A new proposal to send power from B.C.’s Site C dam to remote Yukon mines is baffling on both environmental and financial grounds, according to Yukon mining analyst Lewis Rifkind.

Rifkind, a civil engineer who works for the Yukon Conservation Society in Whitehorse, said beyond environmental concerns associated with the mines, the “lunatic” cost of building more than a thousand kilometres of transmission lines for short-term projects makes the prospect nonsensical.

The idea was floated this week by Yukon energy and mines minister Ranj Pillai, who said that proposed new Yukon mines will require additional power sources and that the Site C dam could provide that energy with a $1.5 billion to $2 billion investment in transmission lines.

The catch, explained Rifkind, is that taxpayers would end up footing the bulk of the bill for transmission lines to far-flung mines that might only operate for a few years.

“We’re privatizing the profits and socializing the risk. Mines go bankrupt and the owners skedaddle. And then we have to tidy up the mess.”

Rifkind pointed to the Wolverine mine as an example of the short lifespan of territory mines. That mine — a zinc operation in the Yukon’s southeast — was supposed to be in operation for 10 years after it opened in 2012 but shut down after just three.

And it will cost taxpayers more than $500 million to clean up leaching waste rock and tailings at the Yukon’s abandoned lead-zinc Faro mine, whose toxic waste covers the equivalent of more than 26,000 football fields and lies one metre deep, according to the federal government.

“Since when do we invest massive amounts of public money without having an idea of what it’s going to be for and who will actually be able to use it, and how?”https://t.co/IsRZntA6Jz

— DeSmog Canada (@DeSmogCanada) January 26, 2018

Northern mining boom in the works  

The Yukon is poised for a mining boom, with a half dozen new copper, gold, and silver mines in various stages of permitting, environmental assessments and early construction. The territory currently has only one operational hard rock mine.

The new mines intend to burn fossil fuels like natural gas for power, which Rifkind said is “not necessarily a bad thing” given other considerations such as the “awful” lifespan of Yukon mines, the profound environmental damage caused by Site C, and the greenhouse gas emissions emitted during dam construction and from dam reservoirs.

“Even if they were to build a small local hydro dam we’d be flooding a river and a lot of the rivers are salmon habitat…and usually those dams are built at taxpayers’ expense. Why should we destroy our environment, why should we use our taxpayers dollars to subsidize something that’s probably only going to last for three years?”

Even if the mines operate for 10 years, Rifkind said it is “a crazy idea” to spend billions of dollars to connect them to Site C’s power. “That doesn’t even address the cost of building Site C and the huge environmental harm it’s doing.”

“The [mines] are hundreds of kilometers from the existing hydro grid in the Yukon, never mind the hook-up to B.C. It’s not just a matter of running lines from Site C to the Yukon border. You’ve then got to do another 400 kilometres to get to the Yukon grid. And then some of those mines are another 150 kilometres or 200 kilometers off the grid.”

What’s the story with all those new Yukon mines?

Planned Yukon mines that could use Site C’s energy under Pillai’s scheme include:

• The Casino copper and silver mine proposed by Vancouver-based Western Copper and Gold Corp. on a stream called Canadian Creek that drains into the Yukon River. The earthen dam for Casino’s tailings pond would stretch 285 metres in height and hold eight times the volume of the Mount Polley tailings pond, whose failed dam was 40 metres high. Road access to Casino would be through the range of the Klaza caribou herd.
• The Coffee gold mine planned by Vancouver-based Goldcorp Inc., one of the world’s largest gold producers. Coffee would be an open pit and heap leach mine on the Yukon River, 130 kilometres south of Dawson, operational for 10 years. Last July, the Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Board halted its review of the project, saying that Goldcorp did not adequately consult with the Tr’ondek Hwëch’in, Selkirk, and Na-Cho Nyak Dun First Nations, which would be affected by the mine.
• The Selwyn lead-zinc mine in eastern Yukon, proposed by the Chinese-owned mining company Selwyn Chihong. The mine would be accessed through the Northwest Territories, along a road that runs through parts of the Nááts’ihch’oh and Nahanni national park reserves. Trucks carrying lead and zinc concentrates would travel to port facilities in Stewart, B.C.

