Minnesota 8th District Candidate Rick Nolan - Picking Winners And Losers

EPA rules don't make a difference?  How it affects power and mining.

Here is how a vote might make a difference in Minnesota in regards to your current or future line of employment: Electric plants in the Northland produce electricity for our mining industry in this area and provide local jobs.

Hoyt Lakes Mayor Marlene Pospeck said she is equally concerned about the state Public Utilities Commission’s threat to close Minnesota Power’s Laskin Energy Center in Hoyt Lakes and Taconite Harbor Energy Center by 2016.

http://www.looktruenorth.com/72-elections/us-congressional/20250-nolan-will-fight-for-mining-jobs-who-knew.html 
 
The closing would affect 40 jobs in Hoyt Lakes. And Pospeck said it would have a devastating effect on the city’s property taxes. “Laskin is about 70 percent of Hoyt Lakes’ tax base,” she said.

Those seem to be real jobs we are talking about here.

The state Commerce Department, which intervenes in utility cases, has urged the PUC to require Minnesota Power to shut down by 2017 both units of its Laskin Energy Center and one of three units at its Taconite Harbor Energy Center, and replace their power with new wind farms and natural gas-fired power plants.

But the Duluth-based utility, whose 144,000 customers in central and northeast Minnesota include the power-thirsty mining industry, says the three generators still produce power economically and that the idea of retiring them needs far more study. The three units represent about 13 percent of the utility's coal-based generating capacity.

http://www.startribune.com/business/165526916.html?refer=y

How about the mining industry?

Will there be the jobs if these regulations (BART) are implemented? Does it make some operations cost prohibitive to continue? Good questions, have a look at the Tilden Mine in Michigan for a cost to industry to get an idea of how this would effect mining facilities. It appears to be 35 - 38 Million at that facility along with annual costs.

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; States of Minnesota and Michigan; Regional Haze Federal Implementation Plan
Full Report Link:
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-08-15/pdf/2012-19789.pdf

The PCA rules approved in April were looser than the state agency's staff originally proposed. They were eased after Cliffs Natural Resources officials said the Hibbing Taconite and United Taconite plants would have trouble complying with proposed nitrogen oxide limits. Critics have said that any tougher haze rules could hurt the state's taconite industry, even forcing some lower-margin operations to close.

Does this sound like it might affect some jobs?

But those tougher limits are now back on the plate, and supporters say the EPA was forced to act because Minnesota regulators "shirked their responsibility."

http://www.twincities.com/localnews/ci_21338933/iron-range-epa-calls-tougher-air-pollution-rules

Who does this affect regionally?
Minnesota .... U.S. Steel, Minntac .......................................... Grate-Kiln Lines 3–7.
Minnesota. Northshore Mining Company-Straight-Grate Furnaces 11 and 12.
Minnesota . United Taconite ................................ Grate-Kiln Lines 1 and 2.
Minnesota... ArcelorMittal Steel ............................................ 1 Straight-Grate.
Minnesota ... Hibbing Taconite .......................... Straight-Grate Lines 1–3.
Minnesota.... U.S. Steel, Keetac ........................................... 1 Grate-Kiln.
Michigan..... Tilden Mining .................................................... Grate-Kiln Line 1.

Some estimated costs:

Cost of Control

Minntac estimated the annualized pollution control cost of installing and operating WWESPs on Lines 3, 4, and 5 to be between $20,000 and $24,000 per ton of SO2 removed. The cost of installing and operating a secondary wet scrubber on these lines was estimated to be between $14,000 and $16,000 per ton of SO2 removed. The annualized pollution control cost of installing and operating WWESPs on Lines 6 and 7 was estimated to be approximately $18,000 per ton of SO2 removed. The cost of installing and operating a secondary wet scrubber on these lines was estimated to be between approximately $12,000 per ton of SO2 removed.

Cost of Control
ArcelorMittal estimated the annualized pollution control cost of installing and operating WWESPs to be about $116,000 per ton of SO2 removed.The cost of installing and operating a secondary wet scrubber was estimated to be approximately $83,000 per ton of SO2 removed.

Cost of Control
Northshore estimated the annualized pollution control cost of installing and operating secondary WWESPs ranged from roughly $180,000 to $540,000 per ton of SO2 removed. The cost of installing and operating a secondary wet scrubber was estimated to be between $140,000 and $420,000 per ton of SO2 removed.

Cost of Control
Hibbing estimated the annualized pollution control cost of installing and operating WWESPs to be about $37,000 per ton of SO2 removed. The cost ofinstalling and operating a secondary wet scrubber was estimated to be between $57,000 and $67,000 per ton of SO2 removed. Given the space limitations and equipment additions that would be required to modify the existing wet scrubber, Hibbing determined that it would be more cost effective toconstruct a new, secondary scrubber; therefore, no cost estimate was provided for modifications to the existing wet scrubber.

