Skip to Content

Brian Nelson

Saint Paul, Minnesota
Commenter for
1 year 6 weeks

Recent Comments

Posted on 04/29/13 at 06:08 pm in response to Losing wetlands: The sinking of Minnesota's protections

especially since changing ethanol policy will have no affect on the loss of wetlands and habitat in Northeastern Minnesota. The real problem will still be sulfide tailings and the likelihood that the mine will pollute. When all is said and done the public will be left tailings pond that is full of battery acid which will be left behind for the public to manage for centuries. It's a temporary boom (for a foreign company) that will in all likelihood destroy a permanent and locally lucrative...

Posted on 06/25/12 at 07:33 pm in response to When it comes to mining, Forest Service, Executive Council are in denial

than he is being portrayed here. He said: "the first principle of conservation is development, the use of the natural resources now existing on the continent for the benefit of the people who live here now." This is exactly the sort of thinking that contributes to the sulfide mine that is now being planned. The people at the very top of these mining companies are only looking at quarterly reports. When the mining is done 20, 50 or even 100 years from now a beautiful area will be forever...

You said in your earlier post that frack sand is not hazardous, and then you imply in your next post that it is perhaps hazardous--you can't have it both ways. I assume you are distinguishing between amorphous and crystaline sand. In fact the mining and cleansing process (which uses numerous toxic chemicals) produces crystalline silica sand. As Tony points out, it is well documented by both the Mayo Clinic and (below) the State of Wisconsin that frack sand is indeed toxic. Please read:

...

Your points are a best case scenario only. You are not taking into account the nature of the Karst topography. The flocculants added to bind the sand are put back after processing into the cavities left behind by excavation. Because of the porous nature of the sedimentary rock as rainwater seeps into the ground it breaks down the flocculants and could produce a toxic mess. The reclamation techniques are not well suited to this type of topography. Also, the blasting is done with a combination...

Posted on 06/02/12 at 05:24 pm in response to Should you be scared to go downtown? Not really

It's a shame that you get pleasure from anyone being mugged.

I would like people to be able to vote without having to go through the expense of getting an ID to vote. Again, what you want is essentially a poll tax. So really, where does the desperation lie? But, ironically, you Dennis, a supposed conservative, a "defender" of the constitution, and you want to do is violate the constitution (see the 24th amendment). Based on your posts regarding women and voting, you are just not that serious about voting rights. This is simply a wedge issue, much like...

Posted on 05/04/12 at 08:21 am in response to Paulsen will have primary challenger for 3rd District nomination

but it was also the older generations who did away with all of those things in favor of convenience, modernization, freedom, etc., etc. So, Dennis are you now saying you want to go back to all of those things. If so, lead the charge. I'm with you.

Posted on 05/02/12 at 01:57 pm in response to Minneapolis could see $300 million swing in stadium contribution

It's a shame that sand mining not getting the attention is deserves. First of all, mining companies like WIndsor Permian, have no problem knocking down the scenic bluffs of SE MN for the silica sand--which is sometimes priced as high as $1400 a ton. Some of these mines use as much as 350 million gallons of ground water a day for cleaning and processing the sand. They also use very toxic chemicals in this process and it may well end up in the groundwater. It is no secret that the heavy trucks...

Posted on 05/02/12 at 01:38 pm in response to Voter ID? We don't see the need

why is it, Dennis, that you support what is essentially a poll tax?

Posted on 05/02/12 at 08:11 pm in response to Voter ID? We don't see the need

your position goes against the 24th amendment. For months you have railed, albeit vaguely, against the Obama Administration's unconstitutional policies, yet here you wish the state to deliberately flaunt that most sacred of documents.