Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Enviro Disaster in Likely, BC as tailings pond breached at Mount Polley Mine


theminister

Recommended Posts

Brian Kynoch, of Imperial Mines, sounded so insincere, unconvincing and even confrontational. Seriously....this is a huge disaster and he sloughs it off like it's under control and a bother? People killing this planet seem so inconvenienced when people question them about it. It belongs to us, too pal. Got some 'splaining to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ron why would you assume the alternative is automatically the extreme opposite. Thus kind of bs makes you sound ridiculous.

But I like your argument. Hey things are better than they used to be so shut up and be happy with that. Keep improving? Make things better? Nah..it's good enough.

No, we can keep improving in some ways but in others they often go over the top.

The one thing that they could do though is make people hold enviromental disaster insurance to help pay for cleanups when they happen.

Other than that things are fairly well regulated which is why we don't have Giant Mine cleanup, or right here at home Brittania Beach Mine (might still be leaching heavy metals into the straight, not sure), or other similar megascale cleanups.

We just have to make sure it's done in a smart effecient way so that we don't drive all the business out of the province. If we do, then we will be in the poor house faster then people think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brian Kynoch, of Imperial Mines, sounded so insincere, unconvincing and even confrontational. Seriously....this is a huge disaster and he sloughs it off like it's under control and a bother? People killing this planet seem so inconvenienced when people question them about it. It belong to us, too pal. Got some 'splaining to do.

It's called consulting with your lawyers before you speak.

I have yet to see the results of an enviromental investigation so ironically the people that are declaring the results are just as unreliable as him.

Let's get some biologists and enviromental scientists in there and figure out what we need to do about this first, then point fingers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, we can keep improving in some ways but in others they often go over the top.

The one thing that they could do though is make people hold enviromental disaster insurance to help pay for cleanups when they happen.

Other than that things are fairly well regulated which is why we don't have Giant Mine cleanup, or right here at home Brittania Beach Mine (might still be leaching heavy metals into the straight, not sure), or other similar megascale cleanups.

We just have to make sure it's done in a smart effecient way so that we don't drive all the business out of the province. If we do, then we will be in the poor house faster then people think.

You're so concerned about not driving business out ...how large of an environmental disaster does it take before it's not with it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cant believe this stuff happens, we are destroying the planet, and their is no end.

Think of the effect this is going to have on the ecosystem. Millions of fish will die from this bull crap, and because those fish were never able to spawn, trillions will never be born, what about the wildlife that depend on these waters?

The human species is a greedy bunch, its only getting worse.

You know what's also full of toxic metals? Whatever device you used to post this on the internet.

Pretty hard to have all those flash lights without copper, and it's hard to have copper without copper mines.

So unless your ready to pay a lot more for everything in order to do things cleaner, then your just a part of the problem.

So while you may hate on them they don't really care so long as you keep buying their products.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's called consulting with your lawyers before you speak.

I have yet to see the results of an enviromental investigation so ironically the people that are declaring the results are just as unreliable as him.

Let's get some biologists and enviromental scientists in there and figure out what we need to do about this first, then point fingers.

The fingers are clearly being pointed at him for good reason. The scale of the disaster is still unknown but large or small the blame is clearly his.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're so concerned about not driving business out ...how large of an environmental disaster does it take before it's not with it?

Depends on how poor we are. Check out the former forests of Haiti if you want to see what people do when desperate.

There's always going to be enviromental incidents if we want to do just about anything. What's important is to try to minimise their occurence and severity should they occur.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fingers are clearly being pointed at him for good reason. The scale of the disaster is still unknown but large or small the blame is clearly his.

That's why CEOs get the big bucks. If something goes wrong it's their head on a platter.

And yes, contrary to what some people think, depending on why and what happened, people could go to jail.

He of course is trying to limit his own an his companies liability. It's his responsibility and in his own interest.

Why the surprise?

Edit: Without all the facts it's impossible to point fingers. I know people like to play judge jury and executioner but that's not how it works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depends on how poor we are. Check out the former forests of Haiti if you want to see what people do when desperate.

There's always going to be enviromental incidents if we want to do just about anything. What's important is to try to minimise their occurence and severity should they occur.

We're one of the richest nations on earth. Given that, answer my question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're one of the richest nations on earth. Given that, answer my question.

The one where everyone, including me, dies.

