Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This report examines the history of arsenic pollution from Giant Yellowknife Gold Mine, and its environmental and public health impacts. It is based on extensive archival research in national and territorial archives, as well as oral histories (published and unpublished) and a review of public reports on the issue. Operating from 1948 to 2004, Giant Mine produced over 7 million ounces of gold mined from arsenopyrite ore formations located on the north shore of Yellowknife Bay. Gold processing entailed roasting the ore, producing as a byproduct arsenic trioxide dust, a highly toxic form of arsenic. In the early 1950s, arsenic emissions from Giant and Con mines totalled an estimated 22,000 lbs. per day. Though Con mine installed a scrubber in 1949, Giant mine (the source of most of the arsenic) did not install pollution control equipment until the end of 1951, after a Dene child died of acute arsenic poisoning at Latham Island. Local livestock also died as from arsenic poisoning. Government and mine officials met at the time to discuss how to address the problem of arsenic pollution, but never contemplated even a temporary shutdown of the mine. The capture of arsenic using a Cottrell Electrostatic Precipitator reduced but did not eliminate arsenic. Collection rates were further improved by the installation of a baghouse in 1958. Studies undertaken through the 1950s and 1960s revealed persistent high levels of arsenic on local produce and berries. Concerns remained about water pollution from both atmospheric deposition and arsenic- and cyanidelaced tailings effluent. The collection of arsenic, , also resulted in the fateful decision to store arsenic trioxide dust in underground chambers and mined-out stopes. Today, the 237,000 tonnes of arsenic trioxide underground at Giant remains the central environmental challenge for the reclamation and remediation of the site. Public health studies undertaken in the 1960s suggested a possible link between arsenic exposure and elevated cancer rates in Yellowknife, but these studies were not made public until the 1970s. A series of independent and government studies followed these revelations as public concern mounted over the health effects of long-term arsenic exposure. Further reductions in arsenic emissions from Giant were achieved, and the mine constructed a tailings effluent treatment system in 1981. While local activists raised concerns about sulphur dioxide and arsenic emissions in the early 1990s, territorial government studies concluded these emissions did not pose a public health risk. For the Yellowknives Dene First Nation in particular, memories of mine development and subsequent arsenic pollution of their traditional lands are painful. Some Dene worked at the mine, but the communities of Ndilo and Dettah saw few benefits from the mines overall. Yet these communities, due to their location in relation to Giant, were on the front line of arsenic exposure over the half-century ofits operation. The Yellowknives Dene not only suffered disproportional health impacts from arsenic pollution, but also the loss of harvesting areas due to the appropriation of land for the mining operations and urban growth in the city of Yellowknife.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,006 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,054 | 0,022 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».