CJ19
WKR
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2018
- Messages
- 552
could be. My point was more along the lines if people are concerned about the environment, stating the reason a mining project should not move forward is because the resource is being smelted somewhere else may not have the effect those environmentalists think. Because if the price of the resources gets high enough, the company just might say...."you know what conservation community....you are right. We will build a smelter next to the boundary waters mine to address your concerns about those materials being smelted somewhere else."
For those in this thread that were deeply concerned about this mine because the material was not remaining here in the United States. Here is your chance to get legislation to keep the material in the United States. I have have not read the legislation nor am I endorsing it or not endorsing it. I am simply passing it along since many people indicated that keeping the material within the US with US based companies was important to them.
Congressman Blake Moore Introduces Legislation to Strengthen Critical Mineral Supply Chains | U.S. Congressman Blake Moore
The Official U.S. Congressional website of Blake Moore of Utah's 1st District
blakemoore.house.gov