You get up early on Monday morning to be at the side-airport by six o’clock.  The sun is already high and bright.  Not so fellow travellers who are glum and cynical about yet another trip north.  Book-in is easy: say your name to a friendly guy who scratches your name on a list and tells you to put you bag (no heavier than forty pounds) in the right bin.

That done, you wonder into a bright lounge replete with plastic chairs, plop down, greet a few friends, and pull out  book.  Around you are others reading perfunctorily, a few desultory conversations about recent mine gossip, and some catching a few winks of sleep.  They got in from far places at midnight last and had but five hours sleep in a sleazy hotel costing $160 a night, regardless of sleep duration.

The plane arrives.  No further ado, except another name slashed off a list and you are on the plane north.  Everybody closes their eyes and falls asleep for the ninety-minute flight.  Nobody listens to the attendant’s lecture on how to click the seat-belt clip—neither the English nor the French version—although the French is good and of perfect accent in spite of the rough look of the fat guy making the announcement.

We are wakened, arrive, board a dusty bus, clamber out and are herded into the reception area.  Sunny smiles as you greet your contact, as you brush past friends on their way out, send you luggage through the scanner that looks for bottles of booze, and get a card to your alloted room.

Drop your bags in your alloted room:  a featureless cubical with a bed, a couch, somebody-elses TV and boots, and too many pieces of paper exhorting you to be safe, be quiet, take your card with you, and turn off your alarm when you leave the room.  The bed is wider than you need; the sheets thin; the pillows hard; and the floor of cheap lino.  You have brought your own towel—for it is considered unhygienic to use communal towels.  You unwrap a thin piece of soap that will not lather in the hard water of a hot shower.  And you remind yourself not to drop the toilet lid lest you wake the guy in the room below.

Hence to the cafeteria for breakfast.  This is a cornucopia of food worthy of a contestant in the hunger games.  Three eggs, scrambled; five rashers of bacon; two sausages; two glasses of orange juice; and three cups of strong coffee. And this is just the first of many meals of glorious proportions.

Thus satiated, you walk the long corridor to the process plant. Pass through double security doors, put in ear-plugs, and walk long spaces past thickeners, conveyor belts, crushers, magnets, piles of salt, and noise.  Thus to the offices of the metallurgists, reliability engineers, and managers.  Grab a last cup of coffee while glancing furtively at the screens of the plant controllers who see all that is happening.

Except that night at supper, another copious meal of steak and salad, you talk to the forty-year old lady who is in the plant and who tells you: “They cannot see what is really going on.  That is why I am there: to see what is actually happening on the floor and make sure they fix it.”

She is slim, of native origin, and intriguing.  You spend the whole meal chatting to her.  You hear her life story: kids at a young age, single mother, a stint as a cleaner, volunteer for plant work, learn the ropes, advance to the floor, ten years now, a good salary, pride of achievement, and now a new apartment in a fast city, leaving the grown kids to fend for themselves. You fall in love and take the dirty tray to the rack and go back to your featureless room.

Next day, another full breakfast, a passage through the security systems, and more meetings.  You have been in the sun to the outside mining facilities.   You have seen what is right and what is wrong.  Now you have to opine, persuade, cajole, bully, and set things moving in the right direction.  Then to lunch and another big meal replete with remanent of last night’s supper.   In this case a chicken Kiev that squirts butter as you cut into it.  But it tastes good!

Another meal-conversation.  The talk is all of when you are scheduled to leave site.  This is an obsession: how many days left before you leave site. Some are on the four-on, three-off schedule.  Some are on the fifteen-on, thirteen-off schedule.  There is interminable argument over which is best.  The folk with two-week off say this is best.  “I have a place on Vancouver Island, a boat, and me and the the wife go fishing for nearly two weeks when I am off.”

“In my two weeks off, I am taking the kid and the wife and we are going north into Quebec with the skiff and we are camping in the summer landscape.”

“I am going to Las Vegas for two weeks to drink, whore, and swim.”

“Maybe when I get to my apartment in the town, I will do an EduMine course or an on-line  MBA.  What do you think?”

The talk is all of the time off and away from site. Yet we spend hours at the supper table talking of the issues of the mine: how best to clean the water; how to meet regulations; is it really the fault of global warming; is there enough rock to construct that embankment; which computer code really replicates reality?

