Talvivaara-yhtiö juoksuttaa kaivosalueen vesiä sekä poikkeus- että hätäjärjestelyin. Normaalijuoksutuksille ei ole nyt kiintiötä.

Suomen luonnonsuojeluliitto tiedotti Vaasan hallinto-oikeuden jätevesipäätöksestä 4.3.13. Etenkin sen jälkeen on tullut jatkuvia kyselyjä. Niinpä luonnonsuojelupiiri tiedottaa Kainuun merkittävimmästä saasteongelmasta, Talvivaaran toimimisesta ilman vedenpuhdistuslaitoksia, myös englanniksi 7.3.2013.

Lisätiedot:
Talvivaaran juoksutuksille ei ole laillisia perusteita.
Tiedotteessa kerrotaan kuinka päätöksellä peruutettiin ELY-keskuksen antama poikkeuslupa. Jätevesiä ei siis saanut johtaa kipsisakka-altaiden ohi. Lue Vaasan hallinto-oikeuden päätös.

Talvivaara: Vaasa District Administrative Court decision, dated March 3, 2013 What does it mean?

March 7, 2013 Kainuun Luonnonsuojelupiiri ry, Vienankatu 7, 87100 Kajaani, Finland

Kainuu District of FANC (Finnish Association for Nature Conservation)

Web page: www.sll.fi/kainuu
Email: kainuu@sll.fi
More information in English

For more information:

Pertti Sundqvist
pertti.sundqvist@gmail.com
Tel. +358 50 432 8281

Johan Heino
johan@aska.fi
Tel. +358 40 511 1601

The Vaasa Administrative Court of Finland (Vaasan hallinto­oikeus) has on March 4, 2013 given a decision against Talvivaara Sotkamo, Plc. The complaint was filed in June 2012 (and will be called the June 2012 decision here).

In June 2012, the Kainuu Centre for Economic Development, Transport and the Environment (Kainuun Ely­keskus) in Kajaani, Finland, which is in charge of monitoring the mine, allowed Talvivaara to invoke Article 62 of the Environmental Protection Act. The Article is meant to allow bypassing of the environmental permit whenever there is a major risk of a catastrophe caused by unexpected natural phenomena or other unanticipated disasters. The Article specifically precludes any problems caused by actions of the company.

The environmental permit allows Talvivaara to relase 1.3 million cubic meters of neutralized water a year into the environment, as long as the water is first passed through a gypsum pond which captures some of the heavy metals. (The acidic water is neutralized with lime, and hence contains large numbers of sulphates, whose amounts are not controlled by the environmental permit. The sulphates are known to have already caused severe damage to the neighboring bodies of water).

The Article was used in June 2012 to justify the temporary diversion of wastewaters past this critical gypsum pond. The diversion degraded the environmental performance of the overall system, and was in violation of the environmental permit. Even though the Article only permits short­term deviations from the environmental permit, the diversion system is still in place as of March 2013. The court’s decision was based on these findings

.
To make the problem worse, the gypsum pond in question suffered a leak in November 2012 in part because it had been used to store contaminated and acidic metal raffinate from the bioleaching process (strictly against the environmental permit or any permission from the ELY­keskus). The gypsum pond has been only partially opened for use. It is not clear how Talvivaara will be able to achieve compliance with the environmental permit, when a critical part of the system is out of commission.

This court decision is only the first in a series of complaints which have been raised against the mine. Of particular interest here is that Talvivaara has invoked Article 62 a total of six times, four of them after the case related to this decision (March 2012, June 2012, August 2012, November 2012, January 2013, and February 2013). The November 2012 case is related to the leak from the gypsum pond, and is being investigated by police authorities.

In the most current case, in February 2013, Talvivaara invoked Article 62 in order to rid itself of excess water in the mine, which it claims to be the result of excess rainfall in 2012 as well as problems with the bioleaching process. Talvivaara claims to have at least 7 million cubic meters of excess water, although the figure is difficult to verify.

Talvivaara applied to relase 3.8 million cubic meters before June 2013; the ELY­keskus is allowing 1.8 million cubic meters to be released, decisions on the other 2 million having been escalated to another authority.

A total of nine entities (communal authorities, environmental groups, and private individuals) have filed complaints against the February 2013 decision to allow use of Article 62. The case is being adjudicated urgently. A key thrust of the complaints is that just as in June 2012, the requirements to use Article 62 are not being fulfilled. The complaints thus demand that the diversions be stopped immediately, and the mine be forced to operate in compliance with the environmental permit.

The June 2012 decision can be appealed to the Supreme Administrative Court, and thus it does not require Talvivaara to stop releasing the waters immediately. However, if the decision were to be enforced and the mine forced to stop its violation of the environmental permit, it would cause serious problems in the waste water management of the mine. In particular it would raise doubts about the usefulness of the new diversions, since almost half of the total diversion capacity would be lost. The new diversions would thus cause major damage to the environment, but little benefit to Talvivaara.

Talvivaara has so far not commented on the June 2012 decision, claiming that it has no bearing on the current status of the mine, or especially the diversions of February 2013.