Opinion editor's note: Star Tribune Opinion publishes a mix of national and local commentaries online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.
•••
Minnesota sits on a stockpile of strategic metal that can address the climate crisis, but it's not what you might think. It's the dead computer in your closet, obsolete copper telecommunications wires in the ground, and the tangle of cords and old cellphones in your junk drawer. Minnesotans are hoarding massive amounts of metals that should be recycled and continue to send an astounding amount of metal every day into landfills, wasting metals essential for the energy transition.
Ron Way's commentary "It's time to approve the PolyMet mine" was appropriately concerned about the climate crisis, but PolyMet is not a solution. PolyMet's open pit mine proposal would destroy thousands of acres of peatlands — one of the world's most powerful natural carbon sinks — in the headwaters of the St. Louis River, the largest U.S. tributary to Lake Superior.
We cannot mine our way out of the climate crisis, and we should not be duped by propaganda from the mining industry into approving a dangerous mine that will release far more carbon than it will prevent. Instead, Minnesota should lead the way on recycling, reduction of electronic waste, and creating a circular economy to ensure that metals already mined are re-used. This approach provides more metal for the energy transition faster than new mining can. It's also good stewardship of our resources.
Way is right that "copper mining has a dismal worldwide record of failing to keep toxins from leaking into the environment." That's why we shouldn't throw away metals already mined. It's also why permits issued to the PolyMet proposal have been repeatedly reversed and returned to state agencies by Minnesota courts.
The legal challenges to PolyMet's permits are not "procedural challenges." As a former Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) employee, Way should know that.
The Minnesota Supreme Court struck down the state permit to mine because it was based on untested reclamation plans questioned by the state's own experts, and because the permit had no end date for completing cleanup. The Court of Appeals reversed the water pollution permit because it did not fully address the impact of PolyMet's groundwater pollution. The Minnesota Supreme Court is currently reviewing MPCA's actions to suppress public knowledge of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) concerns with that permit.