New Website Promotes Borehole in Haakon County; Public Meeting January 24 in Philip

Rapid City engineering firm RESPEC and the South Dakota School of Mines and Technology have enlisted some PR help in promoting the Deep Borehole Field Test, the big federal Department of Energy experiment they want to bring to Haakon County. Their new PR product—a website! logo tells interested parties all they need know about why drilling one or two three-mile deep holes 35 miles northeast of Philip is a great idea. (The location is T6N R23N Sec. 4, NE ¼, the northeast corner of which should be around 44.5164634°N, 101.3364736°W, near the intersection of 200th Street and 238th Avenue.)

The new website also announces three important public meetings on the Borehole:

  • Public Meeting: January 24, 2017, 5:00 p.m.–8:00 p.m., Philip. Supper will be provided.
  • Philip City Council Meeting: February 6, 2017 at 7:00 p.m.–9:00 p.m., Philip.
  • Haakon County Commission Meeting: February 7, 2017, 1:00 p.m.–3:00 p.m., County Building, Philip.

Possibly building this website is “The K Group,” which lists as the Borehole project “Public Support & Outreach” partner. I’m not sure which K Group that might be, but it’s probably this consumer research firm from Connecticut and not this medical sales recruiter in Dallas or this brand partnering outfit in India.

Partnering with RESPEC and Mines to manage drilling—if DOE gives the South Dakota team the final contract—is CBW Resource Consultants, a Calgary, Alberta, firm that mostly works for the oil and gas industry. CBW and RESPEC are both members of the Solution Mining Research Institute, as is Sandia National Laboratories, which used taxpayer dollars to lobby for federal contracts (which is a no-no) with the help of a consulting firm headed by former U.S. Rep. Heather Wilson, who know is president of School of Mines.

2 Responses to New Website Promotes Borehole in Haakon County; Public Meeting January 24 in Philip

  1. Donald Pay

    Ah, yes. Your tax dollars put to good use to sell you on nuclear waste. Thanks, Obama.

  2. Robert McTaggart

    If you watched the Perry hearing, it sounds like he is committed to pursuing consent-based approaches to dealing with the nuclear waste that we have already produced.

    I note that those storage locations have NOT gone through any future consent-based approach that the DOE could develop. So by inhibiting the study of storage technologies, you are in effect promoting the continued storage of these wastes locations that do not enjoy your desired level of consent.