London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
jessell, "Surely any positive benefits will be balanced by the obvious detrimental effects of the project itself?"
Oh if only the projects environment costs was due to balancing positive to detrimental effects on a pro rata basis, this project overall costs are substantially more than they could have been by this environmental balancing, the amount of money the NYMNP will receive over the life of this mine is many multiples the cost of balancing the detrimental effects, this mine and it's transport system is like nothing else ever built before in the world environmentally and the money the National Park asked for and got as a condition of passing planning permission is massive, however my very real concern is that they put it to good use and don't squander it on 'administrative overburden' which is so prevalent amongst organisations administrating other people's cash these days rather than the sum they will receive.
Sheps8.
Jessell spewing the bile on several threads today then. Stay classy :)
Hi BF
The thing to understand is that unlike Sylvinite (MoP) or halite (NaCl), polyhalite is an elastic rock, it does not creep. Once mined in an area there will be some immediate elastic deformation that will then halt with the new equilibrium.
A hugh amount of geotechnical study has been done by Sirius's specialists, particularly SRK. See their work on this in the prospectus Sec 9.3 and 9.4 of their report.
https://siriusminerals.com/downloads/main-market-prospectus/
GK.
I also like the SXX website and their clear specification of how they will address environmental concerns. It seems that this company is addressing the vast majority of concerns, particularly in building the Transport tunnel to mitigate overland transport issues.
However, there is one area I cannot find answers to which others here might be able to clarify for me:- What is SXX going to do to mitigate potential future cave-ins etc? Are they going to 'back-fill' the cavins as they remove the mineral or are they going to flood it?
My main concern is that of future potential Sinkhole issues that seem to be becoming more and more prevalent. It would seem to be more conducive to instigate some form of 'filling-in' process even if it is more of a honeycomb structure. Indeed, such a 'feature' may help to develop Thermal Energy based generation in the future, given that the temperature at that depth, and the size of the evacuated area will provide a wealth of thermal energy.
Indeed SXX could be missing a trick by not considering how to develop and establish any Thermal capability as an ongoing basis during mining???
Any idea, comments etc
I love this project for all of the positive things it will deliver. But I am not blind to the fact that we (like all miners) are taking something from Mother Earth that cannot be replaced.
How will we feed the world after Woodsmith is depleted?
OR
Good afternoon, Jesse. This is where all the mitigation measures, if not initially suggested by Sirius, certainly insisted upon by NYMNPA, will come into their own. From tree planting to the attenuation ponds and the potential for geothermal energy, there was a whole raft of mitigations built in to the planning application. Woodsmith will prove unlike the vast majority of mining operations not only in the scale of its environmental impact, but also its effect on the visual environment. From a ‘green’ perspective, its environmental credentials should prove something we can all be proud of.
Regards,
per ardua ad astra
Good afternoon, chem. You highlight an extremely salient point, imo. Because, with many climatic uncertainties undoubtedly yet to become clear - never mind addressed - the true value of our green credentials may be yet to be determined, and could well prove considerably higher than we might have hitherto conceived. As the effects of climate change continue to manifest and become increasingly challenging, I can very easily envisage a situation whereby under the Kyoto Protocol, countries will find themselves subject to ever increasing limitations on greenhouse gas emissions. Obviously reducing emissions per se is a key aspect - and in that respect our low carbon footprint is vital. However, I can also conceive a time where companies large and small, from the very largest such as ADM, to the smallest such as small collectives or individual farms, will have a financial imperative to acquire carbon credits. In addition to proving competitive on cost, clean, green polyhalite could well have the potential to help farmers obtain sizeable carbon reductions. The value of which could well be prove significant.
Regards,
per ardua ad astra
mpanies from the largest such
Just keeps getting better IMO, pity about the constant naysayers each with their own agenda, I cant be arsed looking in when there is so much banality and short term mentality, don't they know how huge this project is? Regards Jesse
https://www.worldfertilizer.com/environment/18022019/study-finds-polyhalite-is-more-environmentally-friendly-than-other-fertilizers/
If you then added an environmentally friendly mine just imagine the green credentials...
GLA Chem