Our NRRI we know is in Duluth, and we know the EGG is where Larry Zanko is sited. His homepage says that, and it indicates that EGG stands for Economic Geology Group. That suggests a mission of forming or advancing geologically focused economic proposals [i.e., not with any real health focus, health research, health monitoring, or health or medical expertise], and it suggests an overriding concern with "economic resources" if you combine the main name and subgroup name that way. They are rock jocks, not MDs, and with an economic driving mission to boot.
So this mine waste recharacterization effort, renaming taconite tailings waste as "Mesabi Hard Rock" and trying to convince gullible or compliant folks to buy the stuff out of Oberstar's district, or to facilitate that end, is a tasking that naturally gravitated to NRRI's doorstep, whether originating there or in mining industry minds, or elsewhere - saying and embracing the notion, what are we going to do with it as junk to the mines to be dumped by the mines as cheaply as possible, is to hype things upside down by calling it instead an "economic resource" and trying to sell it, etc. That orientation drives the proposal to use taconite tailings waste [whatever the health impacts, known, unknown or suspected] in paving, as aggregate, if it is at all physically suited for that use.
The NRRI focus then is to test whether it, as an engineering matter, works. Not whether it is safe. Only whether it appears a good idea in terms of the rock, concrete and asphalt and how they mix and perform when rubber meets road; directly and narrowly that way and without due regard for possible remote dusting related health worry.
Nice equation, right? Mines prosper. NRRI gets grants and prospers. Contractors use the stuff and prosper. Tinklenberg consults, lobbies, and prospers. A simply fine equation, for prosperity.
Miners dying of rare cancer changes the equation.
The Zanko web page has a search window, and "egg" in that window yields a page stating:
Our Economic Geology Group (EGG) focuses on the geology and mineralization characteristics of ferrous, non-ferrous and industrial minerals of Minnesota. This group specializes in Minnesota's geology through basic and applied geological research and applied technical assistance to companies in the areas of detailed, site specific geological mapping, drill core logging, detailed and regional geochemistry and biogeochemistry, mine planning, ore reserve estimates, testing and product development and other economic geology venues. Check out our current projects [...]
• Taconite Aggregate
We are awaiting the start of a federal grant, with matching funds from Minnesota-based private and public sector sources, to evaluate taconite mining byproducts like waste rock and coarse tailings for use as aggregate in highway construction projects. Taconite aggregate shows tremendous potential by being harder than typical limestone and can assist in meeting new federal and state pavement quality guidelines such as Superpave. In addition, this readily available mining by-product can alleviate the need for establishing new rock quarries in expanding communities or in environmentally sensitive areas.
Exactly as stated, rock jocks and not MDs and having an institutional will to promote "economically beneficial" outcomes of rock jocking. But the page shows two things more - page updating is a problem, the language above is "awaiting the start of a federal grant." It's been given, and over a million dollars have been exhausted that way, some going as promotional and marketing fees to Elwyn Tinklenberg's Tinklenberg Group for their [also non-safety oriented] effort to enlist legislative interest at the state and federal level [aka "lobbying"], and to convince DOT's to embrace the stuff as sound for use in paving [aka "lobbying"], and to arrange cheap ways to transport the stuff to places where contractors would put the stuff into "paving" [aka into the street in front of YOUR home, and into YOUR newly paved driveway where your children come and go].
The second thing shown is the upside being touted, already, before the grant money's been gotten, and anyone aware of grant processing, once the sale's been made and the grant given, the pressure and will of the grantee is to perform as promised, and not necessarily in a most broad sense, to perform as best.
Then miners were croaking at a startling rate from cancer, 17 of them, and MDH does a study saying, basically, "Oh well, they probably in their life/work history were exposed to asbestos and the medical and scientific literature says asbestos exposure and inhalation has distinctly been positively correlated with mesithelioma cancer, the rare form of malignancy the miners developed; it was not the mining, the mineral they routinely worked with, it was something extraneous; asbestos."
If that sounds like begging the question, it is, but with a rationale that if the taconite mining process, and exposure to the dust it generated was the health culprit, there'd likely be even more such cancer development and death. And there was not, only the unique 17 cases.
Also, there'd be hell to pay, in a regulatory context, if mining company profiting from providing mining jobs became an upset applecart because of an inherent carcinogenicity of the mineral being handled.
All avenues led to concluding there had been some phantom ghost asbestos exposure in these 17 "anomalous cases." It's an easy and "best" explanation for all interests, when all are considered.
