4 ms·

Now, this may be naïve or uninformed, but... Shouldn't it be possible to take that slurry and deliberately dry it out much faster, possibly even including a st

Now, this may be naïve or uninformed, but... Shouldn't it be possible to take that slurry and deliberately dry it out much faster, possibly even including a step that separates the products to some extent for separate processing or storage? If it were being dried out in a sealed processing facility, rather than a pond open to the air (and wildlife), the toxic dust wouldn't be a problem—indeed, it would be the end goal. Turn it to dust, compress the dust into something you can seal in a jar or whatever and then store the sealed jar. Or potentially even sell it; I bet some of these toxic byproducts would actually be something someone else wants for their own industrial processes. Obviously even if it's possible, this isn't done because it would be more expensive—but if we, say, were more concerned with health and safety than profits, couldn't this be much less time-consuming and risky to the local water table than just letting it sit for decades or centuries?

londons_explore 3y ago
Yes, you could dry it (for an immense energy cost). But now you have a toxic powder. And it's harder to store that powder than it was in slurry form. The massive volume is by far the biggest problem, compared to the (relatively low) toxicity.
MisterTea 3y ago
> Now, this may be naïve or uninformed, but... Like, that costs money and stuff.
- danaris 3y ago
  And if I thought that profitability of these companies was The Most Important Thing, then that would matter to me. As it stands, I think that companies shouldn't be allowed to offload negative externalities onto the public and the world at large. I think they should be required to clean up their own messes.
  - londons_explore 3y ago
    Even if money is no object, there aren't many environmentally friendly solutions to acidic mine tailings ponds. Most treatments require huge amounts of energy, which itself isn't very environmentally friendly.

londons_explore 3y ago

Yes, you could dry it (for an immense energy cost). But now you have a toxic powder. And it's harder to store that powder than it was in slurry form. The massive volume is by far the biggest problem, compared to the (relatively low) toxicity.

MisterTea 3y ago

> Now, this may be naïve or uninformed, but... Like, that costs money and stuff.

danaris 3y ago
And if I thought that profitability of these companies was The Most Important Thing, then that would matter to me. As it stands, I think that companies shouldn't be allowed to offload negative externalities onto the public and the world at large. I think they should be required to clean up their own messes.
- londons_explore 3y ago
  Even if money is no object, there aren't many environmentally friendly solutions to acidic mine tailings ponds. Most treatments require huge amounts of energy, which itself isn't very environmentally friendly.