I already answered it. It's about risk management and mitigation, not how big a crap someone's allowed to take on the province.

But why worry about reality when there's a chance for rhetoric.....

How about you answer you own question so we can set the bar at least.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The one where everyone, including me, dies.

I already answered it. It's about risk management and mitigation, not how big a crap someone's allowed to take on the province.

But why worry about reality when there's a chance for rhetoric.....

How about you answer you own question so we can set the bar at least.......

Are you actually saying there is no environmental disaster big enough short of total destruction of our species that would make you want to take action that would hurt business? Lol you're a lunatic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Could be a good entry point into the stock. It's not like it's their only mine or that the price of copper is very high at the moment in the event they have to close it down for a while.

Your recognition and concern for the immense and irreparable damage done here is underwhelming.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you actually saying there is no environmental disaster big enough short of total destruction of our species that would make you want to take action that would hurt business? Lol you're a lunatic.

No.

For the third time, it's about limiting risk and have mitigation strategies for addressing problems when they arise.

If you were looking for a line, it's the cost to restore something should an incident occur times the risk vs. the economic return with a reasonable safety factor asscociated with it would be a good way of determining where the line should be.

Where would you place the line? Is it based off of science, math, business relevence? Or is it based off of rhetoric?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No.

For the third time, it's about limiting risk and have mitigation strategies for addressing problems when they arise.

If you were looking for a line, it's the cost to restore something should an incident occur times the risk vs. the economic return with a reasonable safety factor asscociated with it would be a good way of determining where the line should be.

Where would you place the line? Is it based off of science, math, business relevence? Or is it based off of rhetoric?

You keep bringing up this rhetoric, I don't know what you're going on about.

I asked you at what point is it not worth it. You said when we all die. You were pretty clear, so I'm not sure if you're backtracking now or what.

For me, it's the same as you--cost/benefit. But I'm sure we assign values quite differently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The mine's been warned 5 times recently for pond levels being too high - they had chances to address this before it became disastrous, but didn't. When you have people ignoring warnings and something like this then takes place, then it's no accident, it's a crime. Throw the book at them. When the "risk" is putting others in danger or threatens their livelihood then it's too great. It was critical to take steps to prevent things like this from happening but it seems they just sat back and waited until it did - that's irresponsible. They should be shut down in my view.

You can't put a cost on a planet...you take care of it because it's not something to be bought and sold. If people have little regard for the land around them and $$ are driving their actions, they put us all at risk. It costs money to upgrade when risks are presented....they seemingly ignored the warnings and greed becomes the issue. Cost of doing business is one thing, cost of not doing it right is another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The mine's been warned 5 times recently for pond levels being too high - they had chances to address this before it became disastrous, but didn't. When you have people ignoring warnings and something like this then takes place, I'd say they blew it. When the "risk" puts others in danger or threatens their livelihood, then it's critical that you take steps to prevent things from happening, you don't sit back and wait until they do. They should be shut down.

It's such a tough call...

The mine operators certainly deserve to pay for this mess, but do we really want to throw all of those people out of work?

Perhaps (as I believe inane is suggesting) if the penalties for such transgressions actually had some teeth...Maybe if the guys in charge were fined out of their own pockets instead of the company's, or maybe even faced some jail time and the criminal record that would accompany it.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All the people who own fishing lodges and resorts are now officially out of work as the cancellations flood in at what should be the busiest time of the year for them.

I do feel that the mine workers will be casualties in this, but this is a company that clearly doesn't care. Perhaps these people should be hired for the clean up operation.

But your proposal actually makes sense...I agree wholeheartedly. It would never happen again I'm sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You keep bringing up this rhetoric, I don't know what you're going on about.

I asked you at what point is it not worth it. You said when we all die. You were pretty clear, so I'm not sure if you're backtracking now or what.

For me, it's the same as you--cost/benefit. But I'm sure we assign values quite differently.

Why all the drama then? Let's find out what's wrong, why it happened, and what can be done about it. And of course the company should hold the responsibility for dealing with those things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why all the drama then? Let's find out what's wrong, why it happened, and what can be done about it. And of course the company should hold the responsibility for dealing with those things.

Seems like the initial reports say they ignored warnings to build up the pond as levels were beyond the height they should have been - one as recent as May. They WERE responsible, but ignored those warnings? So how many strikes before someone's out?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...