Winner of the 2013-2014 Securian Ethics Essay Scholarship Competition

An Ethical Analysis of PolyMets Proposed Mine

Kanad Gupta
Miriam Hadidi
Kevin Hyde
Alexander Radunz
John Rodgers
Farez Siddiqui


MGMT 1005 Corporate Responsibility and Ethics, Section 002
Professor Jeffrey Kaufmann
University of Minnesota
March 26, 2014
Gupta, Hadidi, Hyde, Radunz, Rogers, Siddiqui 2


PolyMet Mining Corporations proposed mine has received a great deal of both
opposition and support. As a result of the growing controversy, the outside directors on
PolyMets board have asked: Is going forward with the proposed mine ethical on the part of the
company?
Based on the analysis outlined below, it is clear that it would be unethical for PolyMet to
move forward with the proposed mine. Considerations must be made for all relevant
stakeholders, including the citizens and industries who would be directly impacted by the mining
operations environmental harm. Overall, the environmental implications dwarf the claims of
economic benefits for this northeastern Minnesota region.
The proposed mine is an operation that would be located in the Duluth Complex of the
Mesabi Iron Range. The area has a rich history of mining activity and the Duluth Complex
currently contains the worlds third-largest accumulation of nickel and the worlds second-
largest accumulation of copper and platinum-group metals (PolyMet Mining 1). Moreover, the
surrounding area is currently suffering from an economic depression. This makes the Duluth
Complex a preferred location for PolyMet because of the potential economic gains. Still, the
possibility of negative environmental consequences poses a major ethical dilemma for the
outside directors of PolyMet.
The situation becomes a complex ethical dilemma because the outside directors of
PolyMet have obligations to shareholders and the corporation, while they also have an obligation
to consider other stakeholders who may be affected by environmental damage. Furthermore, the
operation is projected to bring growth to northeastern Minnesota, a region which is suffering
from an economic depression. Regarding environmental damage control, PolyMet plans to use
the profits generated from the operation to alleviate the significant harm done to the local water.
Gupta, Hadidi, Hyde, Radunz, Rogers, Siddiqui 3

However, it is unclear whether the water treatment plan is a viable solution because it does not
account for storm runoff, flood plains, or water seepage. More importantly, the negative effects
sustained by the environment would likely affect the Boundary Waters and Lake Superior,
thereby damaging the sustainable tourism industry for 500 years even if the water cleanup plan is
in fact successful. Unfortunately, if PolyMet were to declare bankruptcy, the responsibility to
clean up would be placed upon the taxpayers. All of these factors surrounding the operation pose
a major ethical dilemma, which can be broken down into three key conflicts:
I. The first issue is a conflict between short-term and long-term economic efficiency. The
short term benefits of the mine include an estimated $10.3 billion in revenue over twenty years
for PolyMet, which would surely fulfill the financial obligations to the investors and corporation
itself (PolyMet Mining 1). Moreover, the mine would stimulate economic growth in a suffering
area by producing large sums of tax revenue and job opportunities (PolyMet Mining 1).
However, the long-term effects of the operation suggest a much larger economic and
environmental threat than what may have initially been considered. If the mine were to damage
local bodies of water, the tourism and forestry sectors of the northeastern Minnesota economy
could become massive victims of the twenty year mining operation. The tourism and forestry
sectors produce about 21% of the gross regional product, which has been consistent over the past
decade (see Appendix A). In comparison, the mine will remain intact for a twenty year
maximum and is liberally projected to produce a little more than 3% of the gross regional
product per year in revenue (see Appendix C). The economic boom will be short-lived and the
conditions of the surrounding communities could potentially worsen once the surge wears thin
due to the safety hazards of acid mine drainage, sulfuric acid, and toxic metals, in addition to the
decrease in lake home real estate values that follow these hazards.
Gupta, Hadidi, Hyde, Radunz, Rogers, Siddiqui 4

