2014 ndi 6ws-fitzmier, Lundberg, Abelkop Economy Disads Spending da



Download 0.74 Mb.
Page11/32
Date03.03.2018
Size0.74 Mb.
#42026
1   ...   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   ...   32

Link—MPA

MPA too expensive-a mere 20% of preservation would cost upwards of 19 billion


Balmford 4 (Andrew, Professor of conservation biology at the University of Cambridge. His research focuses on planning conservation, comparing the costs and benefits of conservation and how conservation can be reconciled with other activities, “The worldwide costs of marine protected areas, May 11, 2014, http://www.pnas.org/content/101/26/9694.long)

Despite these uncertainties, we can conclude that marine conservation on the scale examined here would undoubtedly be expensive. A global MPA network covering 20–30% of the seas and costing $5–19 billion per year to run would require we increase our present areal and financial investment in marine conservation by around two orders of magnitude. However, the return on such an investment would be substantial. Aside from any direct financial gains from potentially increased catches, the MPA system modeled here would increase the sustainability of a global marine fish catch currently worth $70–80 billion annually (29). It would also help ensure the continued delivery of largely unseen marine ecosystem services with a gross value, according to one estimate, of roughly $4.5–6.7 trillion each year (i.e., 20–30% of the $22.3 trillion per year, in 2000 U.S. dollars, total for nonextractive marine services in ref. 30). Most significantly, an ambitious program of MPA expansion could probably be instituted for less than the amount already spent by developed world governments on harmful subsidies to industrial fisheries. These subsidies currently run at between $15 and $30 billion each year (in year 2000 U.S. dollars; refs. 31–34; Fig. 3). As well as subsidizing overfishing in domestic and international waters, these payments subsidize developed world boats to overfish developing-world stocks (1, 31, 33-38). Although it may be argued that fishing subsidies safeguard jobs, such protection is only transient, as illustrated by the loss of tens of thousands of jobs after the collapse of the heavily subsidized Grand Banks cod fishery (39). Moreover, a global network with 20–30% coverage (expanded according to model b) could itself directly provide around one million fulltime jobs in MPA protection, almost certainly more than are maintained by all fishing subsidies worldwide (29).


The need for a unique MPA approach for each ocean site makes preservation too expensive


Spalding 14 (Mark, President, The Ocean Foundation, is a member of the Steering Committee of the Western Hemisphere Migratory Species Initiative. Mark is an active participant in the marine working group, “More, Bigger, Better Marine Conservation”, National Geograpic, March 24, 2014, http://newswatch.nationalgeographic.com/2014/03/24/more-bigger-better-marine-conservation/)

I think in our new reality that “effectiveness” beats out “big scale.” We have already learned to our ocean’s cost that bringing commercial fishing to global scale resulted in overfishing, overconsumption, and depletion of the natural resource, as well as a clear disturbance of the ecological equilibrium. As we look ahead, we should remember to be very clear about what works and at what size or level—fixing problems is much more expensive and challenging than preventing them in the first place. I fear that the desire to empower so many fisherman in order to bring “solutions” to scale will undermine actions that are successful at small local scale. We can replicate those in great numbers without creating a lockstep, franchise-style system. We need to address each place, each community, each culture, and each marine conservation challenge as a unique opportunity, and tap the right team to address it. There is no silver bullet that works every time. What were the essential elements of a successful marine conservation project, and can it be reconstructed and applied elsewhere with different personnel and under different circumstances? This can happen in two ways: ask the same grantee to succeed again in a new place; or through independent efforts by other actors to create similar programs. We know that not all success can be replicated. And, we know that just because we write a grant check we cannot dictate replication from the top down, or that it will be a success. This is even less true for “going to scale.” What we can do is support the sharing of lessons learned and hope for propagation of good ideas. We need a nuanced and specific approach to local marine protection, fisheries management, food security and economic development. By combining this approach with replication of success, we can get at the particular goals in which a country will be more willing to invest public funds and business resources for such actions. And, when the scale of the place is large (e.g. the Arctic or the high seas),


Link—Rare Earth Minerals

Rare Earth Mining is expensive-mining projects cost billions of dollars


EPA 12(“Rare Earth Elements:A Review of Production, Processing, Recycling, and Associated Environmental Issues”, December 2012, http://nepis.epa.gov/Adobe/PDF/P100EUBC.pdf)

