POLYMET'S STATEMENT: Stripped of cruft with highlighting added -
“Today’s decision by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is reversal of thoroughly reviewed water quality data that has been collected and assessed over the last decade. The planned NorthMet Project development is protective of water, air and other resources and can produce copper, nickel and platinum group metals (PGM) in a responsible and sustainable manner. In fact, the project clearly shows that through its proposed water treatment and management processes, it will remove more than 1,400 tons of sulfate per year from the St. Louis River system, the result of historic iron ore mining operations. It also will lead to a net reduction in pre-existing mercury loading to the river system.
“The Corps’ decision is one that requires careful review, determined action, and further engagement with regulators and all key stakeholders. NewRange is reviewing all of our options as we chart a course forward [...]
* * * * *
[...]
For further information, please contact:
Media
Bruce Richardson, Corporate Communications
Tel: +1 (651) 389-4111
brichardson@polymetmining.com[...]
PolyMet Disclosures
This news release contains certain forward-looking statements concerning anticipated developments in PolyMet’s operations in the future. [...] Forward-looking statements address future events and conditions and therefore involve inherent known and unknown risks and uncertainties. Such risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, [...] the outcome of the development of the NorthMet and Mesaba projects, and the outcome of any financing required to raise the funds for PolyMet’s share of the work program. Actual results may differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements due to risks facing PolyMet or due to actual facts differing from the assumptions underlying its predictions.
There is the one contact person named, yet Crabgrass will not bother asking the dude a thing. Expecting a cold shoulder, why bother?
However, there are people, the Governor being one, who might ask and get at least some form of reply.
First, the Disclosure is more than investor-oriented boilerplate. It is truth. All of Polymet's position is "forward looking," and in fact "uncertainties include, but are not limited to, [...] the outcome of the development of the NorthMet and Mesaba projects, and the outcome of any financing required to raise the funds for PolyMet’s share of the work program. Actual results may differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements due to risks facing PolyMet or due to actual facts differing from the assumptions underlying its predictions.
With the disclaimer stating truth, the use in the earlier text of "In fact" offends by its patent untruth.
Beyond that, what in the world is "the St. Louis River system?" Watershed is a term of known meaning in geoscience. But, "system?" If they mean the watershed they should say so, but "system" is using weasel wording.
THE MAJOR DEFECT IN THIS
Mass balance: If 1400 tons of sulfate are removed per year, where will it go?
Shipped to Switzerland to be eaten in the Glencore cafeteria? It does not evaporate into thin air. If "removed" where then is it relocated? If left at Polymet owned land and fixtures, how would that be "removed" from the watershed?
It is blowing smoke. You don't remove something from one place unless it is moved to some other place, and guess because these people are leaving the question hanging.
Sulfate anywhere is a nuisance. So what's the answer?