Rifkind said only one of the planned mines — Victoria Gold Corp’s proposed open pit Eagle Gold Mine in the Dublin Gulch watershed, 350 kilometres north of Whitehorse — is anywhere near the grid.

Victoria Gold Corp. has already said it will pay for a 35-kilometre transmission line to connect to the existing Yukon grid, which gets more than 90 per cent of its power from a single Whitehorse dam.

ICYMI: That Time Trudeau Announced $360 Million for Roads to Yukon Mines That Haven’t Been Approved Yet

Ugo Lapointe, national program coordinator for MiningWatch Canada, said he finds it “sad and disconcerting” that B.C. went through such a harsh debate over the $10.7 billion Site C dam and decided to sacrifice a valley potentially to send power to new Yukon mines.

He said the mines will “come and go” and that he is troubled by the idea that Site C’s electricity could go to Alberta’s oilsands operations or to speculative mines in the Yukon.

“Since when do we invest massive amounts of public money without having an idea of what it’s going to be for and who will actually be able to use it, and how?”

Can wind and solar help reduce carbon emissions for mines?

Both Lapointe and Rifkind said there are far more environmentally sound ways to help meet power needs for new northern mines while reducing their greenhouse gas emissions.

Lapointe pointed to the Raglan Mine, a large nickel complex in Quebec’s Nunavik region that installed wind turbines and a small energy storage facility in 2014. In the first two years of operation, the mining company saved 4.5 million litres of diesel and avoided 12,600 tons of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

Rifkind said new Yukon mines can install solar arrays and small wind turbines to meet some of their energy needs, reducing fossil fuel reliance. Once the mines close, he said the renewable energy infrastructure could be moved to a Yukon community as a legacy from the mining project.

How much would it cost to ship Site C’s power to Yukon mines?

A 2016 report found that constructing a 763-kilometre transmission line from Iskut, B.C. to Whitehorse — either to import or export energy — was not economical. The cost of the line was pegged at $1.7 billion at the time.

In an emailed statement to DeSmog Canada, B.C.’s Ministry of Energy and Mines said no formal discussions have taken place between the B.C. and Yukon governments and “it’s too early to comment on any possible transmission intertie between the two jurisdictions.”

BC Hydro is interested in serving new customers provided that it is economic to do so, but studies would have to be done before deciding on possible transmission line routes and the price of energy “would be subject to negotiations,” the energy ministry said in the statement.

Industry Canada confirmed to DeSmog Canada that a transmission line from B.C. to the Yukon would qualify for funding from Canada’s new Infrastructure Bank.

New funding agreements are currently being negotiated with the provinces, and a transmission line to the Yukon or Alberta would also be eligible for green infrastructure funding.

Rifkind said it would be “insane” to use taxpayers’ dollars to pay for transmission lines to send Site C’s power to the Yukon, in part because of significant power losses when electricity travels long distances.

About five per cent of power is lost through long-distance transmission in B.C., and another five per cent through local transmission, meaning that at least 10 per cent of the power that would be shipped from Site C to the Yukon would be lost.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

No charges will be laid against the Mount Polley Mine Corporation, owned by Imperial Metals, for the collapse of a tailings impoundment on August 4, 2014, that sent an estimated 24 million cubic metres of mining waste into the pristine waters of Quesnel Lake.

The incident, considered one of the worst mining disasters in Canadian history, was simply the result of “poor practices,” according to B.C. chief inspector of mines, Al Hoffman, and not due to “non-compliances.”

Hoffman released the results of a yearlong investigation into the tailing pond’s failure Thursday and did not recommend charges be brought against the mine or its parent company.

The Mount Polley mine was operating within existing regulation, Hoffman found, but failed to use best available practices. Hoffman made 19 recommendations to the B.C. government and the mining industry to prevent a similar event from occurring in the future. The recommendations include introducing a “designated mine dam safety manager” to monitor tailings facilities as well as improving records management and transparency around design, construction and operation of mining facilities.