II. The second issue that poses an ethical dilemma is a conflict between economic
efficiency and social norms. Like in most corporations, PolyMet officials intend to pursue
actions that are in the best interests of their own company and investors. Moving forward with
the mine could ensure profitability, as well as potentially bring prosperity to an economically
depressed area. From a utilitarian perspective then, going forward with the mine would be the
most economically efficient decision, at least in the short run. On the other hand, PolyMet must
consider the societal norms and expectations of the residents of the region and how they will
receive the mining operation. There are many opponents to the mine that are concerned with the
legitimate threats that the operation poses to the environment. Opponents of the mine may be
able to make PolyMets operation more difficult by lobbying for stricter guidelines and laws. So,
for purposes of public relations, it is important that PolyMet addresses the social norm of not
harming the environment.
III. The third key issue that poses an ethical dilemma is the conflicting social norms of
the proponents and opponents of the mining operation. With respect to shareholder primacy
theory, PolyMet has obligations to their investors. Since PolyMet is a corporation that receives
financial backing through investors, it is their obligation to pursue the interests of their investors.
It is possible that if PolyMet does not move forward with their proposed mine, they could lose
valuable capital and become less stable as a company. Alternatively, stakeholder theory posits
that PolyMet should consider all who may be impacted by the mining operation, including the
environment and other citizens or industries. Due to this conflict, the outside board of directors
are confronted with an ethical dilemma concerning which social norms are to be considered most
important. To gain a deeper understanding of the matter at hand, a stakeholder analysis was
produced from the perspective of the outside board of directors at PolyMet (see Appendix B).
Gupta, Hadidi, Hyde, Radunz, Rogers, Siddiqui 5

Based on the stakeholder analysis (see Appendix B), PolyMet and its shareholders are
considered the most important and most powerful stakeholders to the outside directors. However,
parties that are opposed to the mine also hold a moderate amount of power to affect this decision,
even if they are not necessarily of very much importance to the outside directors. These parties
include the state government, local community, environmental activists, and the tourism
industry. These parties prioritize the safety and sustainability of the environment, and may be
able to affect the fluidity of PolyMets mining operation by advocating for harsher regulations.
They also have the right to a clean environment, which should not be infringed upon simply in
the name of profit. These rights become a vital part of this stakeholder analysis.
Based on the conflicts and interests outlined above, we must resolve the following
questions in order to explain why going forward with the proposed mine is unethical:
1. What are the environmental implications of the proposed mine and how will they
affect the stakeholders?
With respect to the environment, the mine would likely be a disaster. Similar sulfide
mines all across the world have yielded severe and long lasting contamination in the area around
the mines (see Appendix D). PolyMets proposed mine, however, is an even larger concern than
past mines because the mine and processing facility would be located on the St. Louis River
basin. Legal scholar Maccabee points out that virtually all sulfate releases within the St. Louis
River basin can be considered high-risk since wetlands, floodplains, and lakes are common in the
region (1118). This is particularly dangerous because the basin drains into the St. Louis River,
which is the largest U.S. tributary to Lake Superior (Environmental Protection Agency 1). These
bodies of water are very important for the people of northern Minnesota. The wetlands serve as
systems that can transport and filter water, while providing direct benefits to the environment,
Gupta, Hadidi, Hyde, Radunz, Rogers, Siddiqui 6

including but not limited to: nutrient assimilations, recreation, ground water discharge and
recharge, and habitat for rare plant and animal species (Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources 6).
Acid mine drainage is the most significant problem associated with mining copper and
other heavy metals. When metal sulfide minerals within rock are exposed to water and oxygen
(oxidation), the reaction yields sulfuric acid. The problem is that open pit sulfide mines
[increase oxidation] of metal sulfide minerals and therefore increase the amount of sulfuric
acid that will leach from the rock into the surrounding bodies of water (Maccabee 1116).
PolyMets large scale operation would undoubtedly alter the environment as it would disturb an
area of wetlands of at least 1,522 acres (Maccabee 1117).
The acidic water caused by sulfide mines destroys native wildlife and is even a threat to
human safety. Human exposure to sulfuric acid can cause nausea and headache, while accidental
ingestion may cause major damage and bleeding to a persons digestive tract (Oregon Health
Authority 1-2). Just as frightening, contact with skin and eyes may cause burns and eye
irritation that can lead to blindness (Oregon Health Authority 2). This poses a serious threat to
human safety. It would be unethical to put the health of citizens at risk.
Proponents of the mine may assert that with the correct treatment and care, the
probability of substantial pollution is very low. But, PolyMets plan for damage control does not
account for stormwater runoff and groundwater seepage that represent pathways for the project
to affect water quality in the Partridge River and Embarrass River (Maccabee 1120). This is
crucial because the Partridge and Embarrass Rivers flow into the St. Louis River which
eventually flows into Lake Superior (Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 1). Thus,
Gupta, Hadidi, Hyde, Radunz, Rogers, Siddiqui 7

