pro forma minor nuisance.
 
British Columbians must decide what sort of place they and what values they hold. And since the next major decisions will be pipelines and tankers, the sooner the better.

Share

Mike Smyth Rips Liberals’ $30 Million in Hush Money to Uranimum Mining Company

Share

Read this editorial from Mike Smyth in The Province, condemning the BC Liberals’ decision to pay a mining company $30 million for illegally burying its application to min uranium in BC.

“Compensating a mining company for expropriation of their mineral
rights is not unusual. The question here is whether B.C. taxpayers were
burned for an extraordinarily large amount because the government broke
the law in dealing with the company, and the government didn’t want its
dirty-laundry hamper being tipped over in court.

In a case like
this a mining company would normally be compensated for its “sunk costs”
– the amount of money it had spent on its mineral claim. It’s estimated
Boss Power spent less than $5 million trying to develop the uranium
deposit. Now the government is refusing to release internal legal documents showing how the $30-million figure was arrived at. I didn’t think anything could stink worse than the B.C. Rail plea bargain. This one comes close. And the stench is still rising.” (Oct. 25, 2011)

Share

Clark’s Answer to Deepening Debt: Pretend Shipping Tar Sands to China Means “Jobs” for BC

Share

Christy Clark, aka Premier Photo-Op, has a big mess on her hands – but, fear not, she’ll let us all muck about in it.
 
The government is in deepening debt and Ms. Clark can’t pretend that it’s a mystery how that came about. While there are many causes the principal one is that the government didn’t see the Recession coming and, when it came, went into denial. The budget of 2009 with which they proudly went to the polls was an utter and deliberate sham. Ditto the HST.
 
How is Clark going to deal with this?
 
Easy – Jobs! Jobs! Jobs!
 
And where will those jobs come from?
 
In part from exports to China. Apparently Premier Clark hasn’t heard that China has its own Recession going, Big Time. Their banking system is essentially the government and only looks good on paper because the US owes them so much. Their mega-projects, especially the Three Gorges Dam, have become serious fiscal problems.
 
What is truly worrying is that Ms. Clark will try to create employment, preparatory to election time, on her own mega-projects such as the proposed Enbridge pipeline to Kitimat and the related tanker traffic down our treacherous coast. Environmental rules, such as they are, will become a chimera – a cynical gesture of contempt to citizens who put protection of our environment ahead of Ms. Clark’s election prospects. Fracking, the natural gas extraction which pollutes huge amounts of water, will be hugely encouraged.
 
The entire policy of the Campbell/Clark government will be to have in place a policy which she believes will mesmerize the public into believing that prosperity is just around the corner.
 
If the genie gave me but one wish it would be that everyone understands that pipelines and tanker traffic don’t pose risks but certainties. We must hammer this home as the corporations move into high gear with their high paid flacks to convince the public that they really do care about the environment. The fact is that they couldn’t care less about the environment or any social values. Oil spills are not seen for the ugly destruction they bring but merely the cost of doing business.
 
We environmentalists have to face facts – we haven’t the money to match the outputs of both government and industry. We must get down to basics – the issue is not money or jobs but the preservation of our very soul. We must care for our fish not because we fish but because when we lose them we lose a part of us. When we lose our wilderness we don’t do so just in some sort of abstract way but in the real sense that we, each and every one of us, have sustained a wound that will never go away.
 
There is no “safe” way you can construct and maintain pipelines or transfer oil on tankers. You can’t, in that most weasely of weasel words, “mitigate” the damage. We have to understand that from the moment you start the first pipe installation, the first step on the road to certain environmental devastation has been taken. When the first barrel of oil starts through the pipe, catastrophe has become merely a question of “when”.
 
The arguments we make are never met head-on. The answer will be, “aw hell, you don’t really believe those eco-freaks, do you?” “Jeez, this is the 21st century, sure we can do these things with little or no risk these days”, “Let those goddam tree huggers talk to the guys out of work”. “If you don’t move forward, you’ll end up going backwards”. There are plenty more one-liners.
 
There is no doubt that society must change; our ambitions must take into account a different society. For if we permit the destruction of our environment, what do we have left of the beautiful province we all love so much. The unemployed are not so because of environmentalists but because of a society that finds it easier to destroy than create.

While I do not let religion get in the way of rational debate, surely it’s utterly apropos to remember Jesus’s words, “For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?”

And, folks, it’s our soul that’s at stake here.

Share

Clark, Big Oil Want BC and Alberta’s Raw Resources Open for Business to China

Share

Read this report from the Province on the Business Council of BC’s annual economic forum in Vancouver, where industry leaders and politicians joined arms in calling to make BC’s raw resources open for business with the growing Asian market.’

