http://blog.skytruth.org/2014/08/lan...ley-spill.html


move the line in the picture to see what is happening.

On 8/12/2014 10:10 AM, ImStillMags wrote:
> http://blog.skytruth.org/2014/08/lan...ley-spill.html
>
>
> move the line in the picture to see what is happening.
>

Yes, and?

Does that form the lone outcome for ALL other mine tailings ponds?

On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 9:28:27 AM UTC-7, Mayo wrote:
> On 8/12/2014 10:10 AM, ImStillMags wrote:
>
> > http://blog.skytruth.org/2014/08/lan...ley-spill.html
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > move the line in the picture to see what is happening.
>
> >
>
>
>
> Yes, and?
>
>
>
> Does that form the lone outcome for ALL other mine tailings ponds?



http://corpethics.org/article.php?id=2659

On 8/12/2014 11:08 AM, ImStillMags wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 9:28:27 AM UTC-7, Mayo wrote:
>> On 8/12/2014 10:10 AM, ImStillMags wrote:
>>
>>> http://blog.skytruth.org/2014/08/lan...ley-spill.html
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>> move the line in the picture to see what is happening.
>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Yes, and?
>>
>>
>>
>> Does that form the lone outcome for ALL other mine tailings ponds?
>
>
>
> http://corpethics.org/article.php?id=2659
>
These anecdotes do NOT comprise the soul outcome for ALL tailing ponds.

You know that, but you will not accept it.

On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 10:43:37 AM UTC-7, Mayo wrote:
> On 8/12/2014 11:08 AM, ImStillMags wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 9:28:27 AM UTC-7, Mayo wrote:
>
> >> On 8/12/2014 10:10 AM, ImStillMags wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >>> http://blog.skytruth.org/2014/08/lan...ley-spill.html
>
> >>
>
> >>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>
>
> >>
>
> >>> move the line in the picture to see what is happening.
>
> >>
>
> >>>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> Yes, and?
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> Does that form the lone outcome for ALL other mine tailings ponds?
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > http://corpethics.org/article.php?id=2659
>
> >
>
> These anecdotes do NOT comprise the soul outcome for ALL tailing ponds.
>
>
>
> You know that, but you will not accept it.




And you seem to be able to accept that even one is unacceptable.

"Mayo" > wrote in message ...
> On 8/12/2014 11:08 AM, ImStillMags wrote:
>> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 9:28:27 AM UTC-7, Mayo wrote:
>>> On 8/12/2014 10:10 AM, ImStillMags wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://blog.skytruth.org/2014/08/lan...ley-spill.html
>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>> move the line in the picture to see what is happening.
>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, and?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Does that form the lone outcome for ALL other mine tailings ponds?
>>
>>
>>
>> http://corpethics.org/article.php?id=2659
>>
> These anecdotes do NOT comprise the soul outcome for ALL tailing ponds.
>
> You know that, but you will not accept it.

Nothing lasts forever except ignorance. And tailing ponds are guaranteed to
fail because they must be maintained *in perpetuity* and all their deadly
toxins too. That simply cannot be done. All tailing ponds are earthen
structures and are *not* lined as you made up in a previous post. They are
simply earthen berms and trivaial considerations like putting them near
earthquake zones is not usually taken into account.

There is no technoloigy to clean up these spills. The damage is permanent.
And the corporations whose negligence led to it will never be held fully
accountable.



---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

On 8/12/2014 11:54 AM, ImStillMags wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 10:43:37 AM UTC-7, Mayo wrote:
>> On 8/12/2014 11:08 AM, ImStillMags wrote:
>>
>>> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 9:28:27 AM UTC-7, Mayo wrote:
>>
>>>> On 8/12/2014 10:10 AM, ImStillMags wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>> http://blog.skytruth.org/2014/08/lan...ley-spill.html
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>> move the line in the picture to see what is happening.
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> Yes, and?
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> Does that form the lone outcome for ALL other mine tailings ponds?
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>> http://corpethics.org/article.php?id=2659
>>
>>>
>>
>> These anecdotes do NOT comprise the soul outcome for ALL tailing ponds.
>>
>>
>>
>> You know that, but you will not accept it.
>
>
>
>
> And you seem to be able to accept that even one is unacceptable.

Oh yes, I certainly am.

I accept that man will always make mistakes, fail, screw up, etc.

Airplanes crash, ships sink, sinkholes open up and swallow homes whole,
lightning strikes golfers inside a shelter, your auntie chokes to death
on a pretzel - I do accept that accidents always have and always will
happen.

That's why we have laws, regulatory agencies, oversight, courts, etc.

You're so enmeshed in your own polar extremism that you'd literally shut
down all mining and mineral development because human nature is not perfect.

That type of mentality is why intractable enviros inspire such
frustration and enmity.

I'm not going to let you nor your ilk turn this into a Luddite spiral
downward where we all sit around the last beeswax candle and ponder why
there's no bread on the shelves or lightbulbs that turn on anymore.

Understand?