Well, next MDH learns the number is not merely 17 rare cancer deaths but 58 [later updated to 59 at present], and MDH sits on that data, not making it public, while "contemplating how to reassess the situation" that not being a direct quote but the basic "explanation" [aka excuse making] from MDH when the truth leaked out.
The Pawlenty appointed low-octane ideologue heading MDH was thrown under a bus [aka resigned to have more time with the family] and a new boss was named by Pawlenty under greater public and legislative care and scrutiny and hence a more promising and less mediocre individual was tapped for the job on the second-go-around.
All the while, business as usual at NRRI.
Tinklenberg was paid more money to continue to advance the goal of selling mine waste to contractors.
There was no due concern at all, at NRRI or by Elwyn Tinklenberg or Tinklenberg Group membership to rein in their enthusiasms and face the new and extremely well publicized cancer-death reality. Besides the MDH three monkeys hiding from the implicit realities of input they did not want to see, here or speak, there was head-in-the-sand myopia at play. Where everyone else was getting the the gist and paying due attention, the exceptions were NRRI, MnDOT, and Elwyn Tinklenberg.
What is worse, this head-in-the-sand institutional myopia continued even as public voices were being raised. That includes one of the most credible of Minnesota individuals, Judge Miles Lord, who saved the quality of Duluth's drinking water from further savaging by terminating, with great difficulty from the next higher court and the mining interests [aka Big Steel and crony politicians and other fellow travelers]; but ultimately the Reserve Mining litigation was resolved where dumping mine garbage into Lake Superior was halted.
Again, the cheapest place to dump it is the best place, from the bottom line perspective of the mining interests. Hence, Lake Superior, great idea, we make more money. The bottom line can prove too tempting a constraint, as with others not occupying the mining properties, but directly or loosely affiliated.
Elwyn Tinklenberg was doing what Elwyn Tinklenberg does best. Tinklenberg Group, they had a cash cow, ongoing fees for the effort of pushing onward despite the breaking story of miner death at unprecedented levels from mesithelioma, and the decision was made to keep milking and filling the buckets while the consultancy's decision maker, Elwyn Tinklenberg also moved to advance his career-politician political career by wanting to go to Congress to sit there on the Transportation Committee along with the man he mentions publicly, often and in the context of soliciting business, James Oberstar. All the while others were securing millions for a study to determine the true health hazard of taconite mining, including the main minerals in the ore and hence in the tailings left after the good stuff, what can be sold for cash, has been separated.
Some worry that the study, hoopla, fanfare and all, will be a simple cover-up, or that after the public concern has ebbed a bit the funding will be pulled or constrained to starve the study at some key point prior to finalization and to thus keep business as usual, a result that clearly would suit the aims of the mining interests. And the mining interests have political power. After all, they have money to spend to attain their will. The worry of a study lasting years and somehow in midstream being derailed or misdirected is a real worry, not hysteria and not paranoia. This is especially so in light of the MDH shame in things, from indefensibly sitting on data that should immediately have been made public and honestly faced without need of a leak and press story to foster public outcry.That is where we stand. MnDOT, the agency that negligently let the I-35W bridge deterioate and fall, is doing nothing to curb or control the use of the material, taconite tailings - mining waste, from continuing to be promoted and this again appears to be nothing short of further MnDOT negligence, or worse, an institutional intent to ignore clear signals of the kind MDH was blistered over, for ignoring and/or suppressing.
It is the same species of bureaucratic fault, but now in a different agency.
A moratorium is needed.
None is being proposed by the agencies entrusted with the public interest.
Why, and what are you going to do about it?
Will you vote for Elwyn Tinklenberg for Congress, in light of the truth?
Why would anyone do that, beyond pure partisan politics? Business as usual.
Bottom line: A moritorium on the tailings in paving is overdue. Anyone standing in the way of that kind of a moritorium is risking public health and well being.
No one insensitive to the concerns and preferring to continue to collect consulting fees while saying "Larry Zanko proved it safe" should be sent to Congress, when Larry Zanko did no such thing, and Larry Zanko, himself, is not at all saying he did so.
Go ask Larry Zanko - "Larry did you prove the stuff safe and free or health risks, or is saying you did a falsehood?"
Strib, PiPress, Fox News, WCCO, KARE, if you simply just ask Larry, Larry might answer. And you could print or broadcast the answer and sell advertisement and all the things that mainstream media does to survive.
Guys - Try it. You'll like it.
And anyone saying Larry Zanko proved it safe is open to being viewed and characterized as a sophist and mendacious dissembler.