Engineering work is done in between these dreams and desires.  We meet in dull conference rooms, make and deliberate on PowerPoint presentations, hone MicroSoft schedules, and argue the finer points of interacting with regulators.

Then the time comes to leave site.  You line up with others who are gleeful at leaving site,  They are full of excitement to see family and lovers again; to go fishing; to camp; to Las Vegas or deep studies.

It is easy to board the return-to-civilization flight: no names, no security, no bother.  Just swipe the card, smile, and grab an aisle seat, and the plane lumbers down the gravel run-way as the propellers rotate, the plane takes off, and you are on your way to civilization and away from the camp.

Yet there is a still pride and sense of satisfaction & accomplishment on the plane.  We have all done something great. We have kept the mine running & producing.  We have solved problems, built things, spent money wisely, and been professional.  This is why we came to site; this is what we set out to do & we have done it; we can now leave and know we have earned a big wage; and we will be back in a few days to do it again.  It is fun, satisfying, rewarding.  I will do it again and again until the end of the mine.

This life is better than the city.  There is no traffic commute—I walk to work.  There is no liquor–I am sober all and every day.  I am with friends and folk of common objective all day and at every meal–no competition—we know our place and roll—and we do it well.  I  am proud & and satisfied.  I am happy here and in the places I will be when this flight gets done.  I love my home three thousand miles away.  I love the farm, the boat, the large back-yard in a distant suburb where the kids run free while I am there and away at this fly-in, fly-out mining camp.

When I first came to Canada, I was told by proud Canadians that the country is unique: “Everybody is polite; no protests; and no class action law suites.  Not like across the border.” 

Yet this week I have been contacted by Canadian lawyers seeking a technical specialist to help them start a class action law case against some miners who shut their mine.  The student protests in Quebec continue unabated–over tuition of all things.  And here in Vancouver, one of my colleagues was caught up in a shit-throwing protest over a proposed coal mine.  Here is the report on what happened: 

Protesters of a mining conference in downtown Vancouver were throwing more than just rocks.  The Four Seasons hotel on West Georgia was evacuated Thursday afternoon and Vancouver Police’s hazmat unit was called in after six protesters pulled the fire alarm and threw a bag containing what was later determined to be feces mixed with liquid into the meeting room.  Protesters immediately left and VPD said they have no suspects in custody.   The luncheon affected was hosted by the Canadian Institute of Mining, which was discussing the Raven Underground Coal Project in Port Alberni and the Comox Valley. It was headlined by John Tapics, the president and CEO of Compliance Coal Cooperation, which is leading the project.   VPD spokeswoman Const. Jana McGuinness said the smelly stunt posed no risk to public safety and there have been no arrests. The investigation continues.
Read more: http://www.theprovince.com/news/Liquid+feces+tossed+protesters+evacuates+Vancouver+Four+Seasons+hotel/6674469/story.html#ixzz1vuoY5OFM

Have times changed that much in Canada? 

Now I support reasoned debate about mining.  I am guilty of as much.  But to disrupt meetings in this way, is, well simply disgusting.  No protestor makes a point thus. As no student gets sympathy not studying and demanding not to pay for it.  As for the lawyers, I suppose they represent shareholders who have lost money investing in mining, and now they want their money back.  Just as I would love to have the money back I have lost on the stock exchange.  Maybe we share-losers should go throwing things in protest.

Maybe kids are so spoilt these days that they do not want to study, they do not want to learn, and certainly they do not want to engage in intelligent debate.  What do you think?

Last week two of the serious magazines that I read more for information than crass pleasure had articles on drones.  Those are the unmanned aircraft currently used to kill targets in the Middle East who have, or may want to play terrorist.   One of the articles told of the use of drones to catch some nasty people in Idaho who barricaded themselves on their independent-state farm.

Now today I receive an email that tells me the following: 

Aerial survey company Bluesky has launched a fast response aerial survey service using state of the art unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) or drones. The technology, originally developed by the military, includes Artificial Intelligence (AI) guided autopilot, high resolution integrated camera and environmentally friendly rechargeable propulsion system. Autonomous take-off and landing ensures the system is easy to use and with a wingspan of less than a metre it can be easily transported without the need for complex assembly.

