Which US presidential candidate does gold prefer?
Gold loves chaos and should be hitting new highs, especially with inflation coming down and with it, two rate cuts likely before year’s end.
Rosia Montana is a community of 16 villages located in a district known as the Golden Quadrilateral, in the South Apuseni Mountains of Transylvania, Romania.
(Image by AndreDea, 2003)
After spending 15 years trying to build a $2bn gold mine in Romania, Canada-listed Gabriel Resources (TSX:GBU) may have to re-evaluate its plans as the village where it was planning to set up shop has been declared a site of historical interest.
The decision grants Rosia Montana protection from industrial activities, including mining, AFP reports.
“The culture ministry has finally decided to protect our cultural heritage,” history professor Ioan Piso, one of the main opponents of the project was quoted as saying.
Gabriel Resources, which holds an 80% stake in the Rosia Montana Gold Corporation, filed in July a request for international arbitration to obtain compensation from Bucharest over the delays to its flagship project.
For years Romanians have protested against the project, which they deem as an environmentally risky project and an even larger problem of political corruption.
The pollution concerns are tied to the company’s planned use of cyanide to extract 300 tonnes of gold and some silver from the ore.
The company, which has spent over $1.5 billion on the project since it first acquired the concession in the late 1990s, argues the mine would bring hundreds of jobs and boost Romania’s economy. It also says the project would help the rehabilitation of an area polluted from previous mining.
6 Comments
Thomas Henricksen
The Rosia Montana area can be historical and still be a site for active mining – the old town can be protected and the NOW polluted stream can be cleaned up.
Scott
So self defeating. Part of the environmental permit, if I remember correctly, included a commitment to clean up Soviet era pollution. No one seems to have worked out that if there is no mine, there is no clean up and the pollution hangs around.
rayban
Again , you cannot say it enough times . Stay where there is aready mining going on daily . If there is mining going on , the people are smarter , more down to earth , everyday decent people . There are exceptions , not many . These other countries have agendas that are nationalistic or even relatively stupid . Politicians being as they are in many areas , I just buy into the big 10 mining countries and have not had a nationalism or ‘environmental’ issue loss lately .
the other Bob
Soviet pollution is one side of the coin. Soviet corruption is the other. I’ve talked to a few Romanian opponents of this mine and that’s their remaining worry. Where’s the plan to prevent ‘the curse of natural resources’ (i.e., clientelism, corruption, rent-seeking)? How many mining companies even have a Chief Political Officer to deal with these kinds of threats to their investments? Like it or not, companies are going to have get better at assuring communities that they can reduce corruption. Let’s rise to the challenge.
Pete
I find it strange that the Romanians don’t grasp the issue here and what is good for them and their economy. There is responsible mining going on all over world. Living in the dark ages may only end up hurting the hurt them.
Cédric Ballet
good thing; i’m sick of what the industry is doing to our countries. This would have been a immense loss. Nobody should be given the right to destroy our thousands years old beautiful European villages and landscapes. Furthermore, Romania doesn’t need those “hundred” jobs. Growth is already reaching 5%.
Hundreds underpaid jobs against leveling 4 beautiful mountains, a thousands years old village, and poisoning the soil and water for centuries doesn’t look like a good deal to me, in a booming economy