We are sitting at the kitchen table of a quiet adobe house in the desert just above the town of Andalgalá in remote Catamarca, north-western Argentina. Seventy kilometres to the west, Alumbrera mine is in full operation, digging into the ground 24 hours a day.
Alumbrera, from the Spanish ‘alumbrar’ – to illuminate – was sold to the people on the promise of bringing light to the little village. There would be modernisation: new hospitals, schools, jobs and even a farfetched town-wide WiFi network. In one man’s words the people were promised “paradise”. But it never came.
Across the table from me is Marcos Pastrana, a lifelong resident of Andalgalá and a member of the United Citizen’s Assemblies (UAC), a country-wide activist organisation, is one of the many villagers who are fighting the mine. He tells me the jobs were less than promised; instead of a new hospital there’s been one new ambulance; and the ground water in the traditionally farming based community is being used and contaminated.
How has the mine really affected the village? There are three new brothels and 12 new pharmacies now, the results of more money in the town and – the residents say – poison in the air.
The Mine
At the tourist office in Andalgalá you will find the walls covered in faded posters promoting tours of the old, hand-dug tunnel mines that once sought pink rhodochrosite and other semi-precious stones. But Alumbrera is different – it’s an open pit mine. A relatively new development, open pit mining was started some hundred years ago in the US and has been described as “mass destructive technology”.
A response to declining ore qualities, open pit techniques allow for extraction of very low ore grades. Because the metal to rock ratio is so high, open pit techniques produce huge amounts of waste – 20 tonnes of rock for every gold ring. They extract minerals at these low ratios by using extremely harsh chemicals – cyanide in the case of gold and sulphuric acid in the case of copper. The unwanted mud slurry, now contaminated, is discarded in a “tailings pond”, which will go on leaching chemicals into the ground for hundreds of thousands of years.
Alumbrera is a joint operation between owner Xstrata, Canadian shareholders Goldcorp and Northern Orion Resources, and Argentine state-run company Mineral Deposits of the Waters of Dionysius (YMAD). It is the oldest and largest open-pit mine in Argentina and one of the most profitable in the world. It consumes 87% of the electricity in the province of Catamarca, and uses 60 to 100m litres of water every day. In the pit, 314,000 tonnes of rock are extracted daily, throwing lime and sulphite dust into the air, which residents say has affected air quality over the last ten years.
Alumbrera consists of more than just the pit. ‘Bajo Alumbrera’, as it is called in its entirety, is a string of operations stretching across five river basins for nearly 1000km.
At the mine site, copper and gold are chemically leached from the ore and mixed with water into mud slurry. This is then sent 216km via an aging pipeline to San Miguel de Tucumán. In Tucumán the slurry undergoes a drying process, excess water is dumped into a nearby canal, and a mineral-rock concentrate is transported on Alumbrera’s private trains to a port near Rosario, where it is shipped overseas for separation and smelting.
Environmental Contamination
Alumbrera’s high water use has notable effects – it is causing desertification. Farmers in the already arid zone are finding it harder and harder to raise their crops. In 2007, a farmer from nearby Santa María, told La Nación: “For the last five years we’ve seen nothing of the water that we used to use from the Santa María River… In the best of times, these lands could grow peppers, tomatoes, corn and alfalfa, but now; look what it’s like. Our family is leaving because we can’t work… we have the tools to work, but not the water.”
The pipeline is aging and the danger of ruptures and leakages is increasing. Activist Urbano Cardozo, a member of the UAC, informed me that he had documented five breakages in the 20km he had surveyed, and had found several old and worn pipe junctions stuffed with rags to prevent leaks.
At the factory in Tucumán, the effluent of the drying process – a toxic mix of chemicals and water – is dumped directly into the DP2 canal. This feeds into the Sali-Dulce river system, a source of water for the area’s farmer. Following a series of fish die-offs from 2001-4 it is now totally devoid of life.
Measurements made by Bajo Alumbrera earlier this year, found that the canal contained arsenic and copper concentrations some 20,000 times in excess of the law, 10,000 for mercury, 5,000 for cadmium, 1000 for selenium, and a staggering 60,000 times for lead. Sulphates, molybdenum, manganese, iron, boron, cyanide and the radioactive element strontium have also been found in excess of legal limits.