B.C.’s Ministry of Mines currently has no rule in place for levying administrative penalties against mining operators. Upon release of the report, B.C. Minister of Energy and Mines Bill Bennett said he hopes to introduce new legislation this spring that will give his ministry the power to impose fines to encourage compliance.

Despite the promises for stronger mine management and future legislation, the current lack of consequences for the Mount Polley Mine Corporation and Imperial Metals has critics outraged.

“How can so many things be done so poorly, sloppily or haphazardly and result in massive damage without someone being ‘at fault?’” Ugo Lapoint, Canadian program manager with MiningWatch Canada, stated in a press release.

The catastrophic failure of the tailings impoundment, which sent contaminated waste into a major source of drinking water and spawning grounds for, at high times, up to 60 per cent of the province’s sockeye salmon stocks, was “not an ‘Act of God,’” Lapointe said.

“It was poor design, poor practices, poor oversight and misconducts on the part of Mount Polley Mine Corporation.” 

“It makes no sense. Either there were political reasons for the chief inspector to not lay charges against [Mount Polley], or the regulatory system is even more broken then we all thought. Either way, it’s not reassuring for any of the mines currently operating in B.C.,” Lapointe added.

MiningWatch Canada found that although the chief inspector did not lay charges, he made numerous incriminating statements in his recent report.

“It does not add up,” Lapointe said.

Richard Holmes, environmental biologist and resident of Likely, B.C., where the spill took place, said the report is a damning indictment of the province’s regulatory system.

“I think this reflects the weak regulations we have in B.C.,” he said

He added the lack of charges against the company does not come as a surprise.

“I didn’t think the chief inspector of mines would condemn his own ministers too much,” he said.

Holmes said the disaster is the outcome of “a bad combination of weak regulations, no oversight and a company that was hell bent on walking a very fine line in doing what was right and making a profit.”

The province’s push for more mines is troubling given the Mount Polley incident reflects poorly on the government’s ability to manage resources and watersheds, Holmes said.

There are currently 10 new mines planned for northwestern B.C., threatening transboundary watersheds flowing into Alaska. The proposed mines include the Red Chris Mine, owned by Imperial Metals, the same operator of Mount Polley.

“The Alaskans and others have every right to be concerned about transboundary rivers,” Holmes said. “Alaska has its own mining concerns that don’t need to be compounded by a weak B.C. regulatory system.”

Calvin Sandborn, legal director of the Environmental Law Centre at the University of Victoria, said a previous B.C. report put together by a panel of experts found management failures contributed to the collapse of the tailings impoundment.

“We sure would like to see someone held to account for this incident,” Sandborn said.

“B.C. government officials have been telling us for years they have world-class laws, world–class standards when it comes to mining,” Sandborn said. In 2012, Premier Christy Clark told a Calgary audience B.C. has the “highest standard of sustainable mining in the world.”

“So do those laws really provide a remedy when you have one of the biggest mining disasters in the world?” Sandborn said. “The jury is still out on that.”

Sandborn said there are still two Mount Polley investigations pending — one conducted by the B.C. Conservation Office Service and another by the federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans.

Sandborn said in January a panel of independent experts brought together by B.C. recommended the province eliminate the use of wet tailings impoundments altogether and opt for safer dry stacked tailings — a tailings management technique used in many other mining jurisdictions.

“Most importantly we need to look to the future and accept the recommendations of the government’s own experts and stop ignoring that advice,” he said.

After the Mount Polley incident it was revealed Murray Edwards, owner of Imperial Metals, raised $1 million at a private fundraiser for Clarks’ re-election. The Mount Polley Mining Corporation has donated $46,720 to the B.C. Liberals and mining giant Teck Resources has donated $1.7 million over the last nine years.

“You have to wonder if the B.C. government is constrained because they get so many political contributions from the mining industry, if that is a factor in their policy,” Sandborn said.

Image: Global News 

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Whether it was an act of God or the fault of negligent mine operators, the cause of Mount Polley mine spill — the worst mining disaster in Canadian history — remains officially undetermined, leaving local residents in a frustrated state of limbo.

