Clear Full Forecast

Process Too Long Says Kemess

By 250 News

Monday, January 15, 2007 03:57 AM

    

Just after Christmas, the Joint Environmental Review Panel announced the extension of the review process on the proposed Kemess North Mine.

The delay, says Northgate Minerals Harold Bent, means there will be no final decision on the proposed mine until late August or early September. Not only are there concerns the company could lose an opportunity to reap the benefits of positive metal pricing, Brent told the audience at last week’s Resource Forum it also means the loss of a construction season and the potential loss of employees.

“We had hoped that Kemess North would be coming on stream, as the existing Kemess mine closed up in 2009, but even if Kemess North is approved, there is no way we can have that overlap now.”

Instead, there would be a gap.

Bent says that means the gap could be disastrous for the 475 who are currently working for Kemess. “These are highly trained people and they have families, they have mortgages, they would have no way of knowing how long that employment gap will last and will have to do whatever they have to do in order to look after themselves and their families.” Brent says many will likely leave the area, and that will cause extra problems if Kemess North is given the green light as recruiting and training employees is very difficult given the current labour shortage.

While he supports the steps that must be followed before a mine can open, he says the entire process takes too long “We have been in this process for a full four years now. I can tell you, I can see where at least 18 months have been lost because of process.”

Kemess North would extend the life of the mine until 2020. The two main issues raised in the review have been the proposed use of Duncan Lake as a tailings pond, and the consultation process with First Nations.


Previous Story - Next Story



Return to Home
NetBistro

Comments


The delay in the environmental review process will have no effect on the people delaying the environmental review process and the cancellation of Kemess North will have no effect on the people causing the cancellation of Kemess North.

All the extensions in the world won't change that, unfortunately.
In response to Jeth's comment, Unfortunately that is exactly what the people pushing for the delay and/or cancellation of Kemess North think, that there will be no effect on them. The reality is that those people are still part of this society and the lack of economic engine that Kemess North would provide lowers the standard of living for everybody. These are usually the same people that are howling for more money for health care, education, parks, etc. I wonder where they think the money comes from?
"the company could lose an opportunity to reap the benefits"

And the downside is they destroy something irreplacable. Norgate knew this could be a long process.

UNFORTUNATELY THOSE SHRUBS MAKING RULES AND DECISIONS WORK FOR THE CASH COW. THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS LIKE TO BE OUT OF A JOB. RUSH, FASTRACK,URGENCY AND ECONOMICS ARE WORDS NOT CONTAINED IN THEIR VOCABULARY.
I guess we gave the natives the 1.5 Million they wanted to sit in on the meetings? It's nice that the lawyers will still have a job.
It should be obvious to everyone that if Kemess North was serious about there business operations they would have factored the cost of this project at current environmental standards, which called for a tailing pond. That could even be their fall back position.

Instead Kemess North insisted on their option being to dump the waste into a headwater freshwater lake of the Finley River system. Kemess North want the environment and future society to subsidize them the difference in cost of $600 million. Now they are in a hurry and don't want society to do a cost benefit analysis on their proposal before society has had a chance to see if the future cost in environment, wildlife, fresh water, and risk is equal to or less than what society as a whole benefits from this trade off.

Make no mistake that the difference between a tailing pond and a fresh water lake is a guaranteed cost to society. How much is the question yet to be quantified, and is it worth it?

If Kemess feels it is worth it than surely they can spend a few million out of the $600 million they save to speed the process up with proper funding, rather than dragging the process out trying to keep the natives and environmentalists at bay and then complaining about the slow pace.