Op-Ed Essay

The Boundary Waters is a pristine and delicate natural region that attracts tourists from around the world. Although tourists and residents alike enjoy immersing themselves in the natural beauty of the region, some people only see the Boundary Waters as a goldmine for precious earth minerals. Recently, there has been a proposal for the Twin Metals copper mine to be located near the Boundary Waters region. I would like to highlight why this project is unsustainable both environmentally and fiscally as well as suggest possible ways to improve our current approach to environmental conservation.

There is no question that copper mining pollutes the environment, but some people may still be unaware of the extent of the damage it causes. Extracting precious minerals from the earth releases harmful particles into the air and water, which makes copper mining the most toxic industry in America. The Save the Boundary Waters website claims that “a single mine in [Boundary Waters] will continually pollute the wilderness for at least 500 years.” Furthermore, local residents may be exposed to potentially dangerous levels of mercury as a result of copper mining in the region.

Antofagasta is a Chilean-based conglomerate behind the Twin Metals mining project. The sustainability section on the company website claims that Antofagasta is continually improving its environmental performance. However, an article from citypages.com explains that Chile’s environmental regulation agency “charged Antofagasta with violating its environmental permits” in 2016. The discrepancy between what Antofagasta says and does raises doubt as to whether the Twin Metals project will remain in accordance with environmental regulations.

The process for cleaning up chemical spillover into the environment can be extremely costly. An article from the Star Tribune Minneapolis provides an example. 3M Company disposed of waste contaminated with ‘forever chemicals’ that leaked into the groundwater polluting the ecosystem. Cost estimates for the cleanup of these chemicals could be as high as $1.2 billion, which is well beyond the “$700 million available to spend on cleaning drinking water and restoring damaged natural resources.” If Twin Metals experiences a toxic spillover into the Boundary Waters region, the cleanup costs could potentially exceed the available funds.

Even though a copper mine would provide much needed jobs to residents of the Boundary Waters area, it would also cause a decline in tourism. According to the Twin Metals website homepage, building a copper mine in the Boundary Waters area will create “750 direct full time jobs and 1,500 new spinoff jobs to Minnesota residents.” However, a copper mine would also diminish the natural beauty of the Boundary Waters, which generates $913 million in annual tourism revenue and creates 17,000 jobs according to the Save the Boundary Waters webpage. Because the tourism industry is a large component of the Boundary Waters economy, the Twin Metals copper mine could potentially get rid of more jobs than it creates.

If copper mining pollutes the environment and drives out jobs, then why is there still so much support for the Twin Metals project? An article titled “Not this Mine, Not this Location” provides an explanation. The Trump administration recently shut down research on the environmental risks posed by copper mining. The article further states that, “the stonewalling on the data strongly suggests that politics, not science, is driving Twin Metals forward.” If politicians continue to relax environmental regulations and push for unsustainable practices, the long term effects could be drastic. An article from mspmag.com describes some of the long term effects of unsustainable human activity on global climate. The article states that “there has been a 3.25℉ increase to the average temperature in Twin Cities from 1951to 2012.” These trends will only continue if politicians fail to encourage sustainable practices.

Other studies suggest that systemic racism presents another barrier for sustainable practices. According to an article from The Atlantic, “the environment is largely influenced by people who can be racist.” This has resulted in “more highly segregated areas suffering higher levels of exposure [to particulate matter].” An article from nature.org argues that the best way to produce necessary change is to be racially inclusive. Youth of color may provide new perspectives from first hand experience of environmental pollution, which may help further define the problem and generate environmentally friendly solutions.

A new copper mine near the Boundary Waters region is unsustainable. The particulate matter released from copper mining has been proven to be extremely harmful to the environment and human health. The Twin Metals mine will cripple a thriving tourism industry and provide less jobs than there are currently available. Because questionable politics and systemic racism only exacerbate the situation, the best approach to solving this issue may be less political influence and more racial inclusivity. I hope that we can all be more considerate of the environment and open to new perspectives as we work to secure a more sustainable future.