PolyMet leaves major holes in their damage control plan and will likely affect bodies of water
that are not a part of their post-operational clean-up jurisdiction.
The tourism sector of northeastern Minnesota would also be affected by environmental
damage caused by the mine. Currently, tourism and recreation in northeastern Minnesota itself
generates $1.6 billion per year (Mining Truth 20). Unfortunately, the proposed mine would
pollute waters that are at the heart of this industry. This would make it less safe for tourists to
visit major attractions such as the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness, which is estimated
by the Forest Service to bring in $100 million yearly (Mining Truth 20). Thus, as the
environmental effects of the mine become more evident, the northeastern Minnesota tourism
sector could become less stable due to safety hazards from chemicals in the water. If the tourism
industry can promote a safe environment, it will likely continue to be an annual multi-billion
dollar industry, while the proposed mine operation would only generate $10.3 billion in its
complete twenty year lifespan (PolyMet Mining 1). Overall then, it seems, damaging the
environment becomes a large cost to pay even considering just economics.
2. What are the benefits to the proposed mine, and do these benefits outweigh the
potential environmental consequences?
The UMD Labovitz School of Business and Economics generously projects PolyMets
proposed mine to produce $500 million in economic benefit annually to northeastern Minnesota
(PolyMet Mining 1). The mine is estimated to create 360 stable mining jobs and even 600
indirect jobs, on top of a contribution of $2 million annually for northeastern Minnesota
schools (PolyMet Mining 1). These benefits will continue until the 20 year permit expires.
Given solely these estimates, the mine would reduce the economic depression of northeastern
Minnesota and fulfill the duty of the outside directors to PolyMet and their shareholders. Thus,
Gupta, Hadidi, Hyde, Radunz, Rogers, Siddiqui 8

adopting a utilitarian perspective in the short-term, one may consider moving forward with the
mine as an ethical decision.
However, the long-term outlook following the mine is unacceptable. As outlined above in
question #1, the environmental implications of the operation are immense. Not only would the
mine place the tourism sector at risk, but the local communities following the twenty year period
would likely return to a poor economy. The economic boom would be short-lived and would not
outweigh the long term consequences that the mine imposes on the environment. Therefore, from
a long-term oriented utilitarian perspective, not moving forward with the mine would be the best
option.
3. Do the duties owed to PolyMet and its shareholders outweigh the rights of the
environment and stakeholders affected by the mining operation?
In resolving this question, one should adopt a justice-based approach to ethics. It is
important to consider the duties that are owed to PolyMet and their shareholders, as well as the
rights of the stakeholders who would be affected by the mine. To decide whether going forward
with the mine is ethical, the fairness of the outcomes for each stakeholder should be considered.
As shown by the data, the main short-term beneficiaries of the mining operation are the
local community and PolyMet along with its shareholders, who will all experience economic
growth and gains. However, following the twenty year operation, the local community and
tourism industry seem to only be affected negatively by the externalities of the mine. In fact, in
the long-term, the mine would have an overall adverse effect on the economy of the local
community and tourism sector, the latter of which already contributes more than $784 million
annually in gross sales and supports over 18,000 jobs (Iron Range Resources and Rehabilitation
Board 1). Moreover, the mine would introduce numerous safety hazards for both humans and
Gupta, Hadidi, Hyde, Radunz, Rogers, Siddiqui 9

animals. Based on these factors, it is clear that it would be unfair and unethical to move forward
with the proposed mine.
4. Is water cleanup a feasible solution following the project?
PolyMet has offered to fund and run an ongoing water treatment operation at the site of
the mine in order to offset the pollution caused by the mine. PolyMet has estimated that polluted
water would need to be treated for 200 years at the mine site and 500 years at the offsite
processing plant, at an estimated cost of $3.5 to $6 million per year (Meador 2). Frankly, no
cleanup procedure lasting this long is practical or feasible, especially without risking taxpayer
money. Even so, PolyMets estimate is just that: an estimate. In actuality, there is no way of
knowing for certain the entire duration of the treatment (Dunbar and Kraker 1). The treatment
may actually be a perpetual process, which would be in violation of Minnesota state law (Meador
5-6). This indicates a possible non-disclosure of information by PolyMet to protect the viability
of the project.
It is clear how difficult this decision must be for the directors at PolyMet due to the
implications for both the companys prosperity and the quality of the water in northeastern
Minnesota. When using an ethically structured approach to help determine whether to go through
with the mining operation, it becomes quite salient that the environmental implications of the
decision are too strong for the directors to disregard, and that going forward would be unethical.
Although this is not in the best interests of the shareholders and people involved within the
corporation, this decision will secure the quality of life for people in the region and preserve the
biodiversity of the area for generations to come.