“Using UAV’s we can respond quickly to demands to collect site specific images and data in a very cost effective way,” commented James Eddy, Technical Director at Leicestershire based Bluesky. “The integrated camera captures high resolution photogrammetric images that can be used to create map accurate aerial survey data including height models. The system is compact and lightweight making it easy to store and transport and can be launched by hand from virtually any location. Flight planning software and an Artificial Intelligence guided autopilot make it easy to control and the system will gently and safely return to the ground with a single touch of a button.”

Potential applications of Bluesky’s UAV solution include open cast mines or quarries or even landfill sites where large volumes of material are extracted or moved on a regular basis. The geographically accurate imagery would provide a record of activity at a given point in time and the highly detailed height models could be used to measure stockpiles, cut and fill volumes and for facilities management and safety monitoring.

I can hardly wait to get my first project involving the use of a drone to monitor the performance of a mine tailings facility.  These days some are so big that it is impossible to see them all in one glance.  The biggest I am involved with is nine kilometers from one end to the other.  Even in a helicopter, it is difficult to get an overall impression of what is and what is not.  Imagine having a drone on patrol sending back high class images of beach formation, wet areas, channel flow, the change of pool geometry and the rest. 

Amazing it would be if this military invention and development came to be a common-criminal-catching and a common mine-management tool.

On Saturday I posted a piece on the Pebble Mine.  Here is one of the comments on what I wrote—the commenter takes me to task for consulting to the EKATI Diamond mine, while questioning the need for and the practicality of opening the Pebble Mine.  First the comment and then my reply, which is an extended essay on the morality & ethics of diamond mining.

You question whether a gold mine is needed everywhere.  So let’s ask whether a diamond mine is needed everywhere simply to put glitter on a woman’s finger.  Probably not one could argue, but I see you do consulting work for Ekati so I guess a diamond mine in the pristene north is really OK.   So maybe the argument can be simplified down to whether a person can get some personal economic benefit from the venture (diamonds -yes, Pebble – no).  Stand by your morals and refuse to support the glitterati, stop consulting to the diamonds industry.  There is no proof their tailings will still be stable 1000 years from now.

The simplest answer to the contradiction of working for mines and questioning the need for the Pebble Mine is this:  if good men do not act, bad men will.

A complete and more complex answer is contained in the book by Edward O. Wilson called The Social Conquest of Earth.  Very briefly, Wilson’s thesis is that we are the product of two evolutionary forces.  The first is individual selection that is the basis of all acts of self-benefit, including greed, accumulation of wealth, kids first, and probably sin in general.  The second is group selection.   Thus group selection is the basis of altruism, honesty, cooperation, and of course tribalism.

One could say that individual selection is the basis of the work I do, and group selection is the basis of this blog and my negative comments about the Pebble Mine.

I have often written that my three grandfathers (one a step-grandfather, but the nicest of them) were all miners.  My father was a miner.  I grew up on a mine and was educated on a mining-house (now BHP) scholarship.  I believe in mining; I have benefitted from mining; my kids have been and still are been educated on mining-derived income.  I know others can and should get the same opportunities as I have received from mining.

And because of this deep personal involvement in mining, I know mines can and do impact the environment.  I know mines done well can benefit people.  I know mines done badly or done in the wrong place can devastate places & people.

I designed and oversaw construction of the Cannon Mine tailings impoundment just above Wenatchee.  I know you can build high and large tailings facilities close to towns to no detriment.  Go look at the Cannon Mine website or go visit the mine if you doubt me.

I managed the engineering of the UMTRA Program for five years.  We closed twenty-four inactive uranium mill tailings piles in ten states in accordance with Federal regulations that set a design life of 1,000 years.  I know how to close tailings impoundment to minimal societal and environmental impact.

The first tailings impoundment I designed was for the De Beers Kimberly mine.  I went on to diamond mines in Botswana.  I was probably the first engineer of the Jwaneng mine tailings.  And now I am proud to consult to BHP on the EKATI diamond mine tailings.  What we have done and are doing is no secret.  We published a paper on our work in the Tailings and Mine Waste 2011 conference last year.

Hence I know the EKATI tailings facility, on closure, will be but another terraform in the environment and respond as any other, many other, geomorphic expressions in the landscape.  Go visit, or read my paper, if you doubt me.

My ex-wife was the granddaughter of a diamond buyer.  She inherited many big stones.  I could not, on a mining salary, afford to insure them.    In the good days, she gave me a magnificent men’s ring  with a large yellow Australian diamond in the middle.  I sometimes wear it when I go courting;  although it tends to scare the average Vancouver widow and divorcee.  Too big, I am afraid.