"Mayo" > wrote in message ...
> On 8/12/2014 11:54 AM, ImStillMags wrote:
>> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 10:43:37 AM UTC-7, Mayo wrote:
>>> On 8/12/2014 11:08 AM, ImStillMags wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 9:28:27 AM UTC-7, Mayo wrote:
>>>
>>>>> On 8/12/2014 10:10 AM, ImStillMags wrote:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>>>> http://blog.skytruth.org/2014/08/lan...ley-spill.html
>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>>>> move the line in the picture to see what is happening.
>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>>> Yes, and?
>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>>> Does that form the lone outcome for ALL other mine tailings ponds?
>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>> http://corpethics.org/article.php?id=2659
>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> These anecdotes do NOT comprise the soul outcome for ALL tailing ponds.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> You know that, but you will not accept it.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> And you seem to be able to accept that even one is unacceptable.
>
> Oh yes, I certainly am.
>
> I accept that man will always make mistakes, fail, screw up, etc.
>
> Airplanes crash, ships sink, sinkholes open up and swallow homes whole,
> lightning strikes golfers inside a shelter, your auntie chokes to death on
> a pretzel - I do accept that accidents always have and always will happen.
>
> That's why we have laws, regulatory agencies, oversight, courts, etc.
>
> You're so enmeshed in your own polar extremism that you'd literally shut
> down all mining and mineral development because human nature is not
> perfect.
>
> That type of mentality is why intractable enviros inspire such frustration
> and enmity.
>
> I'm not going to let you nor your ilk turn this into a Luddite spiral
> downward where we all sit around the last beeswax candle and ponder why
> there's no bread on the shelves or lightbulbs that turn on anymore.
>
> Understand?



The president of Imperial Metals, Brian Kynoch, claims that the water in the
tailings pond is "near drinking water quality" and expressed disbelief that
the impoundment could fail so catastrophically, despite the fact that
Canadian officials had issued multiple warnings to Imperial Metals for
exceeding water quality standards for effluent and exceeding the permitted
wastewater levels in the pond.

So in other words Mr. Kynoch just *assumed* everything was peachy keen so
why bother with pesky engioneers and environmentalists? Let's see Mr.
Kynoch drinka few pints of that water.

"That's why we have laws, regulatory agencies, oversight, courts, etc." Not
for them, we don't. No laws, regualtions and oversight stops these people
from cutting every single corner they can to increase profits.



---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 11:07:43 AM UTC-7, Mayo wrote:
> I'm not going to let you nor your ilk turn this into a Luddite spiral
>
> downward where we all sit around the last beeswax candle and ponder why
>
> there's no bread on the shelves or lightbulbs that turn on anymore.
>
>
>
> Understand?

I understand you perfectly. You cannot think beyond what is now. Those apologists for fossil fuels, like you, refuse to accept that there are alternatives and that the only reason we do not have those alternatives already is because of the grip the fossil fuel industry has on politics, the economy and the minds of those who will not look at a future without them.

There is no reason that we have to "starve to death and freeze in the dark"..
Your embrace of the fearmongering that has gone along with the contemplating of alternatives is what holds you and everyone like you back. But fortunately there are those who are working diligently to wean the planet off this poison.

It could be done very quickly if the resources that have been used to perpetuate the myth of fossil fuel dependence was put towards developing all the alternatives that are already available to us.

On 8/12/2014 12:01 PM, Paul M. Cook wrote:
> "Mayo" > wrote in message ...
>> On 8/12/2014 11:08 AM, ImStillMags wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 9:28:27 AM UTC-7, Mayo wrote:
>>>> On 8/12/2014 10:10 AM, ImStillMags wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> http://blog.skytruth.org/2014/08/lan...ley-spill.html
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> move the line in the picture to see what is happening.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, and?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Does that form the lone outcome for ALL other mine tailings ponds?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> http://corpethics.org/article.php?id=2659
>>>
>> These anecdotes do NOT comprise the soul outcome for ALL tailing ponds.
>>
>> You know that, but you will not accept it.
>
> Nothing lasts forever except ignorance.

I had no idea your legacy was that secure!

> And tailing ponds are guaranteed to
> fail because they must be maintained *in perpetuity* and all their deadly
> toxins too.

No, they do NOT need to be maintained "*in perpetuity*", that's a naked lie.

> That simply cannot be done.

It already is:

http://www.albertaoilmagazine.com/20...ammoth-mop-up/

Suncor calls its invention tailings reduction operations, or TRO. The
process is supposed to reduce the drying time of a tailings pond by as
much as 80 per cent, down to between seven and 10 years from the current
snail’s pace of four decades or longer, reports Suncor representative
Sneh Seetal.

“But with the implementation of TRO, we expect to see, in a much shorter
time, the reclamation. We expect to see a reclaimable surface after 10
years,” Seetal says.

> All tailing ponds are earthen
> structures and are *not* lined as you made up in a previous post.

That is also a lie.

http://www.tailings.info/technical/water.htm

Seepage can be controlled by using either barrier or collection systems.
Barrier systems retain or resist the flow of seepage outside the
impoundment area whereas collection systems intercept and safely focus
the seepage as it leaves the tailings storage facility (EPA 1994).
Barrier control methods consist of liners and embankment barriers to
prevent or hinder seepage passing through the tailings containment area
and into the surrounding environment. Collection methods create pathways
for the seepage to accumulate then flow to controlled locations such as
embankment toe drains. Other types of collection systems intercept the
seepage as it migrates into the environment by using extraction wells
and ditch systems.

> They are simply earthen berms

Berm may be earthen, concrete, bentonite, rip rap, metal, etc.

You are still lying.

> and trivaial considerations like putting them near
> earthquake zones is not usually taken into account.

That's an unprovable speculation at best.

Engineers are quite thorough, as too are regulatory agencies.

https://archive.org/stream/CurrentPr...5-42__djvu.txt

European research project TAILSAFE (2004) completed in 2004 by an
international consortium. However, this valuable work does not indicate
recommended computational procedures which may help in real risk values
estimation, especially for a case of statistically non-homogeneous natural
and man-made environment subjected to various randomly defined external
natural inter-correlated influences such as floods, rainfalls, earthquakes,
tectonic movement of surface geological deposits (rocks and soil).