In children, in utero exposure to these chemicals can cause cognitive setbacks, problems learning language, problems with memory retention, nervous damage, blood and brain disease and deformities. In adults, these toxins have been linked to infertility, bone fracture, genetic damage, deformed nails, liver dysfunction, gout and cancer.
The 930-hectare tailings pond is also an ongoing source of pollution. Xstrata’s remediation plan includes a “cap” – they will scrape soil material from the surrounding area to cover the toxic lake. But due to agreements signed in 1996 between Alumbrera and the government, the mine is not legally required to do any remediation. This is left at the hands of local authorities, which many believe means it won’t get done.
Even if clean up does occur, “capping” methods are untested over the extremely long time periods involved, and it is thought that caps will eventually breakdown and begin releasing toxins, essentially forever.
International Interests
The bills that govern mining in Argentina were enacted by neo-liberal president Carlos Menem in the mid 90s, and set up a number of mining-friendly tax and fiscal policies, as well as industry-specific environmental regulations.
The environmental regulations are toothless. They set maximum pollution levels and require mining companies to post environmental impact reports every six months and upon termination of operations. But every six months, Alumbrera reports pollution far in excess of legal limits and the laws give government little or no recourse change the situation. In the words of one mining lawyer who had worked for years in the sector, government can do no more than “suggest, make comments, or persuade” mining companies to change their environmental policies.
The fiscal regulations are designed to attract international mining investment. They consist of several juicy tax policies, offload closure responsibility on the Argentine state and prevent government from modifying its fiscal relationship with a mine for some 30 years after it starts (more than the average life span of these mines).
The implementation of these laws, which had to be approved separately by each province, was paid for by a World Bank programme called ‘PASMA’. The director of which went on to work as the chief geologist for UrAmerica, a UK based uranium exploration company owns 270,000 hectares in Chubut and Salta provinces. The project was part of an extensive World Bank programme designed to normalise world mining regulations, and according to David Modersbach, a researcher at the University of Rosario, these law packages have been offloaded on 117 countries worldwide.
Breaking the Law
By all standards but profitability, Alumbrera is a failure and is being investigated for environmental crimes, contraband and corruption. For the pollution of the DP2 canal, Bajo Alumbrera vice-president Julián Rooney is being prosecuted for “crimes against the environment”. He faces jail time.
This is the first such ruling against a mining company in the history of Latin America. Initiated in 1998 by Juan González, Tucumán’s then-secretary of environment, the case was put on hold until it was recently restarted by the province’s district attorney, Antonio Gustavo Gómez.
The ruling has been appealed, and will be contested in appellate and possibly Supreme Court. Called as key witnesses for their complicity in the mine’s operations are many high-ranking government officials including Secretary of Mining Jorge Mayoral. Testament to the powerful wall of interests that Gómez is up against, he has to deal with constant harassment. “They tried to bribe me,” he says, “My car was vandalised. They call my phone [and make threats]. They killed my dog. I’ve had to change my daughter’s school.”
In Rosario, Alumbrera is under scrutiny for smuggling gold. In that city, prosecutors have ordered Bajo Alumbrera directors Carlos Silvani (the ex-head of Argentina’s federal tax body) and Gustavo Parino (a former customs administrator) to declare gold, uranium and thorium that they had been exporting duty-free, hidden in the mineral concentrate.
In 2005 Alejandro Sangenis, an ex-federal legislator and current minister of health for Tucumán, said that his province was being used as “a route for massive smuggling of strategic minerals”. And two independent sources in Andalgalá confirmed to me that they had overheard mine managers saying they were still not paying for the gold.
Fighting for Hearts and Minds
This mine does a number of things to maintain a positive public image, most notably disbursing money to government, universities and the church. Nominally these activities are simple attempts to remediate for environmental damage and ingratiate themselves with the community. But critics claim money from mining is tainting the objectivity of these important institutions charged with regulating and studying their large pocketed benefactor.
Universities may have been affected. Through its state partner YMAD, Alumbrera distributed $86m in donations to Argentine universities during 2008 and 2009. This July, the Environmental Defence Foundation (FUNAM), a Córdoba based NGO, issued a warning that these donations could be threatening the independence of study results across the country.