Gupta, Hadidi, Hyde, Radunz, Rogers, Siddiqui 10

APPENDIX A









Source: Labovitz School of Business and Economics. "The Economic Impact of Ferrous and
Non-Ferrous Mining." UMN.edu. University of Minnesota Duluth, Nov. 2012. Web. 25 Mar.
2014.



Gupta, Hadidi, Hyde, Radunz, Rogers, Siddiqui 11


Stakeholders Interests in
the decision
Duties owed to
Stakeholder
Importance to
Decision Maker
(Board of
Directors)
Stakeholder Power
PolyMet
Mining
Corporation
Maximize
returns and
remain stable
Serve in the
best interests of
the corporation
High it is the
directors job to seek
success for the firm
High The reputations of
directors are heavily influenced
by the corporations success
Shareholders
of PolyMet
Maximizing
the value of the
shares of the
PolyMet
Mining
Corporation
Serve in the
best interests of
the shareholders
such as
maximizing the
value of shares
High - the directors
are appointed to
serve in the best
interests of the
shareholders
High - Shareholders influence
the amount of capital available
for PolyMet and can influence
the directors' role
Local
Community
Improve and
stabilize
economy;
adequate
resources for
water
Be respectful of
the environment
and maintain
safe standards
for the mine
Medium - PolyMet's
publicity is
dependent on the
effects on the local
community
Medium - The welfare of the
community will affect the
reputation of PolyMet. Also,
they have a powerful public
voice on the matter.
Tourism
Industry
(environment)
Maximize
returns and
keep environ-
ment in a stable
state that
allows tourism
to thrive
Be respectful of
the environment
in the pursuit of
profit
Low - relative to the
corporation or
shareholders of
PolyMet, the
tourism industry is
of little concern to
the directors
Low - the industry is mostly
incapable of physically rallying
to prevent the operation,
especially when compared with
the government or shareholders
Environmental
Activists
Ensure
protection of
the
environment
Although the
directors have
an obligation to
respect the
environment,
they do not owe
anything to the
activists
themselves
Low - although the
activists may
campaign and
address key issues,
the directors have
little regard for
many of the activists
since some are
outsiders
Medium - Environmental
activists can advocate for
harsher regulations or even
advocate against the mine
altogether and have a powerful
voice capable of change
MN State
Government
Safe environ-
ment, econ-
omic growth,
citizens well-
being
Adhere to
regulations
Medium - the
government can
strongly affect the
operation
High - the government can
implement regulations that can
either make the operation more
difficult or even shut it down
Potential
Employees of
the mine (300-
360)
Creation and
upholding of
stable mining
jobs
They do not
owe the
creation of a job
to anyone
Low - the job of the
directors is to serve
the interests of the
company, not
employees
Low - if the decision results in
them not having mining jobs,
they will for the most part just
look for other opportunities
APPENDIX B:
STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS
*Outside directors of PolyMet are the analyst/decision maker
Gupta, Hadidi, Hyde, Radunz, Rogers, Siddiqui 12