> There is no technoloigy to clean up these spills.

That is yet another lie!

http://www.mykawartha.com/news-story...er-guidelines/

The provincial Environment Ministry ordered Imperial Metals Corp.
(TSX:III) to immediately take action to prevent additional water and
silt from leaking out of the tailings pond, account for what was in the
tailings and provide a plan to clean it up.

The province said the company met a Wednesday deadline to provide a plan
to stop continued pollution and for a preliminary environmental
assessment and cleanup, though the documents have not been released
publicly.

http://technology.infomine.com/tailingsmine/

A new cost-effective technology to treat mining wastewater and reduce
sludge by up to 90% has been used for the first time at a copper mine in
Queensland.

http://www.tecedmonton.com/Blog/tabi...ngs-ponds.aspx

Assignments were divvied out. Syncrude took the lead on “MFT
Centrifuging”. CNRL focused on alternative polymers. Suncor and Shell,
both with reasonably advanced “thin lift drying” fine clay removal
projects, worked on research to determine commercial feasibility.
Syncrude also took the lead on polymer mixing techniques.


The consortium has a $90 million budget in 2011 to “host” multi-company
projects, and to augment “common-pool” research budgets.


Meanwhile, the consortium with the Alberta government funded Alberta
Innovates – Energy and Environmental Solutions, undertook to execute the
“tailings road map study,” a $1.4 million study funded by both the
industry and government to identify any or all possible potential
technologies to clean up oil sand tailings.

> The damage is permanent.

No it is not.

> And the corporations whose negligence led to it will never be held fully
> accountable.

That is a wholly separate matter.

I'll say it again, YOU trade in disinformation, and you do it with a
nonchalance that is frankly appalling!

If you aren't a PR rep for the mining inudustry you are in the wrong
business.



---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 11:38:06 AM UTC-7, Paul M. Cook wrote:
> If you aren't a PR rep for the mining inudustry you are in the wrong
>
> business.
>

I was about to ask if he was employed as a propagandist for the industry, you beat me to the thought.

"ImStillMags" > wrote in message
...
> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 11:38:06 AM UTC-7, Paul M. Cook wrote:
>> If you aren't a PR rep for the mining inudustry you are in the wrong
>>
>> business.
>>
>
> I was about to ask if he was employed as a propagandist for the industry,
> you beat me to the thought.

He's good, I'll give him that.



---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 12:13:27 PM UTC-7, Paul M. Cook wrote:
> "ImStillMags" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 11:38:06 AM UTC-7, Paul M. Cook wrote:
>
> >> If you aren't a PR rep for the mining inudustry you are in the wrong
>
> >>
>
> >> business.
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> > I was about to ask if he was employed as a propagandist for the industry,
>
> > you beat me to the thought.
>
>
>
> He's good, I'll give him that.
>


The one thing he fails to address in all the information he cites is that where does the funding come from? Follow the money. Who does it benefit, this so solid sounding information? Too much disinformation floating around out there.

On 8/12/2014 12:14 PM, Paul M. Cook wrote:
> "Mayo" > wrote in message ...
>> On 8/12/2014 11:54 AM, ImStillMags wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 10:43:37 AM UTC-7, Mayo wrote:
>>>> On 8/12/2014 11:08 AM, ImStillMags wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 9:28:27 AM UTC-7, Mayo wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> On 8/12/2014 10:10 AM, ImStillMags wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> http://blog.skytruth.org/2014/08/lan...ley-spill.html
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> move the line in the picture to see what is happening.
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, and?
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> Does that form the lone outcome for ALL other mine tailings ponds?
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> http://corpethics.org/article.php?id=2659
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> These anecdotes do NOT comprise the soul outcome for ALL tailing ponds.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You know that, but you will not accept it.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> And you seem to be able to accept that even one is unacceptable.
>>
>> Oh yes, I certainly am.
>>
>> I accept that man will always make mistakes, fail, screw up, etc.
>>
>> Airplanes crash, ships sink, sinkholes open up and swallow homes whole,
>> lightning strikes golfers inside a shelter, your auntie chokes to death on
>> a pretzel - I do accept that accidents always have and always will happen.
>>
>> That's why we have laws, regulatory agencies, oversight, courts, etc.
>>
>> You're so enmeshed in your own polar extremism that you'd literally shut
>> down all mining and mineral development because human nature is not
>> perfect.
>>
>> That type of mentality is why intractable enviros inspire such frustration
>> and enmity.
>>
>> I'm not going to let you nor your ilk turn this into a Luddite spiral
>> downward where we all sit around the last beeswax candle and ponder why
>> there's no bread on the shelves or lightbulbs that turn on anymore.
>>
>> Understand?
>
>
>
> The president of Imperial Metals, Brian Kynoch, claims that the water in the
> tailings pond is "near drinking water quality" and expressed disbelief that
> the impoundment could fail so catastrophically, despite the fact that
> Canadian officials had issued multiple warnings to Imperial Metals for
> exceeding water quality standards for effluent and exceeding the permitted
> wastewater levels in the pond.
>
> So in other words Mr. Kynoch just *assumed* everything was peachy keen so
> why bother with pesky engioneers and environmentalists? Let's see Mr.
> Kynoch drinka few pints of that water.
>
> "That's why we have laws, regulatory agencies, oversight, courts, etc." Not
> for them, we don't. No laws, regualtions and oversight stops these people
> from cutting every single corner they can to increase profits.