Raúl Montenegro of FUNAM says that the funding source “undercuts the independence of the universities when they are called on to present technical reports”. His faculty declined its share of the funds, urging the university to do so as well. The National University of Patagonia also rejected the funds.
There is also the very real possibility that funding donations from the mine are affecting autonomy of hospitals in the area. Alumbrera recently funded the construction of a new floor at the Tucumán children’s hospital. “Isn’t it curious,” Gómez pointed out, “that this hospital is charged with studying the same business’s health effects?”
Gómez would be the first to tell you that these ties are difficult to trace, as it is more a case of critical studies not being done than researchers deliberately skewing results. But there is some evidence. According to statistics from the paediatric hospital in Andalgalá, between when the mine started in 1998 and 2002, the number of respiratory diseases in children increased by a staggering 63%. In 2002, the hospital stopped publishing such statistics. A year later, in a community supplement published by Alumbrera, director of the hospital Mario Kuibida described contact between the mine and the hospital as “permanent”.
And in La Rioja, the Department of Education has printed a book called ‘The Young Miner’ which aims to teach children the benefits of big mining. Teacher Gaby Romero was shocked on hearing this. “These companies come here to destroy our mountain, our water supply, our food security and our right to protest. They put us under surveillance, hire civilians to intimidate us and now they want to try and indoctrinate our children?” she said.
Andalgalá Under the Mine
And maybe the indoctrination is working – in Andalgalá the people don’t know what to believe. The mine sits 70km from the village and no one is allowed to see it (my repeated visit requests were denied). Floating out there in the desert, hidden in its well-managed public image, it seems more an idea than a massive physical reality. And as an idea, it becomes anything anyone wants it to.
For the activists, it is pure evil. Urbano Cardozo led me around spinning wild tales of the iniquity and intrigue. According to him, the mine had gone door to door paying residents $50 each for their support. They had set off an explosion and blamed it on him. And every week they smuggle out lumps of solid gold in the staff transport plane. These charges were met with confusion and denial when I asked anyone else in the town.
For the mine’s employees, it’s a source of work, and they will defend it anyway that they can. One pointed out that there is a vineyard near the mine. The wine from there, he said, is shipped to France and Spain. If those countries tested the wine and found toxins in it, then he would believe the stories about contamination. This is proof to him. The rest of the people don’t take sides. They shrug their shoulders. “Some like the mine; some don’t,” they say. In the shadow of Alumbrera, no one knows anything.
Nonetheless, the activists are fighting for something real, a fact I had to remind myself of in the hazy world of Andalgalá. They block roads, and Alumbrera’s trains; and they hold protests. In the town of Esquel in Chubut province, residents pushed for a community plebiscite which successfully outlawed open-pit mining by a vote of 86%.
When I find a miner and talk to him – he asked that his name not be used – he tells me he has a good job. The mine has paid for his training. He has seven kids, and he’ll be able to send them to school now. Without the mine, he would have nothing. But he was visibly uncomfortable talking to me, and as we spoke I noticed that he was slowly backing away and kept repeating the words “it’s my source of work”.
As he inched away, I thought of Marcos Pastrana in the cool adobe house on the hill. “I don’t need the mine,” Pastrana said. “And I don’t need the energy from the mine.” And as the miner got smaller and smaller in my field of vision, until he backed unto a fence and stood there worrying his fingers in the mesh, I thought of the Pastrana saying: “We’re not fighting against the mine, we’re fighting for life.”
This is the situation of mining in Argentina now – a few activists fighting for a better world and a few workers living in fear while a largely uneducated populace goes about immersed in misinformation and a foreign company contaminates their air and water and ships their wealth overseas. Until the Argentine state sets up proper environmental regulations, disentangles itself from mining interests, provides infrastructure funding so that public institutions don’t have to rely on private donations and tries in earnest to deal with the problem of corruption, this situation seems unlikely to change.

In Argentina, the Congressman Eduardo Pastoriza, denounced the plundering and pollution since 1994.
See http://www.eduardopastoriza.com.ar
Sir:
Regarding your correspondent’s article “in the Shadow of a Mine” Pollution, Corruption and Crime”, it is difficult to know where to start. The article is hardly a good example of objective journalism since obviously the author comes to the subject with an extreme point of view.
