In Response: US transition to clean energy depends on Minnesota mining

In her Oct. 15 “Local View” column in the News Tribune (“No need to sacrifice clean water for clean energy”), environmental advocate Abby Rogerson questioned whether the mining of copper, nickel, and cobalt “has a place in the transition to renewable energy.”

Rogerson and the Twin Cities-based group she represents face a growing dilemma: They advocate for renewable technologies such as wind and solar to replace fossil-fuel generation and electric vehicles to replace gas burners, but they also face the uncomfortable reality that the massive volumes of raw materials needed to manufacture these technologies have to come out of the ground — out of Minnesota, no less — unless we want to continue our dependence on foreign sources such as China, Russia, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Minnesota holds an astounding 95% of U.S. mineral reserves for nickel, 88% for cobalt, 34% for copper, and 75% for the platinum group metals (PGM) platinum and palladium.

The International Energy Agency, in a March report , said, “In a scenario that meets the Paris Agreement goals, clean energy technologies’ share of total demand rises significantly over the next two decades to over 40% for copper (and) … 60-70% for nickel and cobalt. EV and battery storage … are set to take over from stainless steel as the largest end user of nickel by 2040.”

Automakers acknowledge this reality. Many — like Volkswagen, BMW, and General Motors — are striking deals to purchase minerals directly from mines. Some have even taken investment positions in mines to ensure an adequate future supply.

The administration of President Joe Biden, worried about future access to these metals, is trying to build up the domestic supply chain to reduce dependence on China, using executive orders and legislation. Among other steps to boost domestic production, the recently passed Inflation Reduction Act incentivizes automakers to source battery metals domestically.

A recent National Public Radio report stated that “demand for some mine products could scale up tenfold within a handful of years.” Another NPR report noted that “these minerals aren’t particularly rare, but production needs to scale up massively — at an unprecedented pace — to meet the auto industry’s ambitions.”

But these minerals shouldn’t be mined here, Rogerson postulated, because “no sulfide mine has ever succeeded in keeping its acidic pollution out of the environment. Acid mine drainage flows from mine sites long after closure.”

Fortunately, this popular talking point of mining opponents is not supported by modern, high-tech mines operating today or by the science produced in years of study and environmental review on proposed Minnesota mining projects. It’s like saying that late model cars are unsafe and polluting based on the record of the 1964 Chevrolet Corvair.

Rogerson also opined that, “Fifty years ago, supercomputers on the cutting edge took up the better part of an office and weighed a few tons. Now, an average smartphone packs a thousand times more computing power into a device that fits into a pocket.” She highlighted the “incomprehensible rate of technological advancement” that is transforming the way we generate, store, and use electricity.

Did this “incomprehensible rate of advancement” that we’ve seen in virtually every aspect of our lives over the last 50 years somehow skip over the mining industry?

Thankfully, it did not.

Wisconsin’s Flambeau copper mine on the banks of the Flambeau River — which operated, closed, and was reclaimed in the 1990s — met its permit and closure conditions and never experienced an environmental violation during its operations. The state of Wisconsin subsequently released its reclamation bonds.

The Eagle nickel-copper mine in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula has operated since 2014 without an environmental violation. The Safford Project in eastern Arizona — which began operation in 2009 and applies millions of gallons of acid-induced water to massive, lined heap-leach pads of ore to dissolve copper from the rock — has never experienced an environmental violation. And the Stillwater PGM mine in Montana has operated without an environmental violation since opening in 1986.

PolyMet’s NorthMet copper-nickel precious-metals mine proposed in Northeastern Minnesota goes one step further: It’s to use advanced water treatment technology; the project will clean up legacy water issues from former iron ore processing at its site, leading to a net reduction of sulfate and mercury loading to the St. Louis River. Permits were issued to the project because regulators concluded, after years of scientific study and review, that the project will not create acid mine drainage and will meet all applicable water-quality standards.

Rogerson correctly stated that recycling can and should play a larger role in the clean-energy economy. But the World Bank Group has acknowledged that, “even with large increases in recycling — including a scenario where 100% (end-of-life) recycling is achieved — there is still likely to be strong demand for primary minerals.”

The transition to clean energy is happening. Minnesota has the answers to how and where we will get the critical raw materials needed for this transition and how to recover them responsibly. Skilled Minnesotans, who have a vested interest in protecting the very environment in which they live, work and play, stand ready to make it possible.

Julie Lucas of Side Lake is executive director of MiningMinnesota (miningminnesota.com), which is a group of industry leaders advocating for safe and responsible mining. The group is based in Virginia, Minnesota. She wrote this exclusively for the News Tribune.