The Pebble Project: Economics and Employment

For a link to the full Project Economics Report, click here.

The Pebble Project: Economics and Employment

About the Pebble Partnership:  

The Pebble Limited Partnership (PLP) was created in 2007 by co-owners Northern Dynasty and Anglo American plc to design, permit, construct and operate a modern, long-life mine at Pebble. Both companies have equal representation on the Pebble Partnership Board of Directors.

About this infographic:  

This infographic was designed to summarize the results of a report by IHS Global Insights on the economic and employment impact of the proposed Pebble Mine in Alaska.

8 Responses to “The Pebble Project: Economics and Employment”

  1. PTR says:

    Very impressive. Love the graphics as always.

  2. Jamie Kneen says:

    Doesn’t “economics” usually include both cost and benefit? Also risk and liability? Total tax is a meaningless number without a breakdown of how much goes where, just like operational expenditure and contracting.

    As well, employment is not just total numbers. The numbers are meaningless unless you include regional displacement, training requirements, turnover/retention etc.

    So, not actually very informative. Pretty charts, though.

  3. John says:

    It just a matter of time until the government sees the Hugh benefits of this project and allows it to happen.

  4. zenia Borenin says:

    …after 50 yrs,then what? NO TO PEBBLE MINE!-our land, water, & air will sustain us–it had for thousands of years & will continue to do so, unlike people like you who don’t even reside here, trying to come in, make money, then pick up and move, leaving us with a BIG GIGANTIC TOXIC HOLE IN THE GROUND..Ahhh, no thank you, not in my back yard! Gotta give you credit though, your graphs are impressive, but FISH is more important!!

    • C-Lussier says:

      I have read this same argument over and over from all kinds of anti-mine groups, not just by yourself for the Pebble Mine, but from all kinds fo areas, for all kinds of commodities, and from all jurisdictions.

      The argument makes no sense to me: we, as a society, don’t practice sustenance living. We specialize and we concentrate. This has the effect of having, on a per capita basis, LESS impact than sustenance living. On a per capita basis, we require less farm land, less mined surface area, and less living space, as a species, then we required a hundred thousand years ago. As another positive aspect: we live longer, healthier, are more intertwined as a society; have more access to culture, literature, education, healthcare, electricity and entertainement. Yes, there are costs to pay, and pay we should – companies like this are willing to invest in remediation and reclamation for instance. But insinuating that you’re willing to go back to “stone-aged” living – while surfing the internet – is nonsensical. And suggesting that there is no alternative than either “big toxic hole in the ground” or stone-aged living is really depriving readers of a full deck of possible mitigation measures and really doesn’t help move the discussion along.

  5. j. low says:

    for those who are blanketly opposed to the mining operation, i ask you to please stop purchasing metal products or relying on them in your life completely. the mine wouldn’t be proposed if our species didn’t demand what it produced.

  6. ed says:

    Zenia Borenin there is nothing to fear but fear itself …get a life!!

  7. charni says:

    With stringent environmental regulations mining provides economic strength to the local communities and minerals that provide a better way of life for masses of people. Without mining and technological innovation we would still be living in the stone age – some may want this but the majority of humans are interested in living safe lives in large cities with all the amenities that mineral development provides.

    It would be more accommodating for all concerned if the environmentalists and business were able to co-operate instead of the environmentalists being at the throats of business development at every turn.

    The world is changing – nature will destroy us before we destroy it if we do not protect the environment. At the same time, mineral development and the products from it make human existence so much more pleasant

  8. [...] The economic benefits of the massive copper, gold, and molybdenum Pebble Mine in Bristol Bay, Alaska, seem incontrovertible. According to IHS Global Insight, it will create some 4,700 jobs in Alaska during its construction phase, another 2,900 over a 30-year production cycle, and an additional 2,750 through various subsequent development phases. [...]

  9. [...] construction phase, another 2,900 over a 30-year production cycle, and an additional 2,750 through various subsequent development phases. In the lower 48 states, it will create another 37,000 jobs during the same periods for a total of [...]

Leave a Reply

*

2 Trackbacks

  1. Grinding Down the Threat Posed by Pebble Mine | FNN

    [...] The economic benefits of the massive copper, gold, and molybdenum Pebble Mine in Bristol Bay, Alaska, seem incontrovertible. According to IHS Global Insight, it will create some 4,700 jobs in Alaska during its construction phase, another 2,900 over a 30-year production cycle, and an additional 2,750 through various subsequent development phases. [...]

  2. Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. (USA) (NAK), Rio Tinto plc (ADR) (RIO): Grinding Down the Threat Posed by Pebble Mine - Insider Monkey

    [...] construction phase, another 2,900 over a 30-year production cycle, and an additional 2,750 through various subsequent development phases. In the lower 48 states, it will create another 37,000 jobs during the same periods for a total of [...]

Sorry, you can not to browse this website.

Because you are using an outdated version of MS Internet Explorer. For a better experience using websites, please upgrade to a modern web browser.

Mozilla Firefox Microsoft Internet Explorer Apple Safari Google Chrome