Op-Ed: We don’t need to sacrifice the Wasatch to meet our need for gravel
Parley’s Canyon photo from County Lemonade on Flickr
UPHE member, Malin Moench, has been a strong and thoroughly educated voice of reason in the battle against a proposed mine for Parley’s Canyon. In his latest op-ed published in the Deseret News, Malin outlines the history of the controversial project and goes into detail of why it isn’t needed, even from a materials standpoint.
His full op-ed:
Last spring, gravel miners promoted legislation (HB 502) that would have barred local governments from regulating gravel pits if they were located at least 1,000 feet from residential neighborhoods and 500 feet from highways and railways. The bill’s main proponent and beneficiary was Granite Construction, a California-based supplier of “industrial aggregates” (sand and gravel).
Granite insists on digging a vast (634-acre) open-pit limestone mine in the heart of the Wasatch, removing essentially all of the northeast flank of Grandview Peak that overlooks I-80 in Parley’s Canyon and carving pit walls so steep (70%) that they can never be revegetated. In the next legislative session, the Legislature is expected to hear proposals for regulatory immunity for all gravel mines. That would green light gravel mining on another 1,300 privately held acres abutting I-80 as it descends into the valley. Developing all of these eligible gravel mines would disfigure mountains and canyons on both the east (Granite) and west sides (Kennecott) of Salt Lake Valley.
Worried that Granite’s mine would harm their air quality, watershed and the visual integrity of the vital Parley’s corridor, Salt Lake City and County have tried to use their planning and zoning tools to prevent it. To block their efforts, Granite urged adoption of HB 502. Otherwise, Granite warned, Utah’s economy would face a crippling shortage of industrial aggregates.
The legislature gave Granite half a loaf. It revised HB 502 to require only a study of the future demand and supply of aggregates in Utah’s urban counties. It gave these tasks to the historically pro-mining Division of Oil, Gas and Mining (DOGM) along with an extremely short November deadline. The study is meant to shape future gravel industry legislation.
According to the US Geological Survey, there are numerous ways to deal with local shortages of virgin limestone other than expanding local mining. One is to replace limestone with demolition concrete, asphalt rubble, volcanic ash or power plant fly ash to make cement, mix concrete and build roadbeds. It notes that these alternatives to limestone usually cost less and add desirable plasticity, durability or compression strength to the end product. All are found in abundance in Utah, where they are already in successful production.
The list of commercially viable alternatives to virgin limestone is growing dramatically. Over the last decade, the world’s major cement makers have come under intense pressure to reduce their carbon footprint. Making cement from virgin limestone emits prodigious amounts of CO2, so carbon reduction research pursues processes that avoid virgin limestone.
While demand for cement and concrete in Utah is likely to track population growth, the impending revolution in how cement and concrete are made strongly implies that future demand for virgin limestone to make those materials will actually decline. Currently, most of the cement used to make Utah’s concrete is produced by Holcim and CRH. These international corporations recently acquired technologies that make low-carbon cement and aggregate without the need for virgin limestone, and both have committed to scale them up globally. Likewise, Eco-Material Technologies, headquartered in West Jordan, Utah, has developed processes that can replace from 60% to 100% of the limestone needed to produce cement with fly ash waste from power plants. Terra CO2 Technology just received funding to build a plant in Magna that will replace up to 50% of the limestone needed to make conventional cement with the almost infinite supply of tailings from the nearby Kennecott mine.
These low-carbon, low-limestone cement and concrete production technologies are the wave of the future. DOGM’s forecast of the demand for virgin limestone to supply Utah’s cement and concrete markets won’t be valid unless it fully accounts for the adoption of such breakthrough technologies.
DOGM’s study of Utah’s sand and gravel market is due out this month. Some stakeholders hope it will forecast a shortage in Utah’s urban counties severe enough to justify wresting planning and zoning authority away from local governments. However, it won’t be a valid basis for making this drastic policy choice if it ignores the rapidly emerging alternatives to using virgin limestone to make cement and concrete. The DOGM study must be objective, balanced and complete. The fate of our irreplaceable Wasatch Mountains hangs in the balance.