How are we to reconcile the pollution of our waters with clean energy requirements?
Representative Nolan tells us that copper mining in the Arrowhead will be good for jobs and good for the environment. Two arguments, it seems, that have weight in a society that values money above all else and gives short shrift to the fact that there are unresolved issues even with green technology, as with all new technologies. The byproducts of our decisions today will remain after the jobs are gone.
Will we make the same mistakes that we made with the promise of nuclear energy? Will we fail to manage the byproducts and waste any better? Will we discount the dangers while we struggle to advance the benefits at all costs? Fossil fuel as the primary source of energy is on the wane, for good reason; and alternative energy and its components are becoming profitable. Will we give up the promise of green technology by ignoring the problems for the sake of profit and a quick fix?
An accounting is best made now, before we dive into making poor choices with utterly tragic consequences. What more important than water? We can live without the new technologies from precious metals and mining. Can we live without potable water, jobs or no jobs?
The paths to new energy sources are being made now. Will we fix a course that will eventually lead to a dead end as it has with nuclear energy? Consider the disposal of batteries and the pollution from mining of “precious” metals for these technologies that will make “clean” energy a joke if it is not handled with care?
Avoiding these discussions by praising job creation and claiming that a mine in one of the most water dependent regions in the world will be good for the environment does not cut the mustard. Passing a bill like HR 3115 will not make for a better world.
There are solutions in the making and possible solutions given time. Consider recycling of metals already above ground, passive remedies, more efficient modes of use and reuse …. Some of these solutions are not as profitable in the beginning, but may be far more in the end. Consider those who will pay for poor decisions made today.
Will our best shot be to trade the vitality of our waters and our wilderness for short term profit? Or will we finally take money out of the mix in order to make our best most important decisions. Is this possible?