Sunday, December 4, 2011

Community Information

One of the functions of ARPA is to represent the aggregate mining industry at community meetings. Often these meetings are held because a group of citizens living within close proximity to an active mining site have concerns about how the operations are being conducted, the amount of truck traffic generated by the operation and/or the amount of dust created by the facility. Another common complaint that is expressed is, why does this mining have to take place here? Why can't they mine somewhere else? These are all valid questions and in order to answer them ARPA has developed a fact sheet that they distribute to the attendees of the meetings. I found the information interesting and would like to share it.

In an earlier post I discussed how much aggregate a person will use throughout their lifetime. We often do not see aggregates as a vital resource, however, aggregates are essential to our quality of life. They are used to build the roads and bridges we travel on, our homes and schools and are used in every facet of the construction industry. Historically, Arizona communities have relied on locally mined aggregates as the most effective and efficient way to supply materials. Typically producers transport aggregates by truck but, because it is a high bulk, heavy weight commodity, it is very costly to transport long distances and the distance adds to the environmental impacts. Mining locally available materials allows producers to use less fuel to deliver the material, which in turn reduces costs to the consumer. In addition, utilizing less fuel also reduces emissions and the adverse impact they have on the environment. 

According to the California Department of Transportation if truck trip length is reduced by an average of 15 miles it would have the following benefits:
  • Fuel consumption reduced by 44 million gallons a year.
  • Removal of over 400,000 metric tons of greenhouse gases
  • 42% savings in material costs
  • Fewer delays in the supply of materials would save $9 million a year
 

1 comment:

  1. Thats great that you are considering the environment in your post. everyone should do their part to lessen their carbon footprint.

    ReplyDelete