State Activity Page

 

Home > Policy Issues > Banning Cyanide Use in Mining > Talking Points

Talking Points

Although cyanide is lethal in small doses, many tons are used in mineral extraction.

  • The use of cyanide in mining poses an unreasonable risk to the health of people, wildlife, and fish.
  • The asserted benefits of mining do not outweigh the potential for permanent environmental damage.
  • Cyanide blocks the absorption of oxygen by cells, causing the victim to effectively suffocate.(1)
  • A teaspoonful of two-percent solution of cyanide can kill a human adult.(1)
  • According to scientists, concentrations as low as five parts per billion in river waters can inhibit fish reproduction.(1)
  • In 1995, a 40-minute cyanide spill at the Grouse Creek gold mining plant in Idaho resulted in the contamination of a nearby creek at 1.31 parts per million, 60 times higher than levels toxic to fish.(2)
  • In 1992, when the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency arrived at the site of the defunct Colorado Summitville mine, following its owner’s declaration of bankruptcy, it found six leak sites releasing 3,000 gallons of potentially toxic fluids per minute.(3) Cyanide, heavy metals, and acid mine drainage from the Summitville mine killed all aquatic life within 17 miles of the Alamosa River.(4)

Cyanide use and resulting accidents threaten private property rights and shift the responsibility for cleanup from mining companies to taxpayers.

  • Prior to Montana’s 1998 voter initiative banning the use of cyanide in open pit cyanide-leach mining, landowners downstream of the state’s Golden Sunlight mine were forced to sell their property to Placer Dome Corporation after their drinking water well was contaminated with cyanide.(5)
  • In May 1998, six to seven tons of cyanide-laced tailings spilled from the Homestake Mine into Whitewood Creek in the Black Hills of South Dakota, resulting in a substantial fish kill.(1) The Dakota Mining Company bought the land from the federal government for just $5 per acre (under the General Mining Law of 1872), extracted about $69 million worth of gold over ten years, then filed for bankruptcy in 1998, leaving taxpayers with an estimated $40 million cleanup bill.(6)
  • The example above highlights a national trend – companies establish mining sites that often extract millions of dollars worth of ore, pay for numerous violations of the Clean Water Act to keep polluting, and then go bankrupt when there is a really significant spill, leaving taxpayers to fund the cleanup when the site is classified as a Superfund site.(6)
  • The Zortman-Landusky mine in Montana is a prime example of this trend. On January 15, 2001, the Washington Post reported: “Zortman-Landusky is also a symbol of failure. Pegasus removed less than 50 tons of gold from the mine – about one ounce for every 100 tons of ore it moved – then declared bankruptcy in 1998, citing bad investments and plunging gold prices. The firm also paid a huge settlement for 22 Clean Water Act violations, including a cyanide leak that tainted the local water supply and unforeseen acid drainage problems that have contaminated a host of nearby streams. The water here will have to be treated in perpetuity, and although Pegasus did contribute more than $60 million to the cleanup through its settlement and its bond, taxpayers could get stuck for more than $100 million in additional costs. Pegasus also handed out $5 million to its executives before going under, giving new meaning to the phrase “golden parachute.”(7)
  • Because of the high risk to health and environment as well as the high cleanup costs, there has been an increase in public support for banning the use of cyanide in mining. In Wisconsin, one poll showed 58% support for a bill that would ban the use of cyanide in mining.(8)
  • In 1998, Montana voters passed I-137, which implemented a ban on cyanide heap and vat leach mine operations. Since its passage, the cyanide mining ban initiative has been unsuccessfully challenged in the Montana court system as well as the legislature. In December 2002, a state district judge ruled that I-137 did not violate any constitutional rights of Canyon Resources, a mining company seeking to use cyanide in its gold mines. The district judge also ruled that the company should not be compensated for the loss of its project.(9)

Cyanide accidents are occurring all over the world.

  • In addition to numerous cyanide accidents across the United States, some of the most harmful spills have occurred in other parts of the world.
  • In January 2000, a massive cyanide spill from a Romanian gold mine contaminated more than 250 miles of the Danube River and its tributaries, resulting in a massive fish and wildlife kill. The drinking water supply for as many as two million people was affected by the accident, and experts believe it will take years for the ecosystem to recover.(10)
  • More than a half dozen major spills have occurred outside the U.S., leading to international debate over the use of cyanide in mining and prompting the Czech Republic to ban cyanide leaching in 2000.(11)
  • Courts in Greece and Turkey have ruled against cyanide leach gold mine proposals because of the potential risks to health and habitat.(11)

There is no way to ensure safe use of cyanide in mining, and cost-effective, non-toxic alternatives are available.