EPA’s responsibilities in this area are defined by the federal Superfund law also known as CERCLA. CERCLA contains provisions that give EPA the authority to require that classes of facilities maintain financial responsibility consistent with the degree and duration of risk associated with the production, transportation, treatment, storage, or disposal of hazardous substances. Current and Prospective Mine Development Activity Rare earths are often a constituent in ores processed to recover other metal or mineral commodities. The demand for rare earths may create opportunity for these mines to consider expanding their operations to produce rare earths in addition to their primary commodity. Expansion of mining operations and changes to milling and processing operations may require environmental review and additional permitting for these active mining operations. In addition to rare earth production from current mining sites, it could become profitable for operations to resume at former mine locations. These may be mines with active permits that are currently not in operation due to the current market value of the principal commodity mined, or closed mines where ore remains but no mining is occurring, equipment has been removed, and possibly some level of reclamation has been started or completed. Stockpiles of subeconomic ore, or potentially the waste tailings, may now represent a rich source of ore for REEs that can help the mine transition back into production as the mine site is re-developed. Most of the prospective REE mines in the United States include those that produced REE ores in the past (e.g., Molycorp Mineral’s mine in Mountain Pass, California) or produced another commodity from an ore containing REEs (e.g., Pea Ridge iron ore mine). Some exploration may be required, or enough existing data may be available to begin planning the re-opening of the mine. Most of the activities required for the mine development stage will be needed to reopen the mine. In some cases, the environmental impacts from past mining activities and practices will need to be considered in development of the new mining operation. Development activity is currently occurring at two locations in the conterminous United States to reopen idle mines. These include the Molycorp mine in California (as previously discussed) and the Pea Ridge mine in Washington County, Missouri. Pea Ridge is a $1 billion dollar project that is underway in Missouri to reopen the existing Pea Ridge mine and to begin construction of a processing plant for magnetite iron ores (Baranyai, 2011). The iron ore processing plant will be located 1 mile from the mine, and ore will be pumped through a pipeline to the plant. A St. Louis-based company (Wings Enterprises, Rare Earth Elements Review Section 3 – Life-Cycle Stages of Rare Earth Elements Mines 3-14 Inc.), with support from Glencore International AG of Baar, Switzerland, was developing plans around the opening of the Pea Ridge Mine, and, in early 2012, had expected to start producing rare-earth minerals from holding ponds left by previous mining activity and also from newly mined ores (Wings Enterprises, 2011). Wings Enterprises had estimated that underground mining may extract as much as 5,000 tons of rare earths in 3 years. In addition to construction activities, planning and feasibility studies were under way for the joint iron ore and REE mining operations in Missouri. However, Pea Ridge Resources, Inc. recently purchased the mine from Upland Wings/Wings Enterprises. No additional information was provided on the company’s website to determine when or if REE resource planning and/or production will resume or continue (Pea Ridge Resources, 2012).

Underground Mining costs make Rare earth extraction too costly-safety and lower production rate are culprits


EPA 12(“Rare Earth Elements:A Review of Production, Processing, Recycling, and Associated Environmental Issues”, December 2012, http://nepis.epa.gov/Adobe/PDF/P100EUBC.pdf)

Underground and open-pit mining are the more conventional methods used in the hardrock mining industry. Both of these more familiar mining methods produce common wastes; however, the environmental impact from underground mining is generally considered to be potentially less due to minimized land disturbance, targeted mining producing less waste rock, and differences in handling practices for the rock waste, although there are likely exceptions to this generalization. Underground mining is generally more expensive, primarily due to the lower production rates possible at higher cost compared to aboveground methods. Additional safety measures are also usually required for underground methods that increase operational costs.

Extraction of REE’s is too costly and unfeasible-countries distancing themselves from extreme costs


Sachan 11(Dinsa, Science Journalist at Freelance Past Science Writer at Down to Earth magazine (Centre for Science and Environment) Freelance Journalist at Freelance Journalist Production Journalist at Press Association Book Columnist at Windows & Aisles Cricket Writer at b5media, “Rush for Rare Earths”, Down To Earth, Aug 31,2011, http://www.downtoearth.org.in/content/rush-rare-earths)

Despite their great use, most countries have in the past distanced themselves from undertaking rare earth mining because the process is environmentally damaging. “Acid leaching, the standard method used in extracting rare earths is expensive and hazardous,” says Pant. China thus monopolises the industry. The country’s soil is rich in europium and dysprosium, which are most important for the production of high-tech material. Even the affluent US is reluctant to dive. “It was previously uneconomical considering demand, prices for material, particularly when compared to Chinese labour rates and environmental standards,” says Green. HOW RARE Rare earth metals comprise of 17 elements, including yttrium, scandium and members of lanthanide series in the Periodic Table. These metals do not occur in a free state. They are found in mineral oxide ores. However, their name is something of a misnomer. While they are hard to extract, they are quite abundant in the earth’s crust. In fact, cerium is the 25th most abundant metal in the earth’s crust. Rare earth mining in India was halted in 2004 by the centre-owned Indian Rare Earths Limited (IREL) due to lack of market competiveness. But after the Chinese move, India has decided to resume mining from this year. The government has set aside Rs 140 crore for a 5,000-metric tonne capacity plant in Odisha. It will export mixed rare earth chlorides. But around 55 per cent of the production of the plant will be sold to Japan, informs R N Patra, managing director of IREL. Other countries like Canada, Australia and even the US have also bought new mines. European and North American companies are planning to re-open mines in Canada, South Africa and Greenland. Toyota has bought its own rare earth mine in Vietnam by signing an exclusive supply deal.




Download 0.74 Mb.

Share with your friends:
1   ...   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   ...   32



The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2024
send message
    Main page
united states
soviet union
world bank
great depression
communist party
united states did
national debt
budget control act
central banks