“‘We need to open up the B.C. gate more fully,’ said Lorraine
Mitchelmore, president and county chair of Shell Canada Ltd. ‘Canada
really needs to diversify its customer base for energy products and
create access to global energy markets. This is a real time of great
opportunity for Canada.’ Lindsay Gordon, president and CEO of HSBC
Bank of Canada, echoed these sentiments, and added that British
Columbians need a ‘wake-up call’ of the importance of Asia to ‘their
future and prosperity.'”

Share

Order of BC Awards “Reprehensible”

Share

I find it reprehensible that two of the names on the list for the Order of B.C. are people who actively worked to tear apart the environmental and democratic fabric of British Columbia. Gordon Campbell skulked out of his role as premier and one of the most disliked and mistrusted premiers in the history of the province. He lied to the people of British Columbia and set laws in place that stripped away communities’ rights to protect their own environment and will likely bankrupt BC Hydro.

Jim O’Rourke is a miner, and the chairman and director of Compliance Energy Corporation. This company has an eye on the Comox Valley as the next Appalachia of the North to begin coal mining, both underground and open pit. Their mines would be located in the heart of the Comox Valley’s watershed, about three miles uphill of Baynes Sound and one of the most productive oyster growing areas in the world. The coal mines will poison the watershed and contribute over 60 million tonnes of greenhouse gases to an already overstressed atmosphere. The Order of BC recipients are chosen by the Chief Justice, the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, a President of one of BC`s Universities, the President of the Union of British Columbia Municipalities, amongst others. These two choices tell me which direction our government is looking to. They will sell our children’s future in a blind rush to keep themselves in power.

This is a sad day for British Columbia when these two names get put on the same list as great British Columbians like David Suzuki and Rick Hansen.

Tom Wheeler
Fanny Bay, BC

Share

Shades of Green: A $50 Million Message to Coal

Share

As heat records broke by the hundreds across the United States this summer, Michael Bloomberg braved the sweltering temperatures on a hot July morning, mounted a platform in front of the coal-fired GenOn power station in Alexandria, Virginia, and announced to those gathered that his charity, Bloomberg Philanthropies, was giving $50 million to the US Sierra Club to aid its Beyond Coal Campaign.

Bloomberg, mayor of New York, multi-billionaire and founder of his namesake philanthropy organization, was recognizing the “truly impressive” work of the Sierra Club in stopping the construction of at least 153 new coal-fired power stations in the US. The 91 plants that it was able to shut down since 2010 has prevented 114 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent from entering the atmosphere. The $50 million donation will be used to expand the Sierra Club’s efforts to phase out one-third of the existing coal-fired US power plants, to cut coal consumption for electricity by 30 percent by 2020, and to significantly reduce both greenhouse gas emissions and the plethora of toxic pollutants that cause widespread environmental and health damage – in the US alone, the annual human effect of burning coal is estimated at 13,000 premature deaths and health costs of $100 billion. None of these liabilities are weighed when computing the economic value of mining and burning coal.

But Bloomberg’s $50 million gift is more than a gesture of support for the Sierra Club and its ambitious objective of revoking “the social licence for burning coal”. It is a powerful indictment against coal itself, the censuring of a fossil fuel from the Industrial Revolution era that has become the single largest scourge of our planet’s environmental health. Its emissions comprise mercury, cadmium, lead and other neurotoxic heavy metals, together with acid-producing sulphur, radioactive elements, unhealthy particulates, dioxins, arsenic and over three times the weight of coal in carbon dioxide. (Assuming coal is about 90% carbon then, when burned, the 12 atomic mass units of each carbon atom combine with two oxygen atoms of 16 atomic mass units each to become the 44 atomic mass units of carbon dioxide. In a process that probably seems counter-intuitive to non-scientists, the dense 0.9 tonnes of carbon contained in each tonne of solid coal becomes 3.3 tonnes of gaseous carbon dioxide that is dispersed into the atmosphere as a greenhouse gas.)

Bloomberg’s gift of $50 million attaches weighty ethical considerations to both the burning of coal and the mining of coal. Indeed, coal mining is, itself, a massively polluting operation that taints air, water and land – just the initial effects of a process that is culminating in disturbing structural impacts to global climate and ocean acidity. So Bloomberg’s generosity has implications in the distant communities of Campbell River and the Comox Valley where coal mining has become topical and controversial.

How serious is this issue? At the level of principle, the issue is whether these two communities become part of the problem or the solution. Bloomberg’s $50 million gives moral weight to the solution side by helping to reduce the ills caused by coal in the US. Locally, conservation and environmental organizations, together with many other concerned citizens, are expending countless hours examining technical studies, evaluating the risks and warning about present and future damage. They are also challenging a political momentum that would rather acquiesce to a momentary temptation than consider the long-term perspective. Any concern about whether or not a mining corporation could provide enough “financial security to ensure waste water treatment from the [Quinsam] mine site will be treated in perpetuity…” (Courier Islander, Aug. 19/11) is completely unaware of the duration of “perpetuity” – the comment does, however, acknowledge the risk. Reasonable prudence would never consider subjecting future generations to such a persistent and onerous burden.