Let’s just start with a couple of comments:
1. You focus your comments on one person in Andalgala (actually not located near the mine). Naturally the residents of Belem and Londres, being closer, will have a different point of view regarding the enormous contribution that Alumbrera has made to the immediate region and indeed Catamarca province in general (not to mention the entire country).
2. It would be curious to know how Mr Pastrana can prove that the water in Anadalgala has been “contaminated” by the mine which is located completely on the other side of the mountains, ie nowhere near Andalagala’s watershed.
3. Your description of the mine process is completely erroneous (on purpose?); the mine does not “completely leach the ore from the rock and mix with a slurry…etc, etc”. In fact the copper-gold mineralization is recovered by flotation (a standard industry practice in Chile, Canada, Australia, etc), a close-circuit process that produces a concentrate that is then slurried via pipeline to Tucuman.
4. It is a gross mis-representation to say that “Bajo Alumbrera is actually a string of operations stretching over five river basins for 1,000 kms”; that is just not true. In fact the “footprint” of the mine occupies a restricted area that you would be difficult to identify with a Google fly-over.
5. It is also a stretch of your readers’ imaginations to blame what is generally regarded as a drought in many parts of Argentina to Alumbrera’s water usage. Do you have any idea how many litres of water it takes to produce a litre of red wine that you no doubt enjoy from time to time? Well, it take 1,000 litres of water to produce a litre of red wine (source The Economist, among others). I would also suggest that the consumption of water to produce the hunderds of square kilometres of olives that you see in the northwestern provinces is also a phenomenal number.
6. Regarding the disastrous impacts of seleneium, etc, on the local population, that there are regular leaks from the slurry pipeline, etc, etc, I suggest that you check with the environmentals authorities in Catamarca to clear up those falsehoods. All mining companies work within the strict environmenatl laws of the country wherever they operate (and to the standards of the World Bank Equator Principles).
7. Can you also explain to your readers where specifically the Alumbrera operation can be related to incidences of utero diseases, cancer, bone fracture, etc, etc, again a series of gross insinuations not based on any kind of objective observation.
8. Under your section “Breaking the Law” you are obviously not aware that the charges (fabricated no doubt) against Julian Rooney have been thrown out of the courts.
9. Also can you really be serious when you imply that the company has been accused of smuggling gold out of Rosario?
10. You postulate that Alumbrera has been a “complete failure”. Quite the contrrary, it has been a massively positive impact on the communities around the mine itself (not Andalgala maybe because it is much further away), on the province, and indeed on the country as a whole; even though you can’t bring yourself to admit it, there are very positive aspects to mining (just ask the Chileans), and Alumbrera is a good example.
11. Your insinuations regarding corruption and people being paid off are simply just examples of gutter press. No international company (mining or otherwise) engages in the type of behaviour you are implying.
12. The fact is that open-minded people, for example in San Juan, are seeing and will continue to see enormous benefits from mine development. The fact that you (and others) have been denied access to Alumbrera speaks for itself; your newspaper is anything but objective. However, why don’t you go to an equivalent mine in Chile and see for yourself how a modern mine operates within all the rules and laws of the country and to the benefit of the local regions and country.
I will stop at comment #12.
In short, a disgraceful article. Maybe your newspaper should stick to reporting on tourism rather than entering into subjects you know nothing about.
Carlos Grant
In answer to your objections:
1. The distance between Andalgalá and Alumbrera is roughly 45km, as the crow flies. The same measurement between Alumbrera and Belén (not “Belem”) is 57km. Londres and Alumbrera are 66km apart. They are not, as you say, closer to Alumbrera than Andalgalá.
2. Mr. Pastrana might not be able to provide “proof.” He has no money to conduct testing. But he would tell you about the absences of wildlife that he’s noticed since the opening of mine operations in the 90s. I don’t know if you should believe him. He’s only lived there for 70 years.
3. Miningtechnology.com defines the floatation process as “a process by which chemicals are added to materials in a solution which are attracted to bubbles and float, whilst other materials sink.” I say the metals are “chemically leached from the ore and mixed with water into mud slurry.” Admittedly, “leach mining” usually refers to a process during which chemicals are sprayed directly onto the area being mined. However, since I clearly say that the chemicals at Alumbrera are mixed with ore, it’s evident that this isn’t what I’m referring to. While a change of wording may be in order, the fact remains that chemicals are mixed with ore, which is then shipped in a mud slurry to Tucuman where that chemical mix is released into the DP2 canal.
