To: Members of the Joint Committee on Environment and Natural Resources
From: David von Seggern (vonseg1@sbcglobal.net)
Date: April 13, 2023
Re: Testimony in Support of:
L.D. 1508; Act to Ensure a Strategic Approach to Maine's Energy Transition by Imposing a Moratorium on Lithium Mining;
L.D. 1495: Resolve, Establishing the Commission to Study the Role of Critical Minerals as a Resource in the State; and
Testimony in Opposition of:
L.D. 1476; An Act to Amend the Definition of "Metallic Mineral" in the Maine Metallic Mineral Mining Act;
L.D. 1433; An Act to Exclude Pegmatites from the Definition of "Metallic Mineral"; and
Testimony Neither for Nor Against:
L.D. 1363; An Act to Support Extraction of Common Minerals by Amending the Maine Metallic Mineral Mining Act
Senator Brenner, Representative Gramlich, and the members of the Joint Committee on Environment and Natural Resources,
My name is David von Seggern, and I am testifying today on behalf of Sierra Club Maine, representing over 22,000 supporters and members statewide. Founded in 1892, Sierra Club is one of our nation’s oldest and largest environmental organizations. We work diligently to amplify the power of our 3.8 million members nation-wide as we work towards combating climate change and promoting a just and sustainable economy. To that end, we urge an “ought to pass” report on LD 1508 and LD 1495, and “ought not to pass” on LD 1476 and LD 1433. Sierra Club Maine is not taking a position on the remainder of the bills being heard today at this time.
I moved to Maine from Nevada two years ago. Before beginning my work with the Energy Team at the Sierra Club Maine Chapter, I volunteered with the Nevada Chapter and co-authored Sierra Club policy regarding Guidance on Lithium Mining and Extraction. Coming from a mining state, I am familiar with the mining operations, laws, and regulations.
We do not need to rush this process. Despite the urgency of the climate crisis and the need for lithium, other more readily available opportunities exist out of state; and our resources in Maine and our mining laws must be thoroughly considered. In reviewing all the mining legislation presented today, we encourage the committee to take into account the following:
- The lithium available in Newry is not as readily available or as vast as other lithium deposits elsewhere in the United States;
- Technology to separate lithium from the Spodumene deposits is currently chemically intensive and other technology is likely to become available in coming years such as Direct Brine Extraction in the West;
- Lithium supply is currently meeting or exceeding demand globally, and the market for recycling lithium is growing, further limiting the need for an immediate additional supply of lithium
Maine’s mining laws, as encoded in MRS (38 490-LL to 490-TT), are perhaps the most protective in the nation. We urge that the legislature exercise utmost caution in walking back any of this statutory code or making targeted exceptions as now proposed for mining lithium. Current law protects our valuable natural resources, especially our clean waters. We therefore oppose L.D. 1476 and LD 1433 all of which attempt to change current law regarding lithium, and other metallic minerals.
We support LD 1508 and any other amendments aimed to clarify that current law does indeed apply to lithium, an element accurately described as a metal. We support L.D. 1495 to establish a commission which would provide the information needed to carefully amend, or not to amend, the state’s mining laws in regard to critical minerals.
In the case of mining lithium from pegmatite deposits, we characterize that as open-pit mining rather than quarrying. This type of lithium mining may soon be shown to involve unnecessary environmental risk in the rush to produce domestic lithium while also becoming economically uncompetitive. That is because the lithium mining industry is enthusiastically and diligently pursuing a fairly benign method called Direct Brine Extraction (DBE) across the western states of Utah, Nevada, and California. If proven successful, and we believe it will be soon, DBE will obviate the need to create open-pit mining sites to extract lithium, as well as make them economically uncompetitive.
`
In regard to LD1363, we support parts of this bill, as amended, including the definition language, but have reservations about language in other parts. Section 4 proposes amending the MRS in regard to processing facilities. However, nothing is stated about the eventual disposition of the waste rock that is associated with extraction of any mineral from mined material. This is of concern because eventually the waste will become too large to shelter and must be deposited on open ground or back in the open pit; precipitation will definitely commingle with the waste then. As currently written, we are concerned that it is vague and inadequate and creates a long term problem.
Again in regard to LD 1363, Section 5 proposes a change in MRS such that open-pit mining will be allowed in circumstances which are somewhat arbitrary. Assuming that regulations can be written to define those circumstances more explicitly, we foresee some problems. Firstly, does the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) have the resources to tackle this important and tedious task? Secondly, will the published regulations be an endless source of contention between DEP and mining interests seeking permits? As current law stands, there is a very unmistakable line between what is permissible and what is not, leaving contention as unlikely. Thirdly, how will enforcement of such regulations proceed without additional funding of the DEP?
I wish to add that the state needs to begin formulating a strategy on the recycling of lithium batteries. This is as important as the consideration of whether lithium, and other critical minerals, can be mined in Maine. An amendment to one or more of these bills should direct the Department of Environmental Protection to report on how to “close the loop” on lithium and other battery materials.
Again, we encourage the committee to vote “ought to pass” on LD 1508 and LD 1495, and “ought not to pass” on LD 1476 and LD 1433. Thank you for your time and consideration. I and Sierra Club Maine are available to answer questions at the public hearing or ahead of the work sessions for these various bills.
Respectfully,
David von Seggern
Energy Team, Sierra Club Maine