Your complaint is with any and ALL business then, and profit as well.

And that type of systemic indictment sets you in immediate opposition to
finding solutions.

Not good for the rest of us.

"ImStillMags" > wrote in message
...
> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 12:13:27 PM UTC-7, Paul M. Cook wrote:
>> "ImStillMags" > wrote in message
>>
>> ...
>>
>> > On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 11:38:06 AM UTC-7, Paul M. Cook wrote:
>>
>> >> If you aren't a PR rep for the mining inudustry you are in the wrong
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> business.
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >
>>
>> > I was about to ask if he was employed as a propagandist for the
>> > industry,
>>
>> > you beat me to the thought.
>>
>>
>>
>> He's good, I'll give him that.
>>
>
>
> The one thing he fails to address in all the information he cites is that
> where does the funding come from? Follow the money. Who does it
> benefit, this so solid sounding information? Too much disinformation
> floating around out there.

I would imagine that to properly build, line and then recover a 580 acre
tailing pond 100 feet deep in toxic sludge would require more money than the
mining project could ever produce. It is like "clean coal" technology the
coal industry spouts. It simply does not exist.



---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 2:24:54 PM UTC-7, Paul M. Cook wrote:
> "ImStillMags" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 12:13:27 PM UTC-7, Paul M. Cook wrote:
>
> >> "ImStillMags" > wrote in message
>
> >>
>
> >> ...
>
> >>
>
> >> > On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 11:38:06 AM UTC-7, Paul M. Cook wrote:
>
> >> >> If you aren't a PR rep for the mining inudustry you are in the wrong business.

> >> > I was about to ask if he was employed as a propagandist for the
>
> >> > industry, you beat me to the thought. e's good, I'll give him that.
>
> > The one thing he fails to address in all the information he cites is that
>
> > where does the funding come from? Follow the money. Who does it
>
> > benefit, this so solid sounding information? Too much disinformation
>
> > floating around out there.

> I would imagine that to properly build, line and then recover a 580 acre
>
> tailing pond 100 feet deep in toxic sludge would require more money than the
>
> mining project could ever produce. It is like "clean coal" technology the
>
> coal industry spouts. It simply does not exist.
>

Just a quick "thank you" for the intelligent debunking posts. Mayo's ilk flourished and continue to flourish, backed by such reactionary funding sources as the Marshall Institute and others.

Their job is to hire scientific whores to create doubt in the (usually) uninformed public mind, despite the overwhelming concensus of legitimate scientists w/o an axe to grind.

These scientific whores did a number on acid rain, tobacco dangers, ozone hole,
climate change. Now that all have been demonstrated to be true, they are working on fracking while continuing to create doubt about alternative energy.

As you wrote: Follow the money. (From Judge Sirica of Watergate fame.)

HB

On 8/12/2014 12:17 PM, ImStillMags wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 11:07:43 AM UTC-7, Mayo wrote:
>> I'm not going to let you nor your ilk turn this into a Luddite spiral
>>
>> downward where we all sit around the last beeswax candle and ponder why
>>
>> there's no bread on the shelves or lightbulbs that turn on anymore.
>>
>>
>>
>> Understand?
>
> I understand you perfectly.

I seriously doubt that.

> You cannot think beyond what is now.

An utter lie.

> Those apologists for fossil fuels, like you,

I apologize for nothing. I take the good with the bad.

> refuse to accept that there are alternatives

I pay a voluntary surcharge on my utility bill each month to support
"green" alternatives, try again.

> and that the only reason we do not have those alternatives already is because of the grip the fossil fuel industry has on politics, the economy and the minds of those who will not look at a future without them.

You seem to know next to nothing about cost/benefit or the over 3 dozen
green energy company failures who were handed subsidies by the government.

> There is no reason that we have to "starve to death and freeze in the dark".

There is if we stop using oil or coal - it's called cost effective,
transferable energy density.

> Your embrace of the fearmongering that has gone along with the contemplating of alternatives

I have no fear of wind nor solar, I already support them.

> is what holds you and everyone like you back.

I'm held nowhere - if I decide to buy a Tesla and transfer my energy
load from oil to coal and gas, I'll do so.

Understand please that a Tesla is not solar panel chargeable.

>But fortunately there are those who are working diligently to wean the
planet off this poison.

Now how well did that play out for the battery companies that went
under, or Solyndra, or Fisker?

> It could be done very quickly if the resources that have been used to perpetuate the myth of fossil fuel dependence was put towards developing all the alternatives that are already available to us.

I suspect you have little if any clue what goes on at NREL, Oak Ridge, etc.

What you do have is a loud and uneducated demeanor and an insulting manner.

Neither one of those questionable attributes will win you any respect
nor new adherents.

Frankly when it comes to "fear mongering", the enviros are past masters
at playing Chicken Little.

So spare me your wit and piety, the moving hand has already writ and
moved on.

Are we clear now?

On 8/12/2014 12:38 PM, Paul M. Cook wrote:
> If you aren't a PR rep for the mining inudustry you are in the wrong
> business.
>
Iow, I couldn't possibly have reached conclusions and studied data in
doing so that have led me to far less extreme positions than the ones
you hold?

Do tell.

One of us lied multiple times in this very thread, and it was not me.

On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 9:10:10 AM UTC-7, ImStillMags wrote:
> http://blog.skytruth.org/2014/08/lan...ley-spill.html
>
> move the line in the picture to see what is happening.

The SAME company that built this failed dam has -- incredibly!!! -- been hired to work on dam(s) for the apocalypic Pebble Mine project in Alaska. Can't beat that for undue influence.