Thus I know just how vain and useless is a big diamond—-although they are incredible beautiful.  What can I say, but that a big diamond is part of individual evolutionary selection.   It has nothing to do with group selection and altruism.

Of course we do not need diamonds.  Sea-shells would suffice if sufficiently rare, beautiful, and expensive.  But try convince a woman of that.

We do not need gold, except for my computer and false teeth.  But convince a Republican of that.

Finally there is a single fact that distinguishes my consulting on tailings for mines and  blogging about Pebble Mine.  Nobody pays me to blog.  Nobody pays me to opine about the Pebble Mine.  The mine is still but a dream in Anglo’s flight from South Africa.  Bristol Bay is a valuable resource.  The issue is under consideration and the topic of intense debate.  I know that I know as much about tailings as anybody talking, writing, or experting about Pebble’s tailings.

And thus in the late evening, after a hard day consulting on the best way to dispose of tailings, I believe that I am entitled to say what I think about things that affect the well-being of the tribe—group selection at its best.

An ordinary weekend preceding a Monday holiday.  And yet extraordinary if you think hard about it.

The house is awash in the aroma of vinegar.  I am turning uneaten greens into a sauce.   Put the greens into a pot with sugar, vinegar, and spices, and lots of curry powder.  Cook with wine for about an hour, and the result is perfect sauce for meat and sausage.

Tonight we spread food for the wife, son, and grandson of an old mining friend.  His father was mine secretary of the East Geduld mine, north of Springs, Transvaal.  They lived in house number 2.  We lived in house number 13.   That was as wide a spread in social rank as one dared breach.  Yet we were friends on the basis of intellect (he was smarter than me), common interest in things real–ultimately careers in mining engineering–and that undefinable quality that makes you like a person.

He and his wife now retired both, live in Cape Town.  His son, daughter-in-law, and two grandkids live just across the river from me here in Vancouver. His wife is visiting to see the new grand-daughter.  So they came around for supper.

The talk was light.  Kids, grandkids, Welcome, Orange Free State (an old mining town in South Africa), political change, and the ills & pains of old-age.

He will come at Christmas, for he cares none for travel.  Yet the call of a three-year old grandson is too  much to ignore.  We will meet and talk of old memories of growing up on a mine.   And of kids and grandkids who are accountants, naval officers, municipal civil engineers, and seismic soil-structure interaction specialists.

We will speculate on grandkids who can be anything they choose: architect, CIA investigator, speech therapist, farmer(ess) in Iowa, Jewish Scholar, dress designer, actor, or rebel.

I rather like the potential rebel.  He is ginger, blatant, obstreperous, defiant, seeks adventure, and is confidentially bold.  He may fail; but if he succeeds, let the world look out.

Mining gave us, our kids, and our grandkids there opportunities.  How can we not support mining–at least the right kind?

The draft report by the EPA on potential mining impacts on Bristol Bay by the Pebble Mine or any of the other seven potential mines in that part of Alaska is published.  Here is a link to one report thereon—there are hundreds of news items, so maybe look for others as well if the topic interests you.

We can expect much comment and vacuous writing on the EPA  report–why this is one to begin with.  In essence, the EPA finds that there is a real probability of failure of the tailings impoundment and a real possibility of contamination of fish habitat by a mine above Bristol Bay.  “Could wipe things out for decades,” they say.

This finding is so obvious that you blush to think that it took a big government agency months to come to so simple and obvious a conclusion.

The highly politicised nature of the Pebble Mine and mining development in general in the area makes any statement dangerous.  In saying anything, you risk swift attack by the powers that stand to benefit from the mine.  Even my past postings on this blog on the Pebble Mine have brought me stern lectures from friends and bosses—Anglo is a client, they say.  Maybe we should offer to help them, not comment on their mine?

I retreat into dumb silence and the shield of blogging.  Anglo knows what I write; they know who I work for; they probably even know me.  It is their choice.  But recall that Anglo in the old days in South Africa stood for freedom–at least opposition to the Apartheid regime of the day.  I take that to mean that Anglo still supports freedom of opinion.  And freedom to choose whom to hear.

