American Resources Policy Network
Promoting the development of American mineral resources.
  • Blog

  • HOMEPAGE >> BLOG >> Support America’s mining industry; send a letter to the EPA

Support America’s mining industry; send a letter to the EPA

Earlier this week, ResourcefulEarth.org picked up on our initial calling out of a week-long campaign the environmental Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) Earthworks ran against the mining industry. Read our original post from August 12 here. The site’s follow-up post included a couple of take action items for its community, and we’d like to encourage our supporters to do the same.

Those who support exploring non-fuel mineral resources (that’s us!) deserve to present their factually-based information before the EPA and the Administration. Let’s be the voice of reason before the federal government by knowledgeably explaining that over-regulation is not the answer to providing mining jobs and national security.

Please take a few minutes to send a letter to the EPA on this issue. It is pre-written by the people from Resourceful Earth, and it clearly explains the situation. After taking the action, we would also encourage you to share this letter-writing campaign with your networks.

You may send a letter by email to the EPA Administrator, Lisa Jackson, by clicking here.

  • Mynamis Restricted

    Support you I do, because I believe technological innovation will see so called non fuel minerals producing, or at least becoming an integral part of the production of energy that will make us independent of forign sources some day.

    for decades we have seen honest efforts–even though they be from profiteers who care more for shareholders than the people the energy serves–you and me–, honest efforts to drill, to mine, to explore domestic resources, only to be thwarted by envirnmentalists, some of them extreme, some of them misguided, all of them unaware they are contributing to the demise of the american way of life.

    Not a huge jump. consider; The bottom line is that there are more people in the owrld than are needed to make it go around. Population explosion. the USA is not immune to the ramificatiions of this fact, and so the need for energy to support those that earn it as well as those that don’t, will continue to increase exponentially. this means demand on its sources require su[ply. right now the USA is being pimped by OPEC and Big Oil, that is, supply is being kept small reltive to need so as to increase profit—and power. the net result is a polarization in our own country, as exemplified by the recent debt ceiling hostaged Budget deal to which a compromising president all but capitulated.

    what does this have to do with “non”-fuel minerals? Just the obvious: ANY domestic resource must needsbe exploited, even at the expenseof ‘envirrnmental’ concerns becaue we are t war. an energy war with the middle east—and symbolic wars in the name of support for democracy, let’s face it— and everytime we take a step to weaken ANY effort to produce raw material domestically obtained, is an effort to load a gun and point it at our children of tomorrow.

    I am pro envirnment by the way, but topit against our need for domestic resources and make us more dependent on forign oil and CHINESE raw materials, against concern for native animal species, clean air, even clean water and clen concience is, in my view, unconcionable..

    I support explorartion and development o non fuel minerals. If I have my way, these domestic resources WILL be fuel one day, or part of a technology we will depend on, and so do not want to depend on a country like China, whic is way ahead of the game, and understands what I have just said here.. *just a thought*

    • Dan McGroarty

      I hope all of our visitors will give “Restricted’s” comments a read. I won’t endorse every twist and turn in his argument, but I will say that he’s on the mark when he warns against trading our dependence on foreign oil for foreign dependence on the materials essential to next-gen wind and solar energy and electric-car batteries. Real environmentalists can never ignore the geo-politics of energy — and the need to develop domestic sources of new energy “feedstocks.” That’s the only way to be a “realistic idealist” about energy and the environment.

      Agree? Disagree? Tell us which, and tell us why. Thanks for visiting American Resources Policy Network.