One year ago this week the Mount Polley mine tailings impoundment collapsed, sending a catastrophic 24 million cubic metres of contaminated mining waste down the Hazeltine Creek and into Quesnel Lake, a local source of drinking water and in peak years can host up to 60 per cent of the province’s sockeye salmon run.

The province of B.C. says the Mount Polley Mining Corporation, owned by Imperial Metals, is still under investigation although some fear a January report that found glacial silt responsible for the instability of the collapsed tailings pond may take culpability away from the company.

Kanahus Manuel, a local indigenous activist and member of the Secwepemc First Nation, said the province’s decision to approve a partial re-opening of the Mount Polley mine last month signals to the media and the public that the company is without blame.

“The province giving the permit to Mount Polley was very irresponsible,” she said. “Mount Polley still under investigation and they haven’t cleaned up this disaster.”

Manuel doesn’t believe the reason for the tailings pond collapse was due to the presence of glacial silt.

“According to the people who worked here at the mine it was negligence. The dam wasn’t built properly and the company was not giving workers the proper material, the rock material, they needed to stabilize it.”

“That needs to be addressed,” she said. “They’re getting away with it."

Long-term Impacts of Mount Polley Spill Unknown

Manuel said she marked the one-year anniversary of the spill at a protest at the entrance to the mine with about 100 other individuals from as far away as Vancouver and Montreal.

“It’s very distressing to us as salmon people,” Manuel added, saying local fishermen attended the gathering to feed participants salmon.

“People still have these emotions about the disaster, not knowing what the cumulative impacts and the impacts on the salmon will be in years to come.”

Manuel said she is concerned about the movement of the mining waste through the food chain. “You’ve seen it, the sediment is pulverized into tiny particles. Those are the particles that are going into the food chain and will bioaccumulate in our bodies.”

Fine waste material from the tailings pond on the author's boots, August 11, 2014. Photo: Carol Linnitt.

Sam Albers, manager at the Max Blouw Quesnel River Research Centre, is studying the long-term impacts of the spill on aquatic species and said the effects of the spill will take time to show up in the data.

Albers said the spilled material contains heavy metals like copper and selenium but some of the metals are likely still bound up in rock material. The question is how effectively the metals are dissolving in the water and how that will affect fish over the long term.

"The big concern is that copper and salmon really don't mix all that well,” he said.

"Specifically, dissolved copper and salmon don't mix well. It can get into their olfactory system — so the fish equivalent of a nose — and really mess with their ability to utilize their ecosystem properly."

Albers explained the one-year anniversary of the spill is significant for scientists collecting data, because it allows for "more comparing apples to apples."

"We can now compare August sixth data from this year to August sixth data from last year. That will help us develop that longer-term time series which is critical to being able to comment on the impacts."

Sediment-laced water can be seen flowing into Quesnel Lake at the base of the rebuilt Hazeltine Creek. Photo: Farhan Umedaly.

Fisheries biologist and local resident Richard Holmes said he is also concerned about the impact of the spill on fish species.

“I think the impacts will be long-term but we just don’t know how severe they will be,” he said.

“Especially for the fishery resources, the biggest concern for Quesnel Lake is the sockeye salmon.”

No Disaster Relief for Victims of Spill

Holmes said he is glad attention is being paid to the environmental impacts of the spill although he said he is “disappointed” the company and the province were so eager to get the mine up and running again. The Ministry of Environment approved a permit for the mine to partially restart operations in June.

Holmes said the mine and the province acted “like they’d just won the lottery.”

“I was insulted, actually.”

“They’ve forgotten completely about the social impacts and the cultural and economic impacts on the people in the community,” he said.

He added that a recent flood in Cache Creek has received much more immediate attention from the province which stepped in with disaster relief funds for the community.

“That has never been offered here,” he said.

The province did provide $50,000 to the Likely Chamber of Commerce after the spill occurred but Holmes said that amount was inadequate. “That works out to $143 per person for a year of dealing with this disaster.”