Those who oppose Pebble Mine will laud the EPA report and back up their beliefs with the authority of the EPA.  Those who support the mine, will attack the EPA as a bunch of hopeless innocents beholden to Obama.  One potential peer reviewer of the EPA report has already told me he will attack the report for generalization:  they did not evaluate the Pebble Mine; they simply looked at averages and statistics.  That is not science, he will say.  That is opinion based on prejudice, he will say.

He who shouts loudest may win.  She who coins the best sound bite, will win.  Those who can write the most eloquent letter, may win.  And those with power behind the curtain will prevail.  Oh where is Hamlet to pierce the curtain to Polonius when we need him?

The real issues in my mind are these: Do we need yet another gold mine?  Do we need a gold mine in every state and county?  Surely there are some places we just should not mine?    Surely at least once, we should put food ahead of gold?

I oppose the mine for the very simple reason that I know we cannot build waste rock dumps and tailings impoundments to last forever and never be subject to the inevitable forces of geomorphology.  Or if we can, as we did on the UMTRA Project, the cost is more than a commercial miner will pay.

I repeat what I have written before: (a) prove there is no need for perpetual water treatment; (b) prove that you can walk away at the end of mining and not do long-term surveillance & maintenance; (c) show how the waste facilities will perform in the next 1,000 and 10,000 years; (d) prove that there is zero probability of failure and zero probability of fish impact.

Unless you can satisfy me, you should not be allowed to mine.

Now I know I shall be excoriated for such arrogance & pride.  I shall get nasty comments.  I shall receive supportive private emails.  My bosses and consulting colleagues will sit me down and politely admonish me.  It will all be a small and  private replay of the bigger fight.  For billions and big egos are at stake.

Join in the fray.  It is a worthy fight.  At least as worthy as the fight that Anglo fought against Apartheid.

Students in Chile are protesting; they are demanding free and better education.  The more communist-inclined are demanding nationalization of the country’s copper mines—which produce some sixty-percent of the country’s income.  Politicians dither and special-interest groups lobby.  It takes six years to get a degree when at most it should take four years.

There are clearly class differences in Chile.  You do not need statistics to underpin the observation that as you go further north-east in the city, the apartments get smarter, the people better dressed, even taller and better looking.   Ride up along the coast and the sheer mass of high-rise apartment blocks looking down over a rocky shore, attests to the money some have to enjoy the good life, even in the absence of sandy beaches. 

The mining folk that I chatted with are comfortable.  The middle-aged talk of second homes, foreign trips, expensive wines, and smart restaurants. The young talk of cars, trips home to the south, and foreign education and even foreign work assignments.  They are all in demand and well-paid.  Mining clearly is one way to go to put that eduction to profitable use. 

I have no statistics on scholarships to mining and other mine-related engineering students.  It would be interesting to know how many Chilean students are getting through the six years of education on direct mining money.  Or on indirect mining money, which we may define as income earned by parents in the mining industry.  Are any of the many foreign-owned mining consulting companies serving the Chilean mining industry sponsoring students?  If they are not, they should be.

How many Chilean-trained engineers are working out of the country on mining projects?   How many foreign mining folk are working on mines in the country? 

These and many more questions swirl around the ultimate question: why does it take six years of education to get a mining degree in Chile?   If it is the fault of the system, then I can begin to see why students want it free.  No undergraduate degree needs six years of study.  Not even mining engineering.  In most places you can have a Masters Degree after six years of study. 

No education is free—somebody works so that others can study.  And this is particularly so for university students.  No all who aspire to go to university can get there and too many who do get there simply do not have the brains or aptitude to study.  So inevitably there is a drop-out rate.  That is why engineering students are in demand and paid accordingly.  They have proven they have brains, aptitude, ability, concentration, or all the above, and hence can get a degree.   Thus they can be taken into industry and commerce–of any shade or variety. 

Certainly the young Chilean engineers that I met who are working in the Chilean mining industry are smart, intelligent, committed, and hard-working.  I am almost tempted to say they are more-so-thus than elsewhere but that would be an unfair comparison.  I did not dare ask any of them if they are so good because of six years of study, a good educational system, or just because they are innately clever. 

So while I can sympathize with parents and students struggling to pay for university eduction (I am still paying for one of my daughters and know the cost), I cannot concur with the idea of free university eduction for all who wish to go.  Things get competitive at university.  It is a winnowing experience.  Only some will succeed.  Many will fall by the way.  It is a shame, but not all humans are alike, even though they all deserve equal opportunity.   There is no such thing as equal outcome, equal success, or equal life-styles.  Not even in mining.

