Eclectic is definitely a word I would use to describe my job – yesterday I visited the North York Moors National Park to see the sites where drilling was to take place to establish how much potash (a material used in fertiliser) is found in deposits under the National Park. But as well as learning more about this unique development proposal, I saw lovely wild flowers, pretty villages such as Thornton-le-Dale, the stunning North York Moors coastline (my favourite part) and the tourist metropolis that is Scarborough in the August school holidays.
The sheer variety of the North York Moors has always impressed me. I first came across this when I walked the Coast to Coast some years ago when, much to my surprise, the North York Moors turned out to be my favourite section, simply because of that variety. As well as the vast heathery moorlands I had been expecting I found interesting woods, waterfalls and, of course, that coastline. Heritage Coast has always seemed too weak a description to me – what about ‘so outstandingly beautiful that it takes your breath away’ coast? Anyway, enough of the hyperbole and back to the job in hand – potash mining and its future in the National Park.
I should say now that if this mining application materialises, as expected in late 2011 (although that timescale seems brashly ambitious to me), then it’s likely to be the most significant application in a National Park for some years. And yes, it will involve that old love triangle of nationally stunning landscapes, local jobs and nationally important ‘stuff’ (in this case potash or perhaps even something called polyhalite, another potassium bearing mineral).
So who’s the brains behind this scheme? The developer, Sirius Minerals, is an interesting company with no obvious track record of mining in sensitive landscapes. It has already applied for several exploratory boreholes in the National Park to assess the extent and quality of underground potash resources. However, only one of these is up and running, with delays to the others, not least because drilling boreholes in a sensitive environment like a National Park is always going to be more complicated than it seems on paper with many factors needing to be taken into account. Prehistoric sites, natural springs and tight timescales to beat the onset of inclement weather all make the minimum eight weeks needed to prepare, run and restore a drilling site look increasingly challenging.


There was a v.good article in Talkback a few issues ago on local NYM mining and coastal transport. Might be worth following up with the author as I think the orginal was in the national press.
In 1962/3 there was a large landslip just inland from Loftus. This was after a period of heavy winter rain and was associated by some locals with ground disturbed by mining. As mining has been going on in the area for many generations unknown mines may cause more instability if disturbed by new activity.
This will be an interesting test of “the greenest government ever”. What’s the betting that the methodology of the National Ecosystems Assessment places a greater monetary value on the potash than on the landscape ?
It’s worth remembering that the Boulby mine has been worked for 40 years and it won’t go on forever. And just for the record, it supplies 50% of the UK’s potash, according to Government records – so we currently import the other 50%.
Also, Boulby’s surface footprint is huge, mainly because it processes the potash on site. The proposed Sirius mine would have a much smaller footprint, partly because mine technology has progressed since Boulby was built and also because Sirius plan to transport the salts they mine to an industrial area for processing (using underground slurry pipes).
This presentation should illustrate why the project is very much needed and address many of the valid concerns raised:
http://siriusminerals.com/images/stories/presentations/sirius-investor-nov-dec-2011.pdf
Oh – I must have missed something then. The presentation looks to me more like a pitch to would be investors in the mine. It says absolutely nothing about environmental concerns and possible mitigation measures. Hardly surprising as this is the sort of thing that tends to put off prospective investors.