"Dirty" or "non-dirty" REE-uranium mining by GGG, the EIA facts facts and truth behind EIA?

IA and Egede are against dirty mining
"There are two issues that have been important in this election campaign: people's living conditions is one," he said. "And then there is our health and the environment."

CEO Mair claims that
"The perceived issues at Kvanefjeld can be readily managed by modern mining methods, and this is clearly understood in experienced mining jurisdictions." "It is the most rigorously investigated project in Greenland"
https://themarketherald.com.au/greenland-minerals-asxggg-ceo-claims-kvanefjeld-can-be-readily-managed-by-modern-mining-methods-2021-04-12/


Note that Kvanefjeld EIA has been only accepted for public hearing and the process
is on-going. Statements that it had been accepted are quite forward looking..

It is true that company has produced lots of consultant reports about no effects of the project.
But what is the purpose of and truth behind these reports? Can these be trusted?

A majorenvironmental concern of REEs is bioaccumulation, that is biological enrichment.
This would cause ecologic and even health effects. There are REE contaminated placesin China reporting various diseases an symptoms associated with REEcontaminations.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rare-earth_element


Waters, REE?
Obviously to have an environmental impact assessment of a REE mine,
thereshould be the effects environmental and health effects of REEsIf you think GGGwould be doing a good job with environment, check these from their KvanefjeldEIA,
and REE concentration like cerium (Ce) or lanthanum (La) in watersI can't find anything from water contamination tables.

Would you make an EIA of a nickel mine without mentioning nickel in waters?


Dust
Interestingly there are lots of REEs in dust, but they are not mentioned in deposion.
See tables 25 and 26 EIA page 134, link at the end of this message

The REEs cerium, lantahnum and yttrium are present in the dust in large amount,
but they are not "key metals" in deposition load?!
Same is true for ecologically important zinc and manganese (zirconium?)

Uranium and thorium, on the other hand
appear to have several hundred fold decay in air.
Compare these to other metals like lead, cadmium, mercury, or nickel; or arsene.
For these values are similar in Tables 25 and 26, but uranium and thorium
are diminishing?

I would like to see the explanations of the company men.





The ecologic effects of uranium, thorium and
bioaccumulation daughter nuclids would need to be studied more.So there is lots roomfor improvement with the EIA?

The EIA has notbeen accepted by the people, the process is on-goingand hearing is openuntil June 1sthttps://naalakkersuisut.gl/~/media/Nanoq/Files/Hearings/2020/1812_kuannersuit/Documents/EIA%20ENG.pdf

https://naalakkersuisut.gl/en/Hearings/Hearing-Archive/2020/1812_kuannersuit