Today, I received the following in an email.  The writer asks a number of questions relating to his decision to go into mineral engineering.  First I repeat the email, and then I set out my answers to his questions.  If you too can help this fellow, please do so by commenting.  Thanks. 

I was recently accepted into the mineral engineering program at the University of Toronto. I’ve been following your blog for about a year, to get to know more about the industry. It’s about the time of year in Canada when we have to start accepting university offers. 

Your post “Should I Become a Mining Engineer” was great!  The stats back that up too, seeing as how its one of your more popular postings. But I was wondering if you could flesh it out a bit. Maybe some more concrete information. I’d like to know your opinion:

- Do you think it’s worth it to get a P.Geo (professional geologist) designation as well as the P.Eng?

- What do you think the impact of computers/artificial intelligence/robots/automation will be on the profession? Have you seen the Jeopardy! episode where that supercomputer Watson beats the human competitors?

Also:

- What is a typical day like for a engineer-in-training/junior engineer?

- What are the drawbacks of living in a remote mining site? What are the benefits?

- Do you know of any mining engineers that don’t like their jobs? Why?

- Why do you like mining engineering so much? Why is the work interesting to you?

- I’m a bit older than most undergrads (24 years old). Do you think being older is going to be a drawback in the new graduate job market? 

 Thank you in advance!  

Here are some of my comments, thoughts, and answers to the questions posed.

I see no point in getting a P. Geo as well as a P. Eng.  Both are honorable professions.  But there are many differences.  It is hard enough to keep abreast of things in engineering, as it is.  It is hard enough to keep abreast of things in geology, as it is.  To try to keep abreast of things in both engineering and geology, so that you maintain proficiency in both, is probably beyond most of us.  I suggest that when young, it is best to choose one and focus on that.  There is plenty of challenge in growing as an engineer or geologist without tying to straddle both.  Inevitably life will take you in one direction or another and a broad educational background, while fun and valuable, will ultimately be swamped by the need to do specialist things in the line of work that fate dictates. 

I started my career at a time when there were no computers.  Now they are everywhere.  But they have had no significant impact on what it takes to be a professional.  Just like the old engineers from whom I learnt, I still have to get basic information; I still have to visit the site; I still have to think and exercise judgment.  Experience is still more valuable than computer screen perusal.   Of course computers and robots and artificial intelligence (such as it is) are used.  But only to get more data, to undertake faster analyses, and to augment judgment.  Personally I do not think they have changed what it takes to be a good engineer, and I do not think they ever will. 

There is no such thing as a typical day for an engineer-in-training.  It all depends on where you are, what you are asked to do, how you approach it, and what those around you do to teach, exhort, and challenge you.  Some EITs are put in front of a computer and told to compute, for it is apparent they cannot and never will be able to do more.  Some EITs are run ragged involved in every detail of a project for it is apparent they can do it, they thrive on it, and they produce, adding value at every step. 

The drawbacks of living in a remote camp are that you are in a remote camp.  You are away from the bright lights, the sports field, the pub, and the infinite variety of friends you find in cities.  The benefits, at least to a young engineer, are higher salary, lower living costs, greater challenge and opportunity to learn and shine. 

I have never met a mining, civil, or any other type of engineer who does not actually like their job.  They have all been content, happy, and productive.   I have dealt with some younger engineers wo have left engineering for finance and investment.  They did it because they believed they could make more money that way; and they have—at least until the market collapsed and some came back into engineering.   I have met many an engineer who has moved around and moved on.  Most of us have left behind one or more jobs.  Sometimes we were glad to leave that job—but we always moved on to another engineering job and greater job and life satisfaction.  Keep in mind there are always somewhere messed up companies and nasty bosses.  If you find yourself in such a company or working for such a boss—leave.  As an engineer there are plenty of other nicer places and people to go and work with.  You are not trapped in an unhappy situation–or at least should not be.

I like engineering and mining engineering because that is what I do, it is what I do well, it is what gives me a good income, it takes me around the world, I work with nice and intelligent people, I face interesting challenges, and I see something for it at the end of each day.   How could I want more?  I would do it all again given the choice. 

