It's not the open pit per se, it's the chromite and open pit concept that could be the problem.
Public perception of risk can end up being more politically persuasive than the scientific estimate of risk.
Years ago, the agricultural chemical branded as Alar was found in apple juice. The only reason it was found, however, is that analytical techniques had advanced to such an extent that ultra-trace contaminants were detectable (i.e. part per trillion). I calculated that a person would have to drink 118,000 litres of apple juice a day in order to meet the exposure threshold at which the chemical could have been detected in the person by biochemical changes (the lowest scientific threshold for toxicity). And that assumed that the person accumulated 100% of their cumulative exposure. Rather unlikely, on both counts. Nonetheless, Alar was banned for use on apples, huge volumes of apple juice were destroyed, and we went on, blissfully unaware of far more commonplace and toxic chemicals to which we are exposed at higher concentrations on a daily basis. One chemical was politicized, and the others remained in the shadows.
Given the profit margins already expressed by Cliffs, it would seem that underground mining could still be done at a profit. At least, that's the appearance from over here.
Lar
