Please notice that there is THREE parts to this!
Delve into the Bristol Bay issue discussed in class on Thursday. Use your best science literacy skills to evaluate the information in these web sites, shown below. For a pro-mining view see:
https://www.pebblepartnership.com/ (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.
Click around on that site, and read as much as you can about the project and why the company feels the mine is safe and critical. Then read:
http://www.savebristolbay.org/home (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.
Part A of your essay: Summarize the viewpoints of each site in 5+ sentences, being specific about claims. Who writes for these sites? Agenda, bias, credentials, solid information? (0-10 points, each site, or more if you do a terrific analysis)
Part B: read about National Geographic’s view of the controversy:
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/11/pebble-mine-alaska-copper-epa-trump-environment (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site./ (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.
In a paragraph, summarize what you learned from that article. Can you see why there is a fundamental dilemma: we need minerals – so where do we get them? (0-20 points)
Part C (optional): Then pick some articles on your own! 10 points for each really good analysis (up to 3 additional articles)
Remember to provide citations for all your references, and write using YOUR words – do not copy and paste text from sources that you use for your arguments.