I do not think being 24 years old is an issue.  I hung around university for eleven years.  It was fun and easy and the girlfriend was there.  So I was about 27 when I got my first real job as an engineer.  At this age (65) the age at which I started is irrelevant.  So too it will be for you.

Good luck with your career.

In August in Sudbury, Ontario, there will be a workshop on Abandoned Mines and Bats.  Here is how they describe the workshop:

A two day workshop on August 14 th and 15th, 2012 that will bring together mining companies, regulators, NGO’s and bat scientists.  The workshop will focus on the importance of abandoned mines to bats as places for hibernating sites and will clearly demonstrate how to install ‘bat gates’. Part of the workshop is a field trip to a nearby abandoned mine where participants will observe Biologists catching bats and use remote sensing equipment.

To share information with the mining community, regulators, members of NGO’s and scientists who study bats on the significance of abandoned mines. Abandoned mines can be a dangerous place and the conference will clearly demonstrate the importance of abandoned mines to bats, safety issues, the construction of ‘bat gates’ and the latest remote data collecting equipment that permit easy information gathering on bats.

 I probably will not go.  But this topic is one that opens up new possibilities for sustainable mine use: bat caves, colonies, breeding, and research.  The possibilities are endless. 

I once suggested using old mines as a place to house the homeless of East Vancouver.   That idea was squashed, for, as my critic said: “You cannot take them away from the east side where they have drugs, prostitutes, begging opportunities, many charities handing out food, and all the things they live for.  It would be cruel and unusual punishment to take them out of their familiar surroundings, and dump them in the countryside, even in nice old mine buildings.”

So much for that sustainable mining idea.  Seems like bats don’t mind.  Although it is hard to call this sustainable mining. 

Background:  In response to requests, the U.S. EPA has undertaken to review the Pebble Mine.  They are apparently acting  in terms of the Clean Water Act, although many dispute their authority to do so.   The review is taking place before any formal submittals have been made by Anglo America, and many claim that Anglo should at least be granted due process.

Current Status:  As I understand it, the EPA’s report was due out this week.  But it has been delayed.  A peer review panel of so-called independent people has been appointed.  We have not been told their names.  They sit in silence and await their call to judgement.  As we sit in silence and await their names and the EPA report.

Speculation 1:  The EPA says the mine will have no impact. The peer reviewers agree and Obama is elected again.

Speculation 2:  The EPA says the mine will harm the environment, the peer reviewers disagree.  Obama is accused of killing jobs and Romney wins and his wife goes to consort with miners like her ancestors.

Speculation 3: The EPA says the mine should not proceed.  The peer reviewers agree.  We hear screams of liberal academics who have never designed a mine, worked a mine, or closed a mine.  The peer reviewers are excoriated for lack of real-life qualifications and dumped into the same bin as a renegade EPA.  It is an even fight at the presidential elections, and who knows who will win, for the real issue are the economy and gay marriage. And imposing (?un?)Christian values like lack of respect and denial of freedom on others.  March into the bedroom.  Get that right and they will bow to the alter.

Speculation 4.  Cynthia Carroll stands by her word–she said the mine would not proceed in the absence of lots of local support.  She agrees with the EPA and the un-named peer reviewers and the mine is dead or alive as the findings go.

Speculation 5.  Anglo decides this is all too much. They decide to go back to South Africa and leave Alaska to the savages.  They sell the deposit to the Chinese and all hell breaks loose.  Or they sell to one of those Alaskan Indian corporations and more hell breaks loose.

OK.  Maybe all these speculations are ridiculous.  Reason, logic, and civility will prevail.  But I doubt it.  This is a situation made to order for presidential election-year politics.  Kill a pipeline to get money to flow.  Kill a mine to get support.  Makes sense.

On the other hand Republicans are no doubt salivating.  Write letters, post posts, attack academic, unqualified peer reviewers who concur with the EPA, and make yet another case that Obama and Democrats are anti-mining, anti-work-opportunities—you have heard it all before and will hear it again.

As one potential peer reviewer told me:  It is a hell-of-an assignment, but it will be fascinating to see how the politics play out.  What a terrible reason for agreeing to serve on a panel charged with potentially electing a president: mere curiosity, not commitment to professionalism.

In full disclosure, somebody asked me to get involved.  Afterall, I have written more than most on mining and tailings (1,500 blog postings and my new course on EduMine on Tailings.)  I refused as then I could not blog about it.  How is that for putting punditry ahead of profit?