WASHINGTON — The GOP takeover of the House has upended the political playing field for Twin Metals and environmentalists who are locked in battle over a proposed cobalt, copper and nickel mine in the Superior National Forest.
Permanent federal protection of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness is likely now out of reach and the new GOP Congress will try to ease federal rules for the mine permitting process. With efforts to permanently derail a proposed Twin Metals mine stalled in Washington, D.C., legislation that would block Twin Metals’ plans has been revived in the state Legislature.
But that could fail, too. So the saga over Twin Metals and Chilean parent company Antofagasta’s effort to increase and diversify its mining operations may continue for years.
Taconite is mined in the Superior National Forest, which is part of the national forest system. But environmentalists say mining for minerals like copper, cobalt and nickel in the forest – which require deep extraction in an underground mine – would produce tailings that can be dangerous sources of toxic chemicals that would pollute the Rainy River Watershed – and the Boundary Waters.
Twin Metals vows its plans for a new mine are safe and says the new metals that would be extracted are needed to boost clean technologies aimed at fighting climate change.
Nevertheless, the Biden administration has canceled two federal mining leases owned by Twin Metals – prompting the mining company to sue – and the Interior Department is soon to issue a decision about banning mining in all or part of the forest for 20 years.
A mining moratorium would further block Twin Metals’ plans to try to develop what is considered one of the largest undeveloped copper-nickel resources in the world and make the area off limits to other mines. But that moratorium could be scrapped by a subsequent administration.
And efforts to permanently prohibit Twin Metals from mining copper and nickel in the Superior National Forest in the form of a bill sponsored by Rep. Betty McCollum, D-4th District, died in the prior Congress. McCollum plans to reintroduce her bill in this Congress, but that legislation is unlikely to gain traction.
With the Republican win of the House of Representatives, the most ardent opponent of McCollum’s legislation, Rep. Pete Stauber, R-8th District, who represents the Iron Range in Congress, is expected this week to be handed the gavel of a congressional panel with jurisdiction over mining – and bills like McCollum’s.
As chairman of the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources, Stauber plans to hold a hearing on why the Biden administration cancelled Twin Metals’ leases, asking Interior Secretary Deb Haaland to testify, if necessary.
“We’re going to hold the administration accountable for their actions,” Stauber said. “I am going to ask, ‘Why did you stop this project?’”
Stauber has also introduced a bill, the Permitting for Mining Needs Act, or the PERMIT-MN Act, that would streamline the permitting process, prohibit lawsuits against permitting decisions more than 120 days after such a decision has been made and set 18- and 24-month deadlines for environmental assessments and environmental impact statements on proposed mining projects.
The congressman’s bill would also allow mining companies to begin operations “with or without the discovery of a valuable mineral deposit,” something critics say would open large areas of the nation to indiscriminate mining.
Stauber says the PERMIT-MN Act would increase domestic production of critical minerals necessary for meeting defense, technology and clean energy needs in the United States.
To Stauber, mining in Minnesota’s ore-rich areas are needed not only to boost the state’s economy, but to keep the United States from relying on the minerals and metals it needs from other nations and to stop the exploitation of children in those countries.
“Seventy-five percent of the world’s cobalt comes from child labor in the Congo,” Stauber said.
Meanwhile Becky Rom, the national chair of the Campaign to Save the Boundary Waters, a coalition of environmental and conservation groups trying to block the Twin Metals mine, said, “I’ve spent a lot of time talking to Stauber and I’ve just given up.”
“He has been anointed by the House GOP to be ‘Mr. Mining,’” Rom said.
Stauber’s bill will have GOP support and may pass the House. But it stands little chance of consideration in the Democratic-controlled Senate. Still, in a GOP-controlled House, environmentalists and their Democratic allies no longer will have the platforms afforded to Stauber.
Despite the political setback posed by the GOP’s new control of the U.S. House, Rom of the Campaign to Save the Boundary Waters is optimistic.
“Our goal is permanent protection of the headwaters,” she said.
Rom said there was an effort to put McCollum’s permanent ban on deep extraction mining as part of a public land component in the massive omnibus spending bill Congress approved at the end of the last session.
“But we failed,” she said. “Now I’m very pessimistic that anything will happen in the next two years.”
Still, she said he coalition is setting the stage for a future Congress that might be more sympathetic to her cause. In the meantime, action to stop Twin Metals’ proposed mine has shifted to the state Legislature.
Last week, state Rep. Sandra Feist, DFL-New Brighton, and state Sen. Kelly Morrison, DFL-Deephaven, introduced “The Boundary Waters Permanent Protection Bill,” which would expand the existing state ban on mining within the Boundary Waters to include the entire Rainy River headwaters.