Americans and Canadians would do well to unite under the banner of a powerful environmental organization like NRDC (National Resources Defense Counsel) which has been fighing the Pebble Mine project withe some success.

Do we want another Mt Pooley in Alaska? Do we want to ruin perhaps the BEST salmon area in the country? On which large numbers of people depend for food?

(Note: I have no connection wih NRDC except as a longtime supporter.)

HB

On 8/12/2014 12:58 PM, ImStillMags wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 11:38:06 AM UTC-7, Paul M. Cook wrote:
>> If you aren't a PR rep for the mining inudustry you are in the wrong
>>
>> business.
>>
>
> I was about to ask if he was employed as a propagandist for the industry, you beat me to the thought.
>
Well of course he did, simplistic and pejorative as such a "thought" is,
you're both cut of the same extremist cloth.

On 8/12/2014 1:13 PM, Paul M. Cook wrote:
> "ImStillMags" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 11:38:06 AM UTC-7, Paul M. Cook wrote:
>>> If you aren't a PR rep for the mining inudustry you are in the wrong
>>>
>>> business.
>>>
>>
>> I was about to ask if he was employed as a propagandist for the industry,
>> you beat me to the thought.
>
> He's good, I'll give him that.

I've done my research, measured the costs and benefits and arrived at
win/win thinking.

Nothing in this discussion need be either/or...even nuclear.

It all depends on how good the planning and execution is.

And how robust the oversight is.

On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 3:56:53 PM UTC-7, Mayo wrote:

> I suspect you have little if any clue what goes on at NREL, Oak Ridge, etc.
>
>
>
> What you do have is a loud and uneducated demeanor and an insulting manner.
>
>
>
> Neither one of those questionable attributes will win you any respect
>
> nor new adherents.
>
>
>
> Frankly when it comes to "fear mongering", the enviros are past masters
>
> at playing Chicken Little.
>
>
>
> So spare me your wit and piety, the moving hand has already writ and
>
> moved on.
>
>
>
> Are we clear now?

I seem to have struck a nerve.
You mistake a passion for a clean environment for personal insult.
Let's leave the personality out of it.

I still contend that your support of these companies and their operations is misguided at best.

"Mayo" > wrote in message ...
> On 8/12/2014 1:13 PM, Paul M. Cook wrote:
>> "ImStillMags" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 11:38:06 AM UTC-7, Paul M. Cook wrote:
>>>> If you aren't a PR rep for the mining inudustry you are in the wrong
>>>>
>>>> business.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I was about to ask if he was employed as a propagandist for the
>>> industry,
>>> you beat me to the thought.
>>
>> He's good, I'll give him that.
>
> I've done my research, measured the costs and benefits and arrived at
> win/win thinking.
>
> Nothing in this discussion need be either/or...even nuclear.
>
> It all depends on how good the planning and execution is.
>
> And how robust the oversight is.

OK Einstein, tell me how much it would cost to remove 2,526,480,000 cubic
feet of toxic sludge. That is the volume of the pond that burst. How much
will that cost in man-hours, equipment and fuel. And where will you haul it
off to where it can be safely sequestered for eternity?

Now let's consider the proposed Pebble Mine. The tailing pond for that one
will need to be 6000 acres in area and 700 feet deep. That is 3/4ths the
size of the island of Manhattan and as deep as the Empire State Building is
tall. What liner technology would you propose?




---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

On 8/12/2014 3:24 PM, Paul M. Cook wrote:
> "ImStillMags" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 12:13:27 PM UTC-7, Paul M. Cook wrote:
>>> "ImStillMags" > wrote in message
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 11:38:06 AM UTC-7, Paul M. Cook wrote:
>>>
>>>>> If you aren't a PR rep for the mining inudustry you are in the wrong
>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>>> business.
>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>> I was about to ask if he was employed as a propagandist for the
>>>> industry,
>>>
>>>> you beat me to the thought.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> He's good, I'll give him that.
>>>
>>
>>
>> The one thing he fails to address in all the information he cites is that
>> where does the funding come from? Follow the money. Who does it
>> benefit, this so solid sounding information? Too much disinformation
>> floating around out there.
>
> I would imagine that to properly build, line and then recover a 580 acre
> tailing pond 100 feet deep in toxic sludge would require more money than the
> mining project could ever produce.

And once again you let your "imagination" lead you to conclusions devoid
of fact.

> It is like "clean coal" technology the
> coal industry spouts. It simply does not exist.

That's another lie.

It existed as early as the mid 1930s in Germany - the Fischer/Tropsch
process.

Honestly, do you ever get tired of disseminating disinformation?

On 8/12/2014 4:37 PM, Hypatia Nachshon wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 2:24:54 PM UTC-7, Paul M. Cook wrote:
>> "ImStillMags" > wrote in message
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 12:13:27 PM UTC-7, Paul M. Cook wrote:
>>
>>>> "ImStillMags" > wrote in message
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> ...
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 11:38:06 AM UTC-7, Paul M. Cook wrote:
>>
>>>>>> If you aren't a PR rep for the mining inudustry you are in the wrong business.
>
>>>>> I was about to ask if he was employed as a propagandist for the
>>
>>>>> industry, you beat me to the thought. e's good, I'll give him that.
>>
>>> The one thing he fails to address in all the information he cites is that
>>
>>> where does the funding come from? Follow the money. Who does it
>>
>>> benefit, this so solid sounding information? Too much disinformation
>>
>>> floating around out there.
>
>> I would imagine that to properly build, line and then recover a 580 acre
>>
>> tailing pond 100 feet deep in toxic sludge would require more money than the
>>
>> mining project could ever produce. It is like "clean coal" technology the
>>
>> coal industry spouts. It simply does not exist.
>>
>
> Just a quick "thank you" for the intelligent debunking posts.