  • In the last 25 years, the major causes of cyanide releases into the environment
    from mining have been tailings-dam mishaps (76%), pipeline failures (18%), and
    transportation accidents (6%). Spills have occurred in so many places, and for such a variety of reasons, as to suggest that there is no way to ensure safe transport and use of cyanide in mining.(12)
  • Norman Haber, founder of Haber, Inc., has been investigating alternatives to the use of cyanide in mining since the 1980s and has developed a non-toxic, cost-effective gold-extracting process. The Haber Gold Process (HGP) has been tested and shown to extract gold as quickly as, or more quickly than, processes that use cyanide, and without posing risks to water, wildlife, and human health.(13)
  • Other non-toxic alternatives to cyanide are being explored, such as Cyanide-free Biocatalyzed Leaching of Gold and Silver Ore from YES Technologies.(14)
Sources:
(1) Project Underground. “The Gold Album.” 19 February 2004 <http://www.moles.org/ProjectUnderground/reports/goldpack/goldpack_a.html>.
(2) “Poison in Salmon Country.” Cascadia Times. 2000. 18 February 2004 <http://www.times.org/archives/2000/cyanide2.htm>.
(3) Gavin, Jennifer. “Summit Mine (Colorado) and Pollution.” TED Case Studies 5.2 (June 1996). American University. 18 February 2004 <http://www.american.edu/TED/summit.htm>.
(4) Hunter, Mark H. “Colorado considers a mining ban.” High Country News. 19 June 2000. 18 February 2004 <http://www.hcn.org/servlets/hcn.URLRemapper/2000/jun19/dir/Western_Colorado_c.html>.
(5) “MEIC Passes Initiative to Prohibit Open Pit Cyanide Heap-Leach Mining.” Montana Environmental Information Center (MEIC). Last updated February 16, 2004. 18 February 2004 <http://www.meic.org/i137background.html>.
(6) McClure, Robert and Andrew Schneider. “The Mining of the West: Profit and Pollution on Public Lands.” The Seattle Post-Intelligencer. June 11-14, 2001. 19 February 2004 <http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/specials/mining/>.
(7) Grunwald, Michael. “Babbitt Issues Parting Shots: New Rules Aimed at Curbing Hardrock Mining in the West ” The Washington Post. 15 January 2001. 19 February 2004 <http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=
A60266-2001Jan14&notFound=true>.
(8) “Wisconsin Campaign to Ban Cyanide in Mining Launches Statewide Speaking Tour, Plans October 13 Capitol Rally.” WisPolitics.com. 7 September 2001. 19 February 2004 <http://archive.wispolitics.com/freeser/pr/pr0109/Sept07/pr01090707.html>.
(9) Defenders of Wildlife. “The Environment, Citizens, and the State: 2003 Ballot Measures Final Election Report.” 2003. 19 February 2004 <http://www.defenders.org/states/factsheets/03ballots.html>.
(10) Jordan, Michael J. “Epic poisoning of Europe’s rivers.” The Christian Science Monitor. 16 February 2000. 19 February 2004 <http://search.csmonitor.com/durable/2000/02/16/f-p1s1.shtml>.
(11) “Cyanide Mining Hazards Endanger Communities, Environment.” Mineral Policy Institute. 21 February 2002. 19 February 2004 <http://www.mineralpolicy.org/media/pdf/20020221_DecodingCyanide.pdf>.
(12) “Development of an International Code for the Management of Cyanide in Gold Mining.” Washington, D.C.: United Nations Environment Programme, Division of Technology, Industry, and Economics, 26 September 2002. Mineral Resources Forum. 19 February 2004 <http://www.mineralresourcesforum.org/docs/pdfs/Washington-CN2Sept.pdf>.
(13) “Haber Gold Process (HGP).” Haber. 19 February 2004 <http://www.haberscience.com/Haber%20Gold%20Process.htm>.
(14) “Cyanide-free Biocatalyzed Leaching of Gold and Silver Ore.” YES Technologies. 19 February 2004 <http://yestech.com/tech/gold1.htm>.
This page was last updated on February 24, 2004.