And in reply ralph/Paulineto your derogatory comments from the 1994 court ruling regarding Placer Dome:
"Ralph, maxncompany brings up a very good point. Most people on these boards are interested in mining and mining company stocks and that includes the preservation of the environment in the area of mining operations. Some people come to Montana (mostly the wealthy from California, Washington, Illinois and the North east) in the guise of wanting to save the environment. In reality they do not give a whit about the environment! They are plain obstructionists who will use any tactic to further their objectives, including intimidation, physical obstruction and tying things up in court. I am not saying you are that type, Ralph, but your posts are slanted to knock mining in Montana. That does not help the mining industry, nor the environment. And it is frustrating to those of us in Montana who believe that one of the most economical and environmentally friendly mining industries in the world should be protected and encouraged! You are assisting in perpetrating a fraud against the people of this state. If this is inadvertant on your part, please do a little more research and use a little more reasoning. If it is because you feel that knocking Montana helps out B.C. and AUA, then use your reason again. Your short term gains will surely cost you in the long run.
Here are the facts from the case you brought up from 1994. It involves Placer Dome's Golden Sunlight Pit. The ore contains acid generating rock i.e. rock contains pyrite. pyrite is iron sulphide FeS. Add water and oxygen (H20 plus O2). I think the formula is 4FeS + 4H2O + 9O2 = 2Fe2O3 + 4H2SO4.
Anyway, all that H2SO4 is sulphuric acid. Everyone in the mining industry knows this. Everyone knows that when you drill and blast rock, it pulverises and increases logarithmicly the surface area of the pyrite that will be exposed to air and water. Everybody knows the geology around the Golden Sunlight pit. The gold is there because the faulting and fracturing and brecciation existing in the rock allowed the mineralizing fluids to bring in and deposit the gold. (I apologize to geologists and chemists for this over-simplification) Everyone knows that if the pit was backfilled with acid generating rock, that rock would be exposed to water percolating through it and exposing the pyrite to air and water. Everyone knows that the acid generated would escape into the fractures and then into the environment. Everyone knew this including the Montana Dept. of Environmental quality. (everyone but the judge and the out of state lawyers who brought the lawsuit.) Backfilling the pit was a non-starter from the point of view of protecting the environment.
Backfilling the pit was costed at +$500 million dollars using then current Placer Dome costs. That would have reclaimed approx. 240 acres, making it the most expensive real estate in the state. However, the court's decision, which was honored by Placer Dome (they eventually did another full EIS after the gold price improved) caused havoc among the families of Placer Dome employees (who did not know how long their jobs would last) the merchants in the area and the county commissioners (who did not know when they might lose half the county revenue.