It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
A week before The EPA disastrously leaked millions of gallons of toxic waste into The Animas River in Colorado, this letter to the editor was published in The Silverton Standard & The Miner local newspaper, authored by a retired geologist detailing verbatim, how EPA would foul the Animas River on purpose in order to secure superfund money...
"But make no mistake, within seven days, all of the 500gpm flow will return to Cememnt Creek. Contamination may actually increase... The "grand experiment" in my opinion will fail.
And guess what [EPA's] Mr. Hestmark will say then?
Gee, "Plan A" didn't work so I guess we will have to build a treat¬ment plant at a cost to taxpayers of $100 million to $500 million (who knows).
Reading between the lines, I believe that has been the EPA's plan all along"
Yes this letter was published in the July 30, 2015 edition of the Silverton Standard. -Mark Esper, editor and publisher.
originally posted by: WalkInSilence
It is odd that the media hasn't picked up this connection. And there has not been a response here either.
This is controversial and very disturbing.
I don't understand, is it actually profitable to create such a catastrophe?
Thank You
originally posted by: WalkInSilence
It is odd that the media hasn't picked up this connection. And there has not been a response here either.
This is controversial and very disturbing.
I don't understand, is it actually profitable to create such a catastrophe?
Thank You
Begaye (president of the Navajo Nation) said his tribe is bearing the brunt of the massive spill that was accidentally unleashed by EPA workers inspecting the long-idled Gold King mine near Silverton, Colorado, on Aug. 5. Two-thirds of the San Juan River crosses Navajo land before reaching Lake Powell.
“This is a huge issue,” Begaye said. “This river, the San Juan, is our lifeline, not only in a spiritual sense but also it’s an economic base that sustains the people that live along the river.
“When EPA is saying to me it’s going to take decades to clean this up, that is how long uncertainty will exist as we drink the water, as we farm the land, as we put our livestock out there near the river,” he said. “That is just, to me, a disaster of a huge proportion.”
The EPA is trying to cheat Navajo Indians by getting them to sign away their rights to future claims from the agency’s Gold King Mine disaster, tribal officials charged Wednesday, adding more to the administration’s public relations problems over the spill that threatens critical Southwest waterways.
Environmental Protection Agency officials were going door to door asking Navajos, some of whom don’t speak English as their primary language, to sign a form that offers to pay damages incurred so far from the spill, but waiving the right to come back and ask for more if their costs escalate or if they discover bigger problems, Navajo President Russell Begaye told The Washington Times.
originally posted by: ~Lucidity
Gee I dunno, but did the Gold King Mine owners create this mess to make humongous profits?
I guess the real question is what the environmental impact of not cleaning it up at all would have been.
Role of cyanide in ore processing
Cyanide, in the form of a very dilute sodium cyanide solution, is used to dissolve and separate gold from ore. [3] The process used to extract gold using cyanide was developed in Scotland in 1887, and was first used in large scale commercial mining by the New Zealand Crown Mines Company at Karangahake in 1889. [3, 4] Cyanide leaching is considered to be a much safer alternative to extraction with liquid mercury, which was previously the main method of removing gold from ore. [5] Cyanide leaching has been the dominant gold extraction technology since the 1970s, although small-scale and artisanal miners continue to use mercury in some areas of the world. [3] In Canada, more than 90% of mined gold is extracted from ore using cyanide. [3]
The concentration of cyanide used in this process is normally in the range of 0.01% and 0.05% sodium cyanide (100 to 500 parts per million). [2] As part of their best practices, mines use as little cyanide as possible for environmental, safety, and economic reasons. [2] Cyanide leaching is usually done along with a physical process like milling, crushing, or gravity separation. The pH of the resulting slurry is raised by adding lime or another alkali to ensure that cyanide ions do not change into toxic cyanide gas (HCN). [6] The gold is then further concentrated and reduced, before being smelted into gold bullion. Click here to see a demonstration of the gold excavation and refinement process.
Cyanide toxicity and management
Cyanide is toxic in large doses and is strictly regulated in most jurisdictions worldwide to protect people, animals, and the aquatic environment. Cyanide prevents the body from taking up oxygen, resulting in suffocation, which may be fatal to humans and animals without prompt first aid treatment. [7] However, people and animals can rapidly detoxify non-lethal amounts of cyanide without negative effects, and repeated small doses can be tolerated by many species. [3] Some long-term health effects have been observed in people who have a diet high in cyanide-containing plants such as cassava, and include goiter and depressed thyroid function. [8]
- See more at: www.miningfacts.org...
originally posted by: Logarock
a reply to: infolurker
They have don't this before. Call them EPA dumps or whatever one likes. They will authorize dumping into waterways. Don't think this was an accident.
Between 2005 and 2010, three out of four of the fish species that lived in the Upper Animas beneath Silverton died. According to studies by the U.S. Geological Survey, the volume of insects and the number of bug species have plummeted. And since 2006, USGS scientists have found that the water flowing under Bakers Bridge – then downstream, into Durango – carries concentrations of zinc that are toxic to animal life.
The technology to clean the dirty water exists: a limestone water treatment plant. But the stakeholders group has no money to pay for it, and the EPA estimates it would cost between $12 million and $17 million to build and $1 million a year to run – in perpetuity.