Richard Holmes near his home in Likely, B.C. Photo: Carol Linnitt

He said because the investigation into the Mount Polley spill is still ongoing, the community is struggling to stay afloat without compensation.

“The government can’t have it both ways. Either there is somebody to blame who must pay. Or if nobody is to blame then the government needs to step in,” he said.

Local eco-tourism operator Gary Zorn also expressed frustration at the lack of compensation for Likely residents and business owners.

“What’s the difference between here and what happened here and in Cache Creek?” Zorn said.

“Cache Creek has a huge disaster, a natural disaster, and the government rushes there and gives everybody there up to $300,000 and here we have a massive mining disaster and the government gives them a start up permit.”

Zorn and his wife Peggy said their eco-tourism business, which offers grizzly-watching adventures, lost hundreds of thousands of dollars the day the Mount Polley disaster occurred.

“How come the government doesn’t say, ‘hey you guys, you created some real issues here, there’s some businesses you really did dirt to, you really hurt them. You straighten that mess out too.’”

“Or is the government to blame too?" Zorn said. "I mean, what’s going on here. How do you keep passing the buck and promising lies and lies and lies?”

“Who Will Pay the Bill?”

The province is currently conducting two investigations into the Mount Polley mine spill through the Conservation Officer Service and the Chief Inspector of Mines.

“We will ensure that those responsible are held accountable,” a spokesperson for the Ministry of Environment said.

Ugo Lapointe, Canada program coordinator for MiningWatch Canada, said it doesn’t make sense to restart the mine with two investigations pending.

“The ongoing investigations could lead to serious civil and criminal charges against Imperial Metals or its contractors, which in turn could lead to severe or very costly sanctions or litigations,” Lapointe said. “This critical information should be made publicly available before even thinking of reopening the mine.”

In a video released by the province to mark the one-year anniversary of the spill, Steve Rothman, senior inspector of mines from the Ministry of Energy and Mines, said, “the province would like to see the mine back in operation and in a safe and environmentally-conscious program that takes all the workers back to work and helps support the community.” 

But Lapointe echoes the concerns of the community: “Again we seem to be repeating the same mistakes as before by prioritizing the company’s economic interests over safety and the environment. This is really about getting Imperial Metals back to profitability.”

“We are very concerned of the lack of detailed assessments of the costs and damages caused so far by this massive failure onto the local environment, communities, and businesses, as well as onto First Nations’ right and livelihoods in the area,” Lapointe said.

“Who will ultimately compensate and pay the bill for all of those damages? The persistent blanket of silence on this issue is very worrisome.”

Image Credit: The reconstructed base of the Hazeltine Creek and Quesnel Lake. Photo: Farhan Umedaly.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Barrick Gold's shareholders will be greeted by a familiar sight in Toronto this morning: protesters are once again gathering outside the Annual General Meeting of the world's largest gold mining company to denouce the corporation's human rights and environmental abuses.

Sakura Saunders, of Protest Barrick and one of the demonstration's long-time organizers, told DeSmog that this year's AGM is happening amidst a “perfect storm” of controversies for the company.

“Everyone's angry at Barrick right now. Everyone's mad at [Barrick Chair and founder] Peter Munk because of botched deal after botched deal, fraudulent activity due to their Pascua-Lama mine, and they're also being sued in the British High Court for the killings that have happened with regularity at their North Mara mine,” she said in a phone interview.

The perfect storm

Top of the list for Canada's most prolific mining company is a $6 billion class action lawsuit – totalling over a quarter of Barrick's market capitalization – from shareholders alleging fraud over the company's Pascua-Lama mine, located on the border between Argentina and Chile. Pascua-Lama was meant to be the company's flagship operation at the centre of the largest stock offering in Canadian history in 2009. Slated to start production in 2013, the project has instead been shuttered after ballooning costs and the Chilean government's decision to suspend the mine's license for violating environmental regulations.

The lawsuit, which still needs certification as a class action by the courts, alleges Barrick executives knew and hid information about these environmental concerns from shareholders, causing them to eventually lose millions of dollars in investments.

Barrick is denying the allegations, and has said it will “defend itself against any lawsuit vigorously.”

