3 ms·

It surprised me when I moved west how recent some of these are, and that they are not all out in the middle of nowhere. There's a gold mine in Napa County that

It surprised me when I moved west how recent some of these are, and that they are not all out in the middle of nowhere. There's a gold mine in Napa County that was developed in the 1980s, well after CEQA was enacted. The guy who owns it took out a billion dollars worth of gold and left a big hole where all the acid is impounded behind a dam, in the middle of the Cache Creek watershed. I visit that region frequently and I always wonder why we thought we had to do every last gold mine.

abakker 2y ago
same reason we monetize every click, fund every ad tech, and track every data point. People feel the need to exploit resources in order to get rich. A billion dollars in actual gold is pretty real. Look at superfund sites like Captain Jack mine in Boulder. significant un-managed harm and not that much commercial output.
- WillPostForFood 2y ago
  If only we could get back to lifestyle devoid of using any resources...
  - defrost 2y ago
    The middle ground is have states bake minesite remediation costs into the permissions contracts of mining leases and to enforce such obligations upon those who profit so as to not allow "bankruptcy" defaults by shell companies. This will increase resource costs, put downwards pressure on consumption, etc but we'll still function as a society.
  - abakker 2y ago
    Username checks out :). But, really, I think we’re both posting with a bit of hyperbole here. Of course monetizing resources is how we get resources. OTOH, not monetizing every resource is fine - there exists the possibility of future value in some resources that we haven’t discovered.
Loughla 2y ago
You answered your own question. That person made a billion dollars and left the residents and state with the problems. Business genius.
freeqaz 2y ago
Found the link to what you're talking about: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulphur_Bank_Mine#McLaughlin_Mine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulphur_Bank_Mine#McLaughlin_M...
- snypher 2y ago
  "The McLaughlin Mine enjoyed a reputation as one of the most ecologically sensitive gold mining operations in the world. Nevertheless, during its last year of operation in 2002, the mine emitted 32,396 pounds of mercury into the environment." Wow that's really saying something.
  - Aloisius 2y ago
    Eh. Moving rock that contains low concentrations of mercury into a pile is considered "releasing" it. Whether it carries any risk to the environment depends on local factors.
    - freeqaz 2y ago
      It did say that it was methylated and made bioavailable. Not great I think.
      - Aloisius 2y ago
        That's from the old mercury mines in the area and erosion from naturally enriched mercury soil/runoff from naturally enriched geothermal springs, not the McLaughlin gold mine. (The Wikipedia article is for the Sulfur Bank Mercury Mine. The McLaughlin mine is referenced due to how gold was discovered, but it's about 15 miles away)
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
Aloisius 2y ago
Last I heard, the McLaughlin Mine pits are slightly alkaline. There was a period when they were filling up in the 90s where they were acidic, before being buffered by the pit wall rocks and backfill during reclamation.

abakker 2y ago

same reason we monetize every click, fund every ad tech, and track every data point. People feel the need to exploit resources in order to get rich. A billion dollars in actual gold is pretty real. Look at superfund sites like Captain Jack mine in Boulder. significant un-managed harm and not that much commercial output.

WillPostForFood 2y ago
If only we could get back to lifestyle devoid of using any resources...
- defrost 2y ago
  The middle ground is have states bake minesite remediation costs into the permissions contracts of mining leases and to enforce such obligations upon those who profit so as to not allow "bankruptcy" defaults by shell companies. This will increase resource costs, put downwards pressure on consumption, etc but we'll still function as a society.
- abakker 2y ago
  Username checks out :). But, really, I think we’re both posting with a bit of hyperbole here. Of course monetizing resources is how we get resources. OTOH, not monetizing every resource is fine - there exists the possibility of future value in some resources that we haven’t discovered.

Loughla 2y ago

You answered your own question. That person made a billion dollars and left the residents and state with the problems. Business genius.

freeqaz 2y ago

Found the link to what you're talking about: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulphur_Bank_Mine#McLaughlin_Mine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulphur_Bank_Mine#McLaughlin_M...

snypher 2y ago
"The McLaughlin Mine enjoyed a reputation as one of the most ecologically sensitive gold mining operations in the world. Nevertheless, during its last year of operation in 2002, the mine emitted 32,396 pounds of mercury into the environment." Wow that's really saying something.
- Aloisius 2y ago
  Eh. Moving rock that contains low concentrations of mercury into a pile is considered "releasing" it. Whether it carries any risk to the environment depends on local factors.
  - freeqaz 2y ago
    It did say that it was methylated and made bioavailable. Not great I think.
    - Aloisius 2y ago
      That's from the old mercury mines in the area and erosion from naturally enriched mercury soil/runoff from naturally enriched geothermal springs, not the McLaughlin gold mine. (The Wikipedia article is for the Sulfur Bank Mercury Mine. The McLaughlin mine is referenced due to how gold was discovered, but it's about 15 miles away)

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

Aloisius 2y ago

Last I heard, the McLaughlin Mine pits are slightly alkaline. There was a period when they were filling up in the 90s where they were acidic, before being buffered by the pit wall rocks and backfill during reclamation.