Stakeholders Rights that belong to
Stakeholder
Importance of the
decision to the
stakeholder
Anticipated
Reaction (mine)
Anticipated
Reaction (don't
mine)
PolyMet Mining
Corporation
PolyMet has the right
to directors that serve
in the best interests of
their company
High - This mining
operation would
contribute a lot to
their financial
success
PolyMet will
experience positive
growth
PolyMet will be
unhappy because of
their failure to attain
a company goal. It is
likely they will look
for alternative mining
projects
Shareholders of
PolyMet
PolyMet has the right
to the shareholders
that serve in their best
interests because the
shareholders
appointed them
High - This mining
operation
contributes a lot to
the growth in value
of shares
The shareholders
will reap the
rewards of the
growing company
and may choose to
invest more
Shareholders will
take losses. It is
likely that some will
sell their shares,
causing PolyMet to
lose capital
Local
Community
The expectation is
that PolyMet will
uphold the well-being
economically and
environmentally of
the community
High - the future of
the community's
economy and water
is highly dependent
on the outcome of
the decision
They will
experience
economic growth,
but will face long
term
environmental
consequences
Will be unhappy due
to continuation of the
economic depression
but will be free of the
risk of harmed water
and forests
Tourism
Industry
(environment)
The tourism industry
expects the directors
to adhere to the social
norms and regulations
regarding the
environment
High - The
environmental
implications of the
operation may have
a massive effect on
outdoor tourism
The long term
impact of the
operation on the
water will
drastically hurt
tourism & forestry
Will be happy
because the
environment will
face less risk of
pollution
Environmental
Activists
The activists expects
the directors to adhere
to the social norms
and regulations
regarding
environmental impact
High - the
environmental
implications of this
sulfide mining
operation are
massive
Activists will
likely advocate for
harsher regulations
to make PolyMet's
activities difficult
Will be happy
because the
environment will
face less risk of
pollution
MN State
Government
The MN State
Government has the
right to enforce
regulations and laws
High - this decision
directly affects the
welfare of MN
citizens
The MN State
Government will
enforce regula-
tions and benefit
from tax revenues
Will enjoy security
of safe citizens with
no environmental
damage and less risk
of increasing taxes
Potential
Employees of
the mine (300-
360)
There is an
expectation that the
firm will hire the
employees as needed
Medium - potential
employees are
likely prepared to
look for less
appealing job
opportunities
Will enjoy stable
mining jobs for the
length of the 20
year operation
They will likely
search for
employment
elsewhere but will be
unhappy for the loss
of opportunity
Gupta, Hadidi, Hyde, Radunz, Rogers, Siddiqui 13

APPENDIX C:
THE ESTIMATED CONTRIBUTION
OF THE PROPOSED MINE TO
THE GROSS REGIONAL PRODUCT

PolyMets Estimated Economic Benefit $515 million
Gross Regional Product of Northeastern MN in
2010
$14.9 billion
Percent Estimated Contribution of the
Proposed Mine to the Gross Regional Product
Relative to the Gross Regional Product of
Northeastern MN in 2010
3.5%

Sources:

Labovitz School of Business and Economics. "The Economic Impact of Ferrous and Non-
Ferrous Mining." UMN.edu. University of Minnesota Duluth, Nov. 2012. Web. 25 Mar. 2014.

PolyMet Mining. "Investing in Our Region and State." PolyMet Mining. PolyMet Mining, n.d.
Web. 24 Mar. 2014.


Gupta, Hadidi, Hyde, Radunz, Rogers, Siddiqui 14






Sadbury Mining and
Smelting Region of Canada
Mine in Orijrvi, Finland Britannia Mine in British
Columbia, Canada
The mines in this region
have caused large areas
of forest desolation due
to sulfur dioxide
fumigations over the past
80 years.
Even soils within 2-3 km
were many more times
acidic than untouched
soils.
Heavy metals are
persistent in soils, and
the ecological
consequences to date
have perhaps only been
masked around Sudbury
by the sulfur dioxide
damage, and the
particular importance
attached to it in the
past.

Source: Hutchinson, T.C.,
and L.M. Whitby. Heavy-
metal Pollution in the
Sudbury Mining and
Smelting Region of Canada,
I. Soil and Vegetation
Contamination by Nickel,
Copper, and Other Metals.
Environmental Conservation
1.2 (1974): 123-132.
MNCAT Article Discovery.
Web. 25 Mar. 2014.
The Cu (Pb, Zn) mine of
Orijrvi (17571956) was the
first mining operation in Finland
where flotation techniques (1911
1955) were used to enrich ore.
Large quantities of tailings were
produced.
The nearby lake water still has
elevated heavy metal
concentrations. It has low
productivity, and the planktic
diatom community is still not
developed. The study
demonstrates that unremediated
mining areas form a major risk to
the environment. The damage to
aquatic ecosystems can remain
severe for decades after the
mining activities have ceased.
Source: Salonen, Veli-Pekka,
Tuovinen, Nanna, and Samu Valpola.
History of Mine Drainage Impact on
Lake Orijrvi Algal Communities,
SW Finland. Journal of
Paleolimnology 35.2 (2006): 289-
303. MNCAT Article Discovery.
Web. 25 Mar. 2014.

