The Kiruna Paradox |Kit Ting Karie Yu|
The Kiruna Paradox |Kit Ting Karie Yu|
Moving Kiruna is not about moving the houses. Instead of “refugee relocation”, regeneration of ecosystem and social landscape should be considered. It is an irony that mining operation which began in 1898, created the mining cities Kiruna, Malberget, Savappavaara as well as port cities Navik and Luleå. But it also transformed the landscape, deformed the geological structure and eventually “destroy” the city. The town and mine have developed in tandem, just like two lungs to either side of railroad, sitting upon the largest iron body in the world. However, the situation is getting unbalance, one lung is eating up the other. The state-owned mining company LKAB started underground mining in early 60s, creating a lengthy gorge and reshaping the mountain’s northern slopes into ziggurat-like steps. Since they have dug, the sublevel mining has been lowered six times, the current main level of operations is over 1000m below the historic peak, which has long since vanished. And the new level being constructed is at level 1365. The mining progresses downward while the ore between sublevels is mined; the overlying waste rock caves into void created as the ore is drawn off. Large-scale deformation and fracturing caused while caving progresses upward. As mining moved deeper and closer to town the area had to be vacated, and the city has to be relocated as the land is slowly fracturing.
The traditional reindeer migratory bands, condemned mine properties, deformed land leaves only few sites to consider. Until now, no one can be sure that how deep the iron deposit goes and where else the iron deposits are. The state chosen eastern site will be ensured move in 50years if the mining continues its trajectory. Or even earlier if there are some new findings of iron. The paradox is: because of mining the town was created, but it also “destroying’ the town, how shall we save the town from the deformed landscape? If we continue mining, further deformation will cause. But if mining is stopped, is the town still needed? Naturally there must be serious debate to the move, but seems in Kiruna, there is no doubt the mine came first. LKAB states that 95% of residents favor “the move”. An interview of a tourism clerk confided that “ there is nothing to do in Kiruna, but work, and the mine has the best jobs” Historically, the city population closely relate to the employment of the mining company. Kiruna population keeps decreasing since mid 1970s, though LKAB is aggressive in increasing production of iron ore, better state’s economy does not necessarily mean more attractive living environment. The population, especially the youth, declines steadily and the imbalance in gender, age and education creates various social problems. The mining activities on the other hand gives rise to many environmental problems like aftermined landscape, water pollution, soil contamination and, needless to say, the deformation and eventually relocation of city. Did the dream of ideal city lose in the 21th century? Is Kiruna just a mining town? Is economical development more important than the social, cultural and environmental issues?
The Kiruna Paradox |Kit Ting Karie Yu|
Thanks to the improving technology, physical on-site workers might not be needed eventually; the existence of the city might not be necessary if mining is only thing the citizens concern. Moreover, what will happen when the ore runs out? The new Kiruna, which is built on technically unstable landscape, should be planned in sustainable way. Human beings are like plants, we have our roots and identity to the landscape we belong. Instead of looking for a site to host the 18,000 residents which could possibly moving out, the state should get the involvement of the residents and indigenous people to rebuilding their ideal home and pay efforts in the environmental regeneration of extraction site and its integration to local ecosystem. The subsidence of city is a stepwise decommissioning of urban space. There is a period of 10-15 years for the visible fault to occur. During this period, we can still walk but not build. The planning of the “deforming land” and the perspective for “post-mining era” should be addressed. Is the “mine city park” a good example of creating a soft transition to the condemnation? Human activities leave open wounds to landscape, the scars that are marks left on the landscape tell us something about its dynamism, the history of the land. As one of the largest underground mines in the world, the dramatically deformed landscape, massive infrastructure and after-mined landscape should be regenerated to local ecosystem and developed as to raise public awareness of our scars to the nature.
Moving Kiruna is not about moving the houses, but about regeneration of the ecosystem and social landscape which should be diversified. Recreation, education, natural resources, art and cultures and a wider range of industries should be promoted. The relocation project, instead of “refugee relocation”, could be seen as opportunity to “re-find” the “lost surface”- the lost productive land of herding, harvesting, hunting, living and breathing.