Contravening environmental rules in Chile is just part of the accusations that human rights and environment activists have levelled against the company.

In Tanzania, there have been repeated shootings and killings of people in proximity of Barrick's North Mara mine by police who double as security. The company's subsidiary African Barrick Gold is now being sued in British courts by the families of men who have been killed by security agents, on the grounds that they used excessive force. And in Papua New Guinea, communities next to Barrick's Porgera mine are demanding the company pay for their resettlement after run-off and pollution from the site have made their villages unlivable.

With all these serious, documented abuses abroad, Saunders has mixed feelings about the fact that it is shareholders who are able to seek retribution in the courts, but not those directly impacted themselves.

“I just hope that these lies [about Pascua-Lama] expose the pathological culture at Barrick Gold. Which of course have many other consequences outside of shareholder value,” she said.

An early Barrick Gold demonstration in Toronto took place on April 24, 2014. Photo by @liezelhill via Twitter.

Shareholder activism

MiningWatch Canada is also working to bring awareness to Barrick Gold's activities. This past March they issued a notice to investors about the company's actions in Tanzania. In it, they document various shootings, killings and rapes that have allegedly been committed by security forces and police in and around the mine. They are urging shareholders to recognize the harm being committed by the company and to pressure executives at the AGM.

“[Shareholders] need to pay at least as much attention to the accusations of ongoing human rights abuses and severe environmental damage at Barrick sites around the world, as to the financial predictions of the company’s management based on reserves, pipelines and costs of production, as these severe harms caused by the company result in local-level conflict, opposition and legal action that presents real risks to their investment,” said Catherine Coumans of MiningWatch by email.

Driving this point home, Saunders and Protest Barrick organized a pre-AGM event on April 28, to "help investors bankrupt Barrick." The group distributed information detailing how to join the class action lawsuit. 

End of an era

Barrick's outspoken and controversial founder and chair Peter Munk will also be retiring this year, signalling what some have called the end of an era.

Munk has been ardent in his defense of the company's work, and in his refusal to take action to remedy the impacts of their mines, said Saunders. At the same time, neither she nor Coumans feels his leaving will mark much of a change at the company. “Maybe the company will finally agree to resettle people,” said Saunders. But the problem isn't Munk, she said, “it's that this company continues to operate.”

And while he may be out of the building, the 86-year-old's presence will probably continue to be felt, said Coumans. “[Munk's] influence is likely to continue through his hand-picked co-chair, who will now become chair, and possibly through his son who is also on the board of directors,” she wrote.

Accountability problem

While the biggest and often most visible violator of rights, Barrick is simply a reflection of problems in the mining industry. “Many of the negative impacts Barrick is causing locally, through human rights abuses and environmental degradation, and nationally through tax evasion and avoidance are quite widespread in the sector,” explained Coumans. “Because of Barrick’s sheer size and exposure globally, it is possible to expose a wide range of these harms related to one company, but we are seeing the same negative impacts by other Canadian mining companies.”

And at the root of this widespread problem is the question of accountability. Canada has the largest mining sector in the world, in part because of weak disclosure laws and no legislation for trying Canadian companies for crimes committed abroad.

In an historic ruling last year, a case against Canadian mining company Hudbay for negligence leading to rapes and murders committed by its security personnel at its Fenix mine in Guatemala was allowed to go ahead by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. But there are still no laws on the books clearly granting victims of Canadian companies' abuses abroad the right to sue them in Canadian court.

This has led to the Open for Justice campaign, started in 2013 and spearheaded by the Canadian Network on Corporate Accountability, to have Canadian parliament adopt legislation making it clear that Canadian companies can be sued by both Canadians and non-Canadians for offenses committed abroad, and the creation of an Ombudsperson to receive complaints and verify the compliance of Canadian extractive companies with legally-binding corporate accountability standards. It's only by bringing in this new legislation that Canada's mining sector – including Barrick – will be pushed to change their actions, said Saunders.

While waiting for legislation with more teeth, though, the plans are to continue protesting, which has seen success at pressuring Barrick and changing the debate on mining in Canada. Over the past few years, Saunders says she has seen her and fellow organizers' concerns go from fringe and rejected, to being seriously discussed in the mainstream press.