The ones devoid of factual data?

It is laughable you'd buy opinion over truth.

> Mayo's ilk flourished and continue to flourish, backed by such reactionary funding sources as the Marshall Institute and others.

Sorry my dear, I have no "funding source".

And do you think the Sierra Club or Greenpeace are any less "reactionary"?

Rhetorical question, I know...

> Their job is to hire scientific whores to create doubt in the (usually) uninformed public mind, despite the overwhelming concensus of legitimate scientists w/o an axe to grind.

The peer review herd?

Yes well, barking in unison for grants is no less corrupt than letting
Exxon pay for play.

> These scientific whores did a number on acid rain, tobacco dangers, ozone hole,
> climate change.

Oh look, all grouped together...apples, oranges, and pomegranates...

> Now that all have been demonstrated to be true, they are working on fracking while continuing to create doubt about alternative energy.

Fracking, the latest whipping post, sigh...

> As you wrote: Follow the money. (From Judge Sirica of Watergate fame.)
>
> HB

And why not a dash of Watergate too while you're at it!

Any more witlessly displaced sanctimony to splatter us with?

On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 9:10:10 AM UTC-7, ImStillMags wrote:
> http://blog.skytruth.org/2014/08/lan...ley-spill.html
>

> move the line in the picture to see what is happening.

From BC deforestation to petcoke to tarsands oil leaking into the
Kalamazoo river to gold mine tailings -- where did we ever get
the idea that Canadians cared about the environment?

On 8/12/2014 5:05 PM, Hypatia Nachshon wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 9:10:10 AM UTC-7, ImStillMags wrote:
>> http://blog.skytruth.org/2014/08/lan...ley-spill.html
>>
>> move the line in the picture to see what is happening.
>
> The SAME company that built this failed dam has -- incredibly!!! -- been hired to work on dam(s) for the apocalypic Pebble Mine project in Alaska. Can't beat that for undue influence.
>
> Americans and Canadians would do well to unite under the banner of a powerful environmental organization like NRDC (National Resources Defense Counsel) which has been fighing the Pebble Mine project withe some success.
>
> Do we want another Mt Pooley in Alaska? Do we want to ruin perhaps the BEST salmon area in the country? On which large numbers of people depend for food?
>
> (Note: I have no connection wih NRDC except as a longtime supporter.)
>
> HB
>
True believers like yourself are largely immune to solutions, just
impediments.

On 8/12/2014 5:36 PM, ImStillMags wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 3:56:53 PM UTC-7, Mayo wrote:
>
>> I suspect you have little if any clue what goes on at NREL, Oak Ridge, etc.
>>
>>
>>
>> What you do have is a loud and uneducated demeanor and an insulting manner.
>>
>>
>>
>> Neither one of those questionable attributes will win you any respect
>>
>> nor new adherents.
>>
>>
>>
>> Frankly when it comes to "fear mongering", the enviros are past masters
>>
>> at playing Chicken Little.
>>
>>
>>
>> So spare me your wit and piety, the moving hand has already writ and
>>
>> moved on.
>>
>>
>>
>> Are we clear now?
>
> I seem to have struck a nerve.

Extremism generally does.

> You mistake a passion for a clean environment for personal insult.

Mmmm, the attacks were personal.

> Let's leave the personality out of it.

As you wish.

> I still contend that your support of these companies and their operations is misguided at best.

Is the work regulatory agencies do with them equally misguided?

At what point do we all sit down and arrive at mutually beneficial
solutions?

On 8/12/2014 5:58 PM, Paul M. Cook wrote:
> "Mayo" > wrote in message ...
>> On 8/12/2014 1:13 PM, Paul M. Cook wrote:
>>> "ImStillMags" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 11:38:06 AM UTC-7, Paul M. Cook wrote:
>>>>> If you aren't a PR rep for the mining inudustry you are in the wrong
>>>>>
>>>>> business.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I was about to ask if he was employed as a propagandist for the
>>>> industry,
>>>> you beat me to the thought.
>>>
>>> He's good, I'll give him that.
>>
>> I've done my research, measured the costs and benefits and arrived at
>> win/win thinking.
>>
>> Nothing in this discussion need be either/or...even nuclear.
>>
>> It all depends on how good the planning and execution is.
>>
>> And how robust the oversight is.
>
> OK Einstein, tell me how much it would cost to remove 2,526,480,000 cubic
> feet of toxic sludge.

Off the top of my head?

I haven't a clue.

Have you?

> That is the volume of the pond that burst. How much
> will that cost in man-hours, equipment and fuel. And where will you haul it
> off to where it can be safely sequestered for eternity?

It's not nuclear, so why " for eternity"?

Have you half life data to share?

> Now let's consider the proposed Pebble Mine. The tailing pond for that one
> will need to be 6000 acres in area and 700 feet deep. That is 3/4ths the
> size of the island of Manhattan and as deep as the Empire State Building is
> tall. What liner technology would you propose?

I'm no tailing pond design expert, but I'd think that successive layers
of bentonite, membrane, more bentonite, more membrane, gunnite, etc.
would be worth looking at.

Oh, and one whopping big French drain system around the entire thing to
feed into a series of smaller containment ponds should a breach below occur.

And that is extemporaneous, no googling.

Or...what would the expense be of drilling several thousand feet deep
into a confined geologic stratum and mapping it for non-transmissability?

