Pages

Monday, May 05, 2008

Consistency should count for something. Credibility should count for a lot. Financial disinterest should factor in the equation. Miles Lord, A+.

First, Miles Lord has shown consistency. Before the recent circulation at a campaign event of a memo critical of attempted use of taconite mine waste in paving, the issue was phrased in similar wording, (as best as I understand the content of the item recently circulated), by Judge Lord roughly two years ago, per the included quote attributed to Judge Lord, within a City Pages Nov. 30, 2005, item authored by Mike Mosedale:

Hopstock and Zanko's proposal for the tailings is not without critics. At the Center for Transportation Studies seminar, two old lions of Minnesota's environmental movement--retired federal judge Miles Lord and former Minnesota Pollution Control Agency chief Grant Merritt--raised objections based on the possible health risks. Both Lord and Merritt are concerned because some taconite tailings are known to contain asbestos and asbestos-like fibers. Those fibers, they fear, may be related to the elevated levels of a rare but deadly cancer called mesothelioma on the Iron Range.

From 1988 to 1999, according to a 2003 Minnesota Department of Health study, there were 81 identified cases of mesothelioma among residents of northeastern Minnesota, nearly double the expected rate. For that reason alone, Merritt contends, any use of taconite tailings in highways should be subjected to a full environmental review.

Lord, who issued the landmark 1974 ruling that prohibited the dumping of taconite tailings into Lake Superior, takes a more conspiratorial view. The use of taconite tailings on highways, Lord contends, represents "a deliberate attempt by the taconite industry and its owners, 'Big Steel,' to spread deadly particles on Minnesota highways, thereby making it difficult, if not impossible, to pinpoint the cause of cancer deaths on the Iron Range because cancer will occur throughout the state of Minnesota."

In Zanko's view, such claims are both needlessly inflammatory and "pretty much a red herring." He points out that the Department of Health study concluded that higher levels of mesothelioma on the Range were most likely the result of exposure to commercial asbestos, not taconite dust. A fellow at the University of Minnesota-Duluth's Natural Resources Research Institute, Zanko further notes that tailings have been used in road construction in northeast Minnesota for decades, without apparent ill effect. (And, he adds, highway engineers like using the tailings because they are very durable and have superior friction characteristics).

Zanko further points out that there is no proposal to use tailings from the eastern part of the Iron Range, where the asbestos-like fibers have been identified in taconite. The geology of five pits from the western part of the Range, he says, is markedly different. Examination of the tailings from that region has not revealed any significant levels of asbestos-like fibers.

None of this satisfies Miles Lord. He counters that the MDH taconite dust study was sharply criticized by some scientists for its methodology and conclusions. Additionally, Lord notes, at least one EPA scientist has gone on record stating that the testing of the western range for asbestos has been inadequate.


Zanko like Tinklenberg, is paid to think the way he does, NRRI having an advocacy tasking re the promotion of using Minnesota "natural resources" which is how he regards mine waste piles. That brings us to point three, financial stake vs financial disinterestedness, but not without first commenting on Point 2, basic credibility.

Miles Lord and Grant Merritt have it.

Zanko and Tinklenberg, form your opinion.

Mine is that they are lacking on the used car test. I would buy one from neither.

Who you trust is a matter of opinion - based on how you weigh the facts, but it is not a factual matter itself.

Factually, now point 3. Zanko's livelihood is NRRI, and NRRI is promoting the stuff.

Tinklenberg Group has been reported to me as having taken $94,280 in fees out of NRRI, if I recall the exact number correctly, and may have since received more. In exchange, it is looking at how the stuff can be marketed and shipped/trucked/railroaded upon the rest of us, cheaply and in bulk.

Tinklenberg Group is at trade shows, with Hard Rock hockey pucks and related hoopla, all aimed at selling and not critically judging the wisdom of using the potentially carcinogenic stuff in roads in front of your home and mine. It is not as if he knows the stuff is unsafe. He does not know, believes it okay, and will continue to beat the drums in exchange for cash until someone proves it a public health menace. That is his view of a responsible position in the matter. Not my view, his.

I give Judge Lord a grade of A+, both for his courage during the Reserve Mining litigation, and for his ongoing courage when he does not have a financial stake one way or the other in whether the material is used on the road in front of your home.

Tinklenberg and Zanko, their grade? You give it.