Historical Marker: Mining Vs Recycling



The historical marker, near the Nevada-Arizona border, marks a gold mine, on federal land.

That pile of mining waste is farther away than you think.  Its b i g .

If I could just dump all the electronics onto federal land, submit them to acids and fire, I'd leave less pollution, and since the land was owned by the government, I'd have no cleanup cost.  Federal land mining by private metal companies bankrupted Superfund.

I admit that if we reform the General Mining Act of 1872 - which needs another "Historical Marker" - that the mining may move to rainforests in the southern hemisphere.  But reform of GMA 1872 would also boost recycling stocks, and would cause Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia and other "mining magnets" to change their own policies on metal mining.

The worst recycling is better than the best metal mining.  Build your house next to here and drill a well for drinking water and see how it goes....

Here's another idea (thanks George Hinkle)...

Hopeful recycling for Africa in Ghana.

Sure we can do them both here at home.  But if mining is unleashed, why leash recycling?  THAT'S OUR DOG IN THIS FIGHT.  Hell,  instead of outsourcing mining, what if we outsource our better activity, recycling?  (My suggestion)

This is a company using reuse in Ghana to subsidize Ghana's e-waste recycling.   Bad as in "good".

If I ran "Basel Action Network" or "Greenpeace" or "Natural Resources Defense Council", I'd notice that this MINING activity is visible from the highway... Hell, it's visible from OUTER SPACE.  But a small recycling hut - even one with an Asian child pooched out on the scrap pile - would not be visible in this photo.

And which one, from this distance, would you be more worried about drinking from?

Answer:  See USGS.gov

1 comment:

Andrew wilson said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.