4. It is not a “gross misrepresentation” to say that Bajo Alumbrera is a string of operations stretching for 1000km. The mine is one operation. The whole endeavour includes the mine, the pipeline, the processing plant, and the private ore railroad, which together constitute “a string of operations stretching for some 1000km.” It would be a gross misrepresentation to say that Alumbrera consisted only of the mine, which by the way is clearly visible in google earth (the lake is the tailings pond):
5. While there may be other things in Argentina that use water, the farmers in the area have noticed a decline in water levels since the start of the mine. And I’m not blaming the drought in Argentina on the mine. I’m blaming the desertification around the mine on the mine.
6. There are no claims in the article about those chemicals having “disastrous effects” on the locals. Urbano Cardoso, a local resident, showed me pictures of a leaky, old pipeline, repaired in numerous places with rags. The environmental authorities in Catamarca failed to respond to numerous emails and telephone calls.
7. The article makes no claims that those chemicals had caused the diseases in the area. However, in 2003, there were 82 cases of occupational disease in Xstrata’s mines (one of which is Alumbrera). Based on a study done in the American Journal of Medicine, the Xstrata worker’s union announced that in 1999 Xstrata had exposed workers to 50 times the acceptable limits for pentoxid, vanadium, sulphur dioxide and nitric acid. There are also increases in lung diseases in children, as documented by Andangala hospital.
All the fish in the Sali-Duce river system are now dead. This is the same river system that provides much of the drinking and agricultural water for the area around Tucuman. It’s full of chemicals which cause the diseases I mentioned. You tell me if you think that newsworthy.
8. They haven’t been thrown out of courts. They’ve been appealed. They are awaiting trial at a higher level.
9. I’m completely serious. It was revealed to me, without any inquiry on my part, by two separate workers who had overheard their superiors mentioning that it goes on. It has also been widely publicized: http://www.prensamercosur.com.ar/apm/nota_completa.php?idnota=4487
10. I don’t say that Alumbrera is a complete failure. I say that by all standards but profitability, it’s a failure. And I do talk to a miner who tells me about his good job, his increased standard of living, and how he’s sending his kids to school now: all great benefits of the mine. I have spoken to a number of Chileans, almost all of whom were adamantly anti-mining.
These mines do provide short term economic benefits in terms of jobs. But they create economic dependence. When the mine goes, so does everything else. They also perennially inflate their economic multipliers. The reality is that Alumbrera created about 1200 jobs. Sure, it’s started to pay out to the government, but it’s also going to leave it with a massive cleanup bill.
11. It’s not “gutter press.” International mining companies are notorious for dealing with corrupt officials and paying off local authorities. Your statement that “No international company (mining or otherwise) engages in the type of behaviour you are implying” is just wrong. Maybe you should try reading this, an article about a Canadian mining company which was involved in killing an anti-mining activist and paying off local officials. Or this, an academic study which finds a direct causal link between corruption and mineral exports in poor countries. These articles are easily obtainable on the popular and widely used internet search engine “Google.”
12. You talk about “open minded people in San Juan.” I don’t know what you mean. Do you mean the notoriously single minded pro-mining governor José Luis Gioja? Maybe. But you couldn’t mean the people of San Juan. Not the same people who have protested mining since 2005. And you couldn’t mean the people of neighbouring La Rioja Province, who had their Governor, Ángel Maza, ousted in 2006, and kicked Barrick Gold out of the area.
From what I can tell, you make it your mission to troll the internet responding with your own strange brand of truth to articles that treat mining and pulp mill industries unfavourably. In your post on another blog, you say “Mining activity also receives the brunt of […] eco-fundamentalists sponsored and financed by powerful organizations and European royalty with large monetary donations.” I think it’s fair to say you’ve lost touch with reality.
You claim to work for the blog Bustisimos, the stated purpose of which is to agitate for the installation of pulp mills in Argentina, and for the Argentine Commission on Nuclear Energy. You have no right to talk about objectivity.
International mining companies have well oiled public relations departments releasing their side of the story every day. In this article, I have tried to give a voice to the people who don’t have a voice. To do anything else would be dishonourable and disgraceful.
Cole Robertson