“Each year we've come, Barrick has had to admit to what we are saying,” she said. “Each year I feel a lot of validation regarding the accusations against Barrick that have finally been accepted in the mainstream.”

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Yukon-based mining company Gabriel Resources Ltd. sent an ultimatum this week to one of the poorest countries in Europe to either approve its Rosia Montana gold mine project or face a $4-billion lawsuit.  

If approved, the project will create the largest open-pit mine in Europe in an area many have argued should be a UNESCO World Heritage Site because of its natural beauty and unique history. The Romans mined gold at Rosia Montana over two thousand years ago.

Thousands took to the streets across Romania last week to protest Gabriel Resources’ project in what is being called the “Romanian Autumn." Earlier this week the Romanian Prime Minister – a supporter of the project – conceded Parliament would most likely reject the Rosia Montana project because of its unpopularity.

Last Wednesday, Gabriel’s CEO Jonathan Henry struck back in a manner that is becoming typical of Canadian mining companies operating overseas – approve the project or else.

“The Rosia Montana project is really a bad news project,” says Jamie Kneen, communications and outreach coordinator for MiningWatch Canada.

“In fifteen years of trying to make this project a reality Gabriel Resources has failed to redesign the project to accommodate people’s concerns or address the issues associated with the project,” Kneen told DeSmog. MiningWatch Canada is an Ottawa-based organization promoting mining policies and practices that are in the public interest.

Canadian mining companies already have one of the worst reputations in the world.  Companies such as Gabriel are not helping Canada’s case.

“If the lower house [of parliament] does reject the project, we will go ahead with formal notification to commence litigation for multiple breaches of international investment treaties for up to $4-billion,” Henry said in a phone interview with the Globe and Mail.

It is unclear which “international investment treaties” Henry is referring to because Gabriel has yet to name which ones Romania is breaching. His words did send Gabriel’s stocks up 15 per cent though.

Gabriel’s stocks took a 50 per cent nose-dive earlier this week when Romanian Prime Minister Victor Ponta expressed his doubt the draft law for mining Rosia Montana would receive parliamentary approval.

“There is a majority opposed to the bill,” Ponta had to admit last Monday.

Henry vowed to make Gabriel’s case against Romania “very public” to the extent that “Romania’s effort to attract foreign investment will suffer greatly.”

If approved, the Rosia Montana project would level four mountains, wipe three villages off the map and displace hundreds of rural Romanians. Despite this some villagers want the mine to get the go-ahead because of the jobs Gabriel has promised them.

"We want to mine! We want to work!" shouted a group of miners demonstrating at Rosia Montana’s town hall on September 9th.

One of the largest concerns opponents of the Rosia Montana project have is the use of cyanide to process gold.

“Rosia Montana involves mining large volumes of low grade ore,” says Kneen of MiningWatch.

“To separate the gold from the ore it’ll be crushed up and sprayed with cyanide out in the open. This is a practice that has been banned in places such as the state of Montana because of dangers it poses to the environment and communities,” Kneen told DeSmog.

It is estimated the Rosia Montana project will produce 250 million tons of toxic tailings laced with cyanide. Gabriel plans on storing these tailings in a huge dam. In 2000, cyanide laced tailings from a gold mining project in northwestern Romania leached into two rivers and contaminated the drinking water of 2.5 million people.

Gabriel has a lot riding on Rosia Montana. The company has never operated a mine before and all its projects (the company only has two) revolve around Rosia Montana. Gabriel claims to have spent over $500 million on the project over the fifteen years the company has been seeking approval and they have very little to show for it.

“Investors in Rosia Montana should really be questioning what their money has actually gone to,” Kneen told DeSmog.

Romanian Parliament is currently debating whether to approve or reject the draft law for mining Rosia Montana. In the meantime, protests against Gabriel’s gold mining project are expected to continue throughout the week culminating with a global day of action on September 15th.

Image Credit: Hanuta Flickr, Past Horizons

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.