On 8/12/2014 6:24 PM, wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 9:10:10 AM UTC-7, ImStillMags wrote:
>> http://blog.skytruth.org/2014/08/lan...ley-spill.html
>>
>
>> move the line in the picture to see what is happening.
>
> From BC deforestation to petcoke to tarsands oil leaking into the
> Kalamazoo river to gold mine tailings -- where did we ever get
> the idea that Canadians cared about the environment?
>
Oh come on, they have to have a national economy too.

"Mayo" > wrote in message ...
> On 8/12/2014 3:24 PM, Paul M. Cook wrote:
>> "ImStillMags" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 12:13:27 PM UTC-7, Paul M. Cook wrote:
>>>> "ImStillMags" > wrote in message
>>>>
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 11:38:06 AM UTC-7, Paul M. Cook wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> If you aren't a PR rep for the mining inudustry you are in the wrong
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> business.
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I was about to ask if he was employed as a propagandist for the
>>>>> industry,
>>>>
>>>>> you beat me to the thought.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> He's good, I'll give him that.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The one thing he fails to address in all the information he cites is
>>> that
>>> where does the funding come from? Follow the money. Who does it
>>> benefit, this so solid sounding information? Too much disinformation
>>> floating around out there.
>>
>> I would imagine that to properly build, line and then recover a 580 acre
>> tailing pond 100 feet deep in toxic sludge would require more money than
>> the
>> mining project could ever produce.
>
> And once again you let your "imagination" lead you to conclusions devoid
> of fact.
>

You're the one dreaming up "liners" for ponds so big they could cover Lake
Erie. Do you think Home Depot carries them?

>> It is like "clean coal" technology the
>> coal industry spouts. It simply does not exist.
>
> That's another lie.

It does not exist. Period. It is a term manufactured by the industry PR
marketers. The extraction of coal is a horribly polluting and destructive
business all on its own.

> It existed as early as the mid 1930s in Germany - the Fischer/Tropsch
> process.

That is a proces Hitler used to convert coal into gasoline. It isn't used
now because of its enormous cost. Clean coal it isn't.

> Honestly, do you ever get tired of disseminating disinformation?

You top Newt Gingrich with your fantasy plans of hyper engineering saving
the world using technology that does not exist.




---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

On 8/12/2014 10:07 PM, Paul M. Cook wrote:
> "Mayo" > wrote in message ...
>> On 8/12/2014 3:24 PM, Paul M. Cook wrote:
>>> "ImStillMags" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 12:13:27 PM UTC-7, Paul M. Cook wrote:
>>>>> "ImStillMags" > wrote in message
>>>>>
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 11:38:06 AM UTC-7, Paul M. Cook wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you aren't a PR rep for the mining inudustry you are in the wrong
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> business.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I was about to ask if he was employed as a propagandist for the
>>>>>> industry,
>>>>>
>>>>>> you beat me to the thought.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> He's good, I'll give him that.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The one thing he fails to address in all the information he cites is
>>>> that
>>>> where does the funding come from? Follow the money. Who does it
>>>> benefit, this so solid sounding information? Too much disinformation
>>>> floating around out there.
>>>
>>> I would imagine that to properly build, line and then recover a 580 acre
>>> tailing pond 100 feet deep in toxic sludge would require more money than
>>> the
>>> mining project could ever produce.
>>
>> And once again you let your "imagination" lead you to conclusions devoid
>> of fact.
>>
>
> You're the one dreaming up "liners" for ponds so big they could cover Lake
> Erie. Do you think Home Depot carries them?

Do you need a reference for commercial membrane manufacturers?

Even Bridgestone (tires) does it, albeit not too well if Tempe's (AZ)
Town Lake failure is any indication.

>>> It is like "clean coal" technology the
>>> coal industry spouts. It simply does not exist.
>>
>> That's another lie.
>
> It does not exist. Period.

It does, and I proved it too.

> It is a term manufactured by the industry PR
> marketers. The extraction of coal is a horribly polluting and destructive
> business all on its own.

The extraction process is NOT what "clean coal" refers to.

You know that, don't you?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_coal

Clean coal is a concept for processes or approaches that mitigate
emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases that arise
from the utilization of coal, mainly for electrical power generation,
using clean coal technology. Currently, the term clean coal is used in
the coal industry primarily in reference to carbon capture and storage,
which pumps and stores CO2 emissions underground, and plants using
integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC). IGCC involves coal
gasification, which provides a basis for increased efficiency and lower
cost in capturing CO2 emissions.[1][2][3][4] Prior to the current focus
on carbon capture and storage,[5] the term clean coal had been used to
refer to technologies for reducing emissions of NOx, sulfur, and heavy
metals from coal combustion.

http://seca.doe.gov/technologies/coa...pgfb_tidd.html

Clean Coal Technology Demonstration Program (CCTDP) - Round 1
Advanced Electric Power Generation - Fluidized Bed Combustion


Please don't go tell those dedicated government scientists they were had
by the PR boys, OK?

>> It existed as early as the mid 1930s in Germany - the Fischer/Tropsch
>> process.
>
> That is a proces Hitler used to convert coal into gasoline.

Ding!

You got one right.

> It isn't used
> now because of its enormous cost.

Then you got one wrong...tsk...

http://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=9101HIE6.txt

http://www.oregonlive.com/business/o...5531373740.xml

The best bet right now for nonconventional fuel comes from South Africa,
experts said. The country has powered its airline industry for a decade
using a coal-based jet fuel blend developed by petrochemicals group
Sasol. It's technically a synthetic fuel, which means it can be used
without altering engines or other aircraft equipment.


