Pascua Lama
Pascua Lama is located in the Andes mountains, in the southern reaches of Atacama Desert, straddling the border between Chile and the Argentina Northwest at an altitude of over 4,500 metres.
Due to its proximity to glaciers, Pascua-Lama has caused controversy and public protest in Chile, including demonstrations and petitions presented to the Chilean government.
[7] Alcayaga, Luna, and Padilla, analyzing the treaty, have concluded that, "both in terms of content and form, [it] contains provisions that violate Chile's constitution".
[8][9] Nevertheless, nothing came of the lawsuit, and Chile's National Environmental Commission (CONAMA) issued its final approval for the Pascua Lama project on 13 June 2006.
It performed its first studies of the glaciers in 1991, purchased the Chañarcillo estate at the location via an affiliate (Empresa Nevada) in 1997, and published an environmental impact report in 2000, which was approved by COREMA, the regional environment authority, in 2001.
In June 2005, Barrick intended to commence building in January 2006, after responding to a questionnaire put to it by CONAMA, Chile's National Environmental Commission.
[13] Those protesting the project contend that it will involve the removal of 20 hectares of ice, a volume of 300,000 to 800,000 cubic metres, and that this will cause serious environmental harm.
Nevertheless, the EIA and IIA approvals in both Chile and Argentina specifically preclude this from happening, and Barrick has confirmed it has no plans to move any ice or glaciers.
[14] Opponents also contend that the project will affect the water supply of the 70,000 farmers in the Huasco valley, releasing cyanide, sulfuric acid (vitriol) and mercury into the valley's rivers (this is however, a misleading statement, as the processing plant, which such chemicals are used or generated, is on the Argentinian side of the mountain),[7] that the company has bought the support of the farmers with "social assistance" and promises of US$60 million for infrastructure work,[1] and that the Mining Integration and Complementation Treaty was adopted under pressure from Barrick.
[7] In November 2005, a petition of 18,000 signatures was presented to the Chilean government by the Anti Pascua Lama Front, a coalition of environmentalist groups.
[2] The original scope of the ore body lay partially under two small glaciers which eventually feed into the rivers of the Huasco Province.
[18] The historical record of these types of projects in Chile and the companies' real-world ability to meet legal environmental constraints makes the processing of residual-waste a point of contention.
The inability or unwillingness of local authorities to stand up to spills and breaches of environmental requirements is well known and another key point of disagreement with opponents to the project.
[citation needed] The recent approval (as of 2000–2009, during the Lagos and Bachelet presidencies) of many controversial projects such as large mines, dams for power generation, huge salmon farms, forestry, etc.
[7] It states that its US$1.5 billion investment "would be directly invested in the Huasco province in Chile and San Juan province in Argentina", that it has "identified more than 600 potential suppliers from Chile’s Region III" in pursuance of its policy of sourcing local goods and services, and that "sustainable development projects have been and will continue to be a priority for funding to the tune of millions of dollars focused in the areas of education, health, infrastructure and agricultural improvement".