At the practical level, when Quinsam Coal cannot even manage its existing wastes, then the prospect of allowing further mining of an even more polluting grade of coal simply boggles any sense of social and environmental logic. And for what? On the positive side is a mere four additional years of local jobs. On the negative side is 1.7 million tonnes of dirty coal, 5.6 million tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions, and the likelihood of perpetual acid seepage into a healthy, fish-bearing watershed that is a signature attraction of the Campbell River region. The balance is an unqualified “no” for more coal mining. And if any doubt remains, consider provincial authorities that have been both incapable and unwilling to enforce whatever meagre environmental regulations they might impose.The proposed Raven mine in the Comox Valley invites the same risks and hazards.

Coal mines have another shortcoming. They expose and release methane, a greenhouse gas that is about 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide. The Raven mine is projected to exhaust 127,500 cubic meters of methane per day into the atmosphere. The Quinsam mine, depending on its relative size, would exhaust an equivalent amount. These emissions produce consequences that our planet can no longer absorb or ameliorate.

Michael Bloomberg is just one of many people who now grasp the disastrous implications of mining and burning coal. In his speech to the people who had gathered on that hot July morning in Alexandria, Virginia, he said we must “fight climate change and bring about our clean energy future.” By offering $50 million to this cause, he said, “I am doing my part to move our country Beyond Coal. Are you with me?”

“Are you with me?” is a clarion call that is now echoing around the planet, a moral imperative to anyone who cares about the health of our bodies and the well being of our oceans, rivers, lakes and air. Listen and it can be heard in even the communities of Campbell River and the Comox Valley. The future is now. And the time has come for us to become the change that we want to happen.

Share

First Nations Leaders Respond to Barabara Yaffe’s Provocative Column on BC Resource Projects

Share

Read this scathing response to a recent column by the Vancouver Sun’s Barbara Yaffe, titled “First Nations Need to Embrace Resource Projects” – from the Vice Tribal Chief of the Carrier Sekani Tribal Council and the Tribal Chief of the Tsilhqot’in National Government. (Aug 2, 2011)

 

Share

Are They Ganging up on the People and Environment?

Share

Just before I get down to business, I know that all environmentalists will be saddened that a former member of the group, Patrick Moore, allegedly got stiffed by a client for $120,000. I hate to sound like a “Johnny-come-lately” with good advice but, Pat, there are some professions where it’s wise to get your money up front.
 
Those who specialize in conspiracy theories – I’m a sometime member but inching closer to full membership – might wonder if the despoilers of our environment are ganging up on us. This thought came to me as someone representing yet another very worthy cause came to me asking for advice – this one was on the “smart meters” proposed by the bankrupt BC Hydro, which somehow has a billion plus rattling around in their jeans. This is interesting because the difference between this and a tax is invisible and the Campbell/Clark government hasn’t even bothered to go through the motions of putting it to a vote in the Legislature – in addition to removing oversight authority from the public’s supposed watchdog, The BC Utilities Commission (also stripped of authority over Site C Dam and private power projects).
 
The fish farm debate heats up, if that’s possible, as we learn the scientist who advised the provincial government – standing against all other fish biologists dealing with this subject – was practicing voodoo science. That’s not quite what a colleague said about Dick Beamish but one must infer it from what he did say as he dissociated himself from anything Beamish said or did.
 
We have Independent power being proved by the hour to be an environmental catastrophe as well as being fiscally mad as they drive BC Hydro over a financial cliff.
 
And what is the latest cost of the original $1 billion dollar Site”C” at now? Did I see $8 billion with independent estimates topping $10 billion all for power we won’t need but is deliciously placed to extract natural gas and “mine” the biggest polluter on the planet, the Tar Sands?
 
We still have the Fish Lake (Prosperity Mine – don’t you love the PR slant on that name) supported by Premier Clark.
 
We have a brand new environmental threat in what is called “fracking” where gas is “mined” horizontally with enormous amounts of water taken out of an already overburdened supply. We haven’t even considered the NAFTA ramifications.
 
We have Premier Clark, if not approving pipelines from the Tar Sands to Kitimat and greater capacity of the Kinder Morgan line to Burnaby certainly not disapproving even though the record of the companies involved is appalling. On the same subject, the Campbell/Clark government some years ago wrote the feds saying that they didn’t oppose large oil tankers plying the most spectacular and dangerous waters in the world. The Campbell/Clark crowd are utterly unfazed by the fact that spills on land and sea are not “risks” but mathematical certainties.
 
While all this is going on, the C/C government is paving farm land and threatening wildlife sanctuaries.
 
It’s hard not to sniff a corporate/government conspiracy, with the government thinking they can pile so much on us at one time we can’t get our acts together.
 
They are wrong.            
 

Share