The following table illustrates the SO2 emission reductions projected by Tilden with the technically feasible technologies.

TABLE V–B.37—PROJECTED ANNUAL SO2 EMISSION REDUCTIONS
SDA     90 0.03 $38,403,000
Wet Scrubber  80 0.05 7,448,000
WWESP  80 0.05 15,733,000
Dry Scrubber  55 0.11 35,381,000

More Information:
Potential Impacts of the Federal Regional Haze and Best Available Retrofit Technology
Rules on the Taconite Industry in Minnesota
Final Report for the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
September 30, 2003
Barr Engineering Company
Project No. 23/62-833
CFMS Contract No. A45712
Report from 2003:
http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/view-document.html?gid=2235

(See Attachments I through M for annualized cost figures:)

Minnesota Regional Haze Plan - Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/air/air-quality-and-pollutants/general-air-quality/state-implementation-plan/minnesota-regional-haze-plan.html

We end up with this quote from Candidate Rick Nolan in the eigth congressional district of Minnesota.

Rick Nolan: "These [EPA] rules and regulations are not job killers. Quite frankly, they are job creators.”

How so Rick, one industry like wind energy wins, while others in Minnesota who work in these industries lose miserably in the end??   Are you supporting all of the people and jobs in the 8th district Rick and would you be acting responsibly if you were given the chance? Minnesota's mining industry is ranked number one in gross product output - adding more than $3.1 billion annually to the regional economy. Why should we throw this industry away?

http://www.taconite.org/campaign.php

Rather than a win lose approach promoted by Rick Nolan and the democratic party leadership, wouldn't we be better off with a win win approach using all of our natural resources in an effective and common sense manner that allows our business to stay in business? This is after all, real jobs we are talking about now.

Oh, but Rick would support us anyhow right?  Lets have a look at the last pretty much party line vote on the land exchange to support our school children in all of Minnesota.
So, how did the parties vote?

House Vote 568 - H.R.5544: On Passage
Mainly Republican For And Democratic Against.
http://politics.nytimes.com/congress/votes/112/house/2/568

Rick is a good democratic trooper along with the best or worst of them. You can count on his vote against the people,communities and jobs of Minnesota.

Let's just not allow that failure to occur.

Minnesota Politics In The 8th District, Democratic Party Memory Loss At Large

There are a some good stories to have a chuckle with in the 8th district this year regarding how politicians change their tune to fit the situation.

First up would be Jeff Anderson's post primary support of Rick Nolan. Here is this story from the Princeton Union Eagle during the democratic primaries.

http://unioneagle.com/2012/06/former-duluth-concilor-in-three-way-primary-race/

Anderson argues that he, among the DFL candidates, best matches up with Cravaack on the issue of mining — Cravaack has become a very pro-mining congressman, Anderson said.
“I know we’ve mined for a 130 years and I want to see us mine for another 130 years,” Anderson said.
“I want to see us do it safely, I want us to do it the right way,” he said.
“And I believe we can,” he said.

Now I like Jeff in general, he is local and has a good understanding of the area. Too bad he didn't win the primary as he was a viable candidate if a person looks at things from the democratic perspective.


Jeff's take on Nolan during the primaries:

Full Article:
http://www.virginiamn.com/news/article_b5f33326-d152-11e1-848b-001a4bcf887a.html

Anderson argues Nolan is out-of-step with the times.
“A very nice man,” Anderson said of Nolan.
But two years ago voters rejected a Democratic congressman, former Congressman James Oberstar, who was first elected in 1974, explained Anderson.


Duluth City Councilor Jeff Anderson last week challenged his two opponents to take a definitive stand on a recently-passed House measure, which he supports, that would accelerate the permitting process and also delay a decision on a permanent sulfate standard until a Minnesota study is completed. An amendment to that bill, the National Strategic and Critical Minerals Production Act of 2012, to speed up the permitting process was steered through by Cravaack.

On Wednesday, party-endorsed Rick Nolan of the Brainerd area said he would not have voted for the measure. “If the bill was for the purpose of expediting the process I’d be very supportive. But it would gut health and safety standards,” he said.

Anderson said both Nolan and Clark are badly out of touch on the copper/nickel/precious metals issue.

“The question is simple. Do Rick Nolan and/or Tarryl Clark believe that we need to streamline the permitting processes and normalize the allowable sulfate discharge levels, or do they not?

“One answer will create jobs. The other will allow them to continue pandering on this vitally important issue,” Anderson said Wednesday.

Cravaack's take on things?