> Clean coal it isn't.

Oh but it is.

>> Honestly, do you ever get tired of disseminating disinformation?
>
> You top Newt Gingrich with your fantasy plans of hyper engineering saving
> the world using technology that does not exist.

SASOL does not exist?

Huh?

http://www.avweb.com/blogs/insider/A..._207896-1.html

http://www.redorbit.com/news/science...omegrown_fuel/

Experts said the safest bet right now for non-conventional fuel comes
from South Africa in the form of a coal blend developed by
petrochemicals group Sasol.

It’s technically a “synthetic” fuel, which means it can be used without
altering engines or other aircraft equipment.

U.S. companies are quickly developing a variety of similar synthetics.
Airline experts say three companies in particular could provide as much
as three million gallons a day of synthetic fuel by 2012: American Clean
Coal Fuels of Portland, Ore., Baard Energy in Vancouver, Wash., and
Rentech Inc. (RTK) of Los Angeles.

"Mayo" > wrote in message ...
> On 8/12/2014 12:38 PM, Paul M. Cook wrote:
>> If you aren't a PR rep for the mining inudustry you are in the wrong
>> business.
>>
> Iow, I couldn't possibly have reached conclusions and studied data in
> doing so that have led me to far less extreme positions than the ones you
> hold?
>
> Do tell.
>
> One of us lied multiple times in this very thread, and it was not me.

I guess your tight sweater, miniskirt and pom poms threw me.




---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

On 8/14/2014 1:55 AM, Paul M. Cook wrote:
> "Mayo" > wrote in message ...
>> On 8/12/2014 12:38 PM, Paul M. Cook wrote:
>>> If you aren't a PR rep for the mining inudustry you are in the wrong
>>> business.
>>>
>> Iow, I couldn't possibly have reached conclusions and studied data in
>> doing so that have led me to far less extreme positions than the ones you
>> hold?
>>
>> Do tell.
>>
>> One of us lied multiple times in this very thread, and it was not me.
>
> I guess your tight sweater, miniskirt and pom poms threw me.
>
Tsk, you haven't gotten over the French drain defrocking yet?

On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 6:07:25 PM UTC-7, Mayo wrote:

>
> Oh come on, they have to have a national economy too.

This is a video by Alexandra Morton. She is worth paying attenion to.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpZOLkIaOnY#t=35

On 8/18/2014 5:15 PM, ImStillMags wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 6:07:25 PM UTC-7, Mayo wrote:
>
>>
>> Oh come on, they have to have a national economy too.
>
> This is a video by Alexandra Morton. She is worth paying attenion to.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpZOLkIaOnY#t=35

That is brainwashing and propaganda.

Do you regularly launder your mind?

"I imagine them coming out of the woods going, what happened"?

That's called anthropomorphizing.

It's a luxury older people who "hate humanity" get to bathe in, bless
their hypocritically furrowed brows.

"This is death"!

Wah.

On Tuesday, August 19, 2014 10:40:04 AM UTC-7, Mayo wrote:
> On 8/18/2014 5:15 PM, ImStillMags wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 6:07:25 PM UTC-7, Mayo wrote:
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >> Oh come on, they have to have a national economy too.
>
> >
>
> > This is a video by Alexandra Morton. She is worth paying attenion to.
>
> >
>
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpZOLkIaOnY#t=35
>
>
>
> That is brainwashing and propaganda.
>
>
>
> Do you regularly launder your mind?
>
>
>
> "I imagine them coming out of the woods going, what happened"?
>
>
>
> That's called anthropomorphizing.
>
>
>
> It's a luxury older people who "hate humanity" get to bathe in, bless
>
> their hypocritically furrowed brows.
>
>
>
> "This is death"!
>
>
>
> Wah.

No. This is a very educated, erudite, impassioned woman who cares about the ecology of BC and the fisheries. She's been working for years to prevent the kinds of things that are happening now. Before you completely dismiss what she has done, you would do well to listen to her. Here is a selection of her talks and videos.

https://www.youtube.com/results?sear...exandra+Morton

On 8/19/2014 9:03 PM, ImStillMags wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 19, 2014 10:40:04 AM UTC-7, Mayo wrote:
>> On 8/18/2014 5:15 PM, ImStillMags wrote:
>>
>>> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 6:07:25 PM UTC-7, Mayo wrote:
>>
>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> Oh come on, they have to have a national economy too.
>>
>>>
>>
>>> This is a video by Alexandra Morton. She is worth paying attenion to.
>>
>>>
>>
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpZOLkIaOnY#t=35
>>
>>
>>
>> That is brainwashing and propaganda.
>>
>>
>>
>> Do you regularly launder your mind?
>>
>>
>>
>> "I imagine them coming out of the woods going, what happened"?
>>
>>
>>
>> That's called anthropomorphizing.
>>
>>
>>
>> It's a luxury older people who "hate humanity" get to bathe in, bless
>>
>> their hypocritically furrowed brows.
>>
>>
>>
>> "This is death"!
>>
>>
>>
>> Wah.
>
> No.

Sorry, but yes.

> This is a very educated, erudite, impassioned woman who cares about the ecology of BC and the fisheries. She's been working for years to prevent the kinds of things that are happening now. Before you completely dismiss what she has done, you would do well to listen to her. Here is a selection of her talks and videos.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/results?sear...exandra+Morton

She's a dilettante, a self-trained "biologist" and full time activist
who trades emotion for attention.

And you fell for it.