Britannia copper
mine operated from
1927 to 1974.
To this day, millions
of liters of contami-
nated water still flow
from the mine into
the ocean
In the area, there has
been a disappearance
of fish and shellfish.
It was also reported
in 1997 that the only
sign of life in
Britannia Creek is
some algae on rocks.
Rainwater and
snowmelt pour into
the mine, causing
acid mine drainage
that leaches metals
and acidic water out
of nearly 160 km of
tunnels.
Estimated costs for
cleanup greater than
$10 million.

Source: "Acid Mine
Drainage: Mining and
Water Pollution
Issues." MiningWatch.or
g. Environmental Mining
Council of British
Columbia, 2000. Web. 25
Mar. 2014.
APPENDIX D:
THE EFFECTS OF PAST
SULFIDE MINES
Gupta, Hadidi, Hyde, Radunz, Rogers, Siddiqui 15

Works Cited
Dunbar, Elizabeth, and Dan Kraker. "Water Treatment a Central Question in PolyMet's
Environmental Study." MPR News. Minnesota Public Radio, 5 Dec. 2013. Web. 25 Mar.
2014.
Environmental Mining Council of British Columbia. "Acid Mine Drainage: Mining and Water
Pollution Issues." MiningWatch.org. Environmental Mining Council of British Columbia,
2000. Web. 25 Mar. 2014.
Environmental Protection Agency. "St. Louis River & Bay Area of Concern." EPA.
Environmental Protection Agency, 20 June 2013. Web. 25 Mar. 2014.
Hutchinson, T.C., and L.M. Whitby. Heavy-metal Pollution in the Sudbury Mining and
Smelting Region of Canada, I. Soil and Vegetation Contamination by Nickel, Copper,
and Other Metals. Environmental Conservation 1.2 (1974): 123-132. MNCAT Article
Discovery. Web. 25 Mar. 2014.
Iron Range Resources and Rehabilitation Board. "Northeastern Minnesota Jobs, Businesses,
Economy Boosted by Impact of Tourism Industry." Iron Range Resources and
Rehabilitation Board. Iron Range Resources and Rehabilitation Board, 6 May 2011.
Web. 25 Mar. 2014.
Labovitz School of Business and Economics. "The Economic Impact of Ferrous and Non-
Ferrous Mining." UMN.edu. University of Minnesota Duluth, Nov. 2012. Web. 25 Mar.
2014.
Maccabee, Paula Goodman. Mercury, Mining in Minnesota, and Clean Water Act Protection: A
Representative Analysis Based on the Proposed Polymet Northmet Project. William
Mitchell Law Review 36.1 (2010): 1110-1145. MNCAT Article Discovery. Web. 25 Mar.
Gupta, Hadidi, Hyde, Radunz, Rogers, Siddiqui 16

2014.
Meador, Ron. "Review of PolyMet Mining Project Finds Treatment, and Costs, Lasting
Centuries." MINNPOST. MinnPost, 10 Dec. 2013. Web. 24 Mar. 2014.
Mining Truth. "Frequently Asked Questions about Sulfide Mining in Minnesota." Mining Truth.
Mining Truth, May 2012. Web. 25 Mar. 2014.
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. "Minnesota's Water Supply: Natural Conditions
and Human Impacts." Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Minnesota
Department of Natural Resources, Sept. 2000. Web. 25 Mar. 2014.
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. "Northmet Mining Project and Land Exchange
Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement: Water Quality." Minnesota
Department of Natural Resources. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, 6 Dec.
2013. Web. 25 Mar. 2014.
Oregon Health Authority. "Fact Sheet for Sulfuric Acid." Oregon.gov. Oregon Health Authority,
Sept. 2011. Web. 25 Mar. 2014.
PolyMet Mining. "Investing in Our Region and State." PolyMet Mining. PolyMet Mining, n.d.
Web. 24 Mar. 2014.
PolyMet Mining. "Doing Things Right with a Modern, Safe Mine." PolyMet Mining. PolyMet
Mining, n.d. Web. 24 Mar. 2014.
Salonen, Veli-Pekka, Tuovinen, Nanna, and Samu Valpola. History of Mine Drainage Impact
on Lake Orijrvi Algal Communities, SW Finland. Journal of Paleolimnology 35.2
(2006): 289-303. MNCAT Article Discovery. Web. 25 Mar. 2014.