“The bill only waives federal permitting standards when the state standards for permitting exceed the federal standards, thus eliminating extremely time consuming duplication. If state standards already in place exceed federal standards, a waiver could be granted,” a Cravaack spokesman said on Wednesday. In addition, a news release from Cravaack’s office last week said:

“H.R. 4402 maintains full compliance with existing environmental regulations. The bill gives the lead agency the ability to waive duplication if the agency determines the state and federal safeguards are sufficient. Specifically, all existing environmental regulations must meet current federal standards, although certain state standards currently exceed federal standards. In such instances, the federal permitting process could be waved to avoid duplication.”

So how have things changed for Jeff since: 

He is definitely standing behind his man in his series of Facebook photo shots.

https://www.facebook.com/JeffAndersonMN/photos_stream

https://www.facebook.com/JeffAndersonMN/photos

So who exactly is the man he is standing behind? If his previous words are any indication I'd have to go with Congressman Cravaack on this one as his views seem to align more with him than Rick Nolan. ????? Strangely, that does look like Rick Nolan in those photos though.

Jeff should have stuck to his guns, I can't blame him though being a career democratic politician. Guess he is hoping everyone has a short memory about what he did support and who was in touch on things...

Moving along we have Tom Rukavina:

He stands behind his man with this video: He even uses the good old Packsacker insult to indicate that Congressman Chip just isn't one of us. He seems to conveniently forget all the good things Cravaack has done for economic development in this region it seems.



But how do his ideologies stack up with Chip Cravaack? Have a look at this editorial excerpt:
http://www.letfreedomringblog.com/?p=13865

Chip Cravaack’s legislation mirrored the bill that Gov. Dayton signed into law. In fact, Chip’s legislation includes this language:

“(7) The Legislature of the State of Minnesota, meeting in its 87th Legislative Session, passed (and on April 27, 2012, the Governor of Minnesota approved) S.F No. 1750 (Chapter 236), section 4 of which adds section 92.80 to the Minnesota Statutes to expedite the exchange of a portion of the State trust lands located within the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness.
(b) LAND EXCHANGE REQUIRED.—The Secretary of Agriculture shall consummate a land exchange with the State of Minnesota pursuant to section 4 of S.F No. 1750 (Chapter 236) of the Legislature of the State of Minnesota (section 92.80 of the Minnesota Statutes) to acquire all right, title, and interest of the State in and to certain State trust lands identified as provided in such section in exchange for all right, title, and interest of the United States in and to National Forest System land in the State for inclusion in the State trust lands.

Tom Rukavina voted for S.F.1750. Chip Cravaack authored legislation that made S.F.1750 federal law.

And then we have this opinion from Tom in the Timberjay, a little paper up north where he straightens out a environmental extremist :http://www.timberjay.com/stories/Rangers-dont-want-to-become-sherpas,10578

Next, let’s talk about this absurd statement in Mr. Carron’s letter claiming the bill is “a giveaway to multinational mining companies.” The 93,000 acres of school and University trust land in the BWCAW will become federal land, and the 93,000 acres of federal land in the Mesabi Purchase portion of the Superior National Forest will become state trust land and will be managed in perpetuity to raise income for public education. What bogeyman do you see under your bed here, Mr. Carron? An acre for acre exchange where state land becomes federal land and federal land becomes state land will result in no net loss of public ownership. Why is this such a hard concept for the environmental community to grasp? It certainly isn’t a giveaway to any mining company.

Ely, tower, Winton, Cook Grand Rapids, and the North Shore couldn’t exist without our taconite industry. And the truth is, we are currently mining in the Superior National Forest, and we haven’t harmed it, have we? Minntac, Arcelor Mittal, North Shore Mining, and Mesabi Nugget are all currently operating in the Superior National Forest and it’s their taconite taxes that keep all our communities, including Duluth, alive.

Tom just doesn't seem to agree with the environmentalists that control the Twin Cities led DFL party and the ideology behind that group. The environmentalists want de facto wilderness in Northern Minnesota whether it is called that or not. No mining at all is their intent even if it can be done safely.
You probably won't see this link on the extremist websites:
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/polymet-reports-successful-water-treatment-121101047.html

The NorthMet Project''s potential impact on water quality is a key issue in the environmental review and permitting process. The successful pilot plant test is a significant accomplishment, demonstrating that water with elevated sulfate levels can be treated to meet Minnesota''s 10 parts-per-million sulfate standard for waters used for the production of wild rice.

Here is the environmental statement from Rick Nolan's political website who is a product of the Minnesota democratic party machine:   http://nolanforcongress.org/issues

The Environment

The environment, our air, lakes, rivers and forests, are crucial to our 8th district economy.  The degradation of our air and water, along with global warming, threaten the very survival of our species here on mother earth.  We must protect the environment in order to preserve our way of life and our tourism industry.

This sounds all good and nice doesn't it? It is simply a wink and a nod to the environmental extremists that he will back them in all future legislation. 