Twin Metals said the latest effort to block its proposed new mine in the Superior National Forest is misguided and counterproductive because the minerals the mine would produce are needed in clean technologies aimed at combatting climate change.
“We cannot meet Gov. Walz’s goals to boost clean energy and clean transportation in Minnesota without mining,” said Twin Metals spokeswoman Kathy Graul. “The greatest risk to the Boundary Waters and the broader environment is climate change. Fighting this climate crisis with clean technologies requires the minerals that are abundant in the ground in northeast Minnesota.”
Anything to pollute, defile, devalue and deny environmental concerns. Laws exist to discourage physical rape of others, but none to prevent rape of nature, a traditional Republican specialty.
And what about the people who live there? Is a 1 million acre federal playground not enough for the Twin Cities Democrats that they want the whole of northern Minnesota? Democratic support for organic ag vs real ag has made the “Farmer” part of the DFL meaningless, so now they intend to do the same for the “Labor” part.
So far as I know, the national forests are owned by the US. They do not exist merely for the economic benefit of the people of “Northern Minnesota”. And calling the BWCA a “federal playground” seems a rather anti-environmental stance, no?
The idea that “conservatives” advocating for these foreign-owned mining operations because of the tiny number of (union?) mining jobs that could result hardly makes them champions of “labor”. The Repub party and the “conservative” movement are avowedly anti-labor and have been for generations. And how exactly does support for “organic ag” make one an committed opponent of “real ag”? (Whatever that means…)
It is my understanding that neither Polymet nor Twin Metals have agreed to use union labor to operate their mines. There is nothing stopping them from agreeing to union representation now.
They will delay that as long as possible, as the mining industry always does.
“Democratic support for organic ag vs real ag has made the “Farmer” part of the DFL meaningless . . .”
What?
Correction, please. Republicans control the House, not Congress. House Republicans love to investigate and obstruct, and will be able to create many opportunities to do that, but do they really want to open up a discussion of the amount of environmental damage that could occur if a foreign owned mining company is as careless about pollution as it has been in the past? As for passing any anti-environmental legislation and getting Biden to sign it, not happening.
And what exactly did House Democrats do for 5 years? Russiagate. How did that turn out? Don’t tell me the Republicans are alone in wanting in investigate something.
“Russiagate. How did that turn out? ”
If you are smart enough to understand the difference between collusion and conspiracy and know DOJ rules on indicting a sitting President you know exactly how it turned out.
Yes, a nothing Sandwich!
Trump was being investigated before he was even in office.
“Both sides do it!” I would say that will never grow old, but that would be a lie.
The Republicans are using the investigations as a means of retaliation. Rep. Comer has said as much, with no hint of justification other than that. I doubt that anyone other than the most extreme members of the caucus think that anything will come of these investigations, but then again, the whole Republican caucus is made up of the most extreme members.
Trump’s collusion with Putin’s intelligence services to aid his 2016 campaign was actually investigated by a DOJ special counsel, Robert Mueller. Although the (Repub-controlled) senate Intelligence Committee did produce several reports also documenting Trump’s acceptance of election interference in his favor by Putin. That’s how “Russiagate” was actually investigated.
As for attempts by the Dem House to investigate the many scandals of the Trump regime, he totally stonewalled them and refused to provide the House with any requested materials.
The hypocrisy is of “greenies” claiming they care about the earth but willing to get their metals and minerals from 3rd world mines is classic Lefty. Folks FYI, there is a lawful way of getting permitted for mining in Minnesota. If mining companies can get permits they are allowed to mine. I guarantee you Minnesota mining would be 10x cleaner for the world’s environment but the not in my backyard folks don’t care.
Minnesota exceptionalism is not a thing if Glencore or the Chileans are running the operation. No guarantees the locals get the jobs either. The fracking boom in No Dak attracted a pretty diverse crew for example.
Speaking of inconsistencies and hypocrisy, why isn’t degrading the environment of African countries putting “America First!”, Joe?
According to Stauber, it would seem like the US legally requiring the world’s noble mining concerns to cease using child labor would be the win-win solution…
Actually, it’s Not In My Boundary Waters Watershed.
Why should we mine in this country when we can be dependent on China for solar panels and EV batteries ?
The history of Twin Metals instructs us in terms of risks, benefits, corporate profits, and social and environmental justice — and that doesn’t touch all the risks! Creating a fence around the Boundary Waters is the right thing to do. The record of environmental disasters is quite clear; when the last trout is gone, it’s gone. We don’t a second chance at preserving and protecting the air, water and air.