So if Rick Nolan is to protect the workers in Minnesota they have to have jobs don't they? Seems he kind of forgot about that simple detail. It seems that we should spend 250$ Million to make up for that lack of understanding and as a sideline note, kill any mining and job projects by studying them to death.

How in the end do Tom Rukavina and Jeff Anderson support Rick Nolan.? Not very well it would seem as it looks as though they agree more with Chip Cravaack on what is important to this region.

Tom Rukavina, State Representative District 5A Letter on BWCA/state/federal land exchange

September 24, 2012

To the Editor:

I see one of our new immigrants to Ely, Mr. Reid Carron, is putting out more misinformation on the proposed BWCA/state/federal land exchange. Let me enlighten your readers.

First, Mr. Carron states “current law adequately provides for dealing with school trust lands, no additional legislation is necessary”. If so, I ask Mr. Carron why, after 35 years, has no exchange taken place? I’ll tell you my opinion why, because the Feds, DNR, and most environmental organizations have never wanted an exchange. It’s too big a headache for the Feds and the DNR. And, as for the environmentalists, the real truth is that they don’t want federal land to become state land because they know they’ll have a tougher time suing in state court than in federal court, over activities they don’t like, such as logging, snowmobiling, and ATV use.

Next, let’s look at Mr. Carron’s claim that school trust money is “miniscule”. Every year, the Minneapolis, St. Paul and Anoka-Hennepin School Districts get over $1 million each from that fund. Good management of the timber resources alone from this exchanged land could and should increase those figures exponentially. Maybe $1 million a year is miniscule to Mr. Carron. But to this old, tired, 3^rd generation Ranger, that’s still real money.

Now, let’s talk about this absurd statement in Mr. Carron’s letter claiming the bill is “a giveaway to multinational mining companies”. The 93,000 acres of school and University trust land in the BWCA will become federal land, and the 93,000 acres of federal land in the Mesabi Purchase portion of the Superior National Forest (that’s the unattached portion of the Superior National Forest that runs from north of Biwabik all the way to north of Hibbing) will become state trust land and will be managed in perpetuity to raise income for public education. What bogeyman do you see under your bed here, Mr. Carron? An acre for acre exchange where state land becomes federal land and federal land becomes state land will result in no net loss of public ownership. Why is this such a hard concept for the environmental community to grasp? Because, it certainly isn’t a giveaway to any mining company.

Next, let’s talk about Mr. Carron’s claim that “Ely area residents . . . will lose scores of thousands of acres of Superior National Forest land that are now available for hunting, snowmobiling, hiking, snowshoeing, and many other recreational pursuits”. While many of the “old immigrants” from the Ely and Tower area must be thinking that you’re talking about the

To the Editor

September 24, 2012

Page Two

original Boundary Waters Act, Mr. Carron, let me assure them that for you to say this about the proposed land exchange bill is an absolute lie. In fact, Ely and Tower area residents will have an easier time recreating on the new state land. But that’s really why you and other environmentalists oppose this bill, isn’t it? Because you know it will be easier to put a snowmobile trail or cut down a tree on state land than on federal land.

Mr. Carron, your letter was, to put it in Range-speak, just a bunch of BS. To imply that any member of the Iron Range Delegation is supporting this legislation because we are stoolies for “multinational mining companies” is nuts. I will never forget the way my father and grandfather were treated by the Oliver Iron Mining Company (while you on the other hand don’t even know what the Oliver Iron Mining Company is). So let me tell you, Mr. Carron, that I am always going to be on the side of the miners and our mining communities, and not your “multinational mining companies”. And while I am no economic genius, I know that without mining and mining companies we have no Iron Range.

So, Mr. Carron, as I’ve said before and I’ll say many times again, Ely, Tower, Winton, Cook, Grand Rapids, and the North Shore couldn’t exist without our taconite industry. And the ugly truth, which the Friends of the BWCA, Sierra Club, etc. fail to acknowledge is that we are currently mining and logging in the Superior National Forest, and we haven’t harmed it, have we, Mr. Carron? Minntac, Arcelor Mittal, North Shore Mining, and Mesabi Nugget are all currently operating in the Superior National Forest and it’s their taconite taxes that keep all our communities, including Duluth, alive.

So in ending, Mr. Carron, while you’re worried about the Range turning into a “Banana Republic”, I’m worrying about a bunch of hypocritical environmentalists who want to turn our proud, productive, mining-based Iron Range into a Bangladesh where we can all be “sherpas” carrying bags and canoes for tourists, and existing on their tips and leftovers!

Tom Rukavina

State Representative

District 5A

P.S. I won’t even get into your outright lie that the Iron Range Delegation killed some proposed land exchange you claimed happened in 1997 because after all, it’s just another lie.