I've been thinking a lot about numbers lately, maybe because it is the end of the year, and therefore a time for reflection. But when I read about hundreds of billions of dollars committed to re-energizing the economy or billions of people occupying the planet or billions of pounds of copper from a possible mine at Pebble, I just get confused. That may be because I cannot count past 10 without taking my shoes and socks off.

What do big numbers mean to Alaska's mining industry? From my perspective, sooner or later the hounds of Hell will run the domestic mining industry to the ground (no pun intended) to the extent that it is dependent on access to federal public lands. It is incredibly curious to me, at least, why there is such a rampant antipathy regarding domestic mining. Certainly mining in the United States is safer and more environmentally sensitive than is the case in virtually any other location in the world.

More significantly, we have a huge share of the world's undeveloped resources and many of those resources are located in sites remote from population centers. One can see Russia from Gov. Sarah Palin's porch more easily than one can see the Bingham Pit from Manhattan. Parks are nice and everyone loves a nice forest, but you cannot get there without the help of a few tons of iron ore.

Understanding the numbers

What do the numbers mean? Let's start with the world's population.

By the latest reckoning, the population is a little over 6.7 billion people, about one third of which is situated in India and one third in China.

Alaska consists of 365 million acres of land, about 150 million acres of which is held by the state or private interests (primarily Alaska Native regional corporations).

Essentially, we could put the entire population of the world in Alaska and no one would have to stray onto federal land.

The population density would be about 50 people per acre, but Mumbai, India's population density, at about 46 people per acre, is almost there already.

If we just moved everyone to Alaska, we could use the rest of the world for farming or recreation or whatever.

Besides, that population density would generate lots of heat, so - thinking about peak oil - energy minerals wouldn't be depleted at the current rapid rate.

Transportation needs would be reduced because if you needed to meet with someone, you would only have to travel across the state and not across the country or halfway around the world.

Assuming that everyone wants all the things that Americans have (televisions, iPods, microwave ovens, etc.), we can project that each person will require about 1,300 pounds of copper over his or her lifetime, about 670 pounds of zinc, and about 925 pounds of lead. I don't have quite enough toes to do all the math, but I think that translates roughly into 8.7 trillion pounds of copper. If the Pebble Project contains 85 billion pounds of copper, that means we would require about 100 such projects just to provide the world's existing population with the copper pipes, electric wires and hybrid car engines it would need over the people's lifetimes.

An essential industry

If the reserves of the Red Dog mine are 26 billion pounds of zinc, we would need about 17 Red Dog mines to meet the lifetime zinc demand. Red Dog also has about 7 billion pounds of lead reserves. The world's 6.7 billion people will need about 6.2 trillion pounds of lead over their lifetimes, or about 900 times the total lead reserves at Red Dog.

It seems self-evident that the stress of these current numbers is untenable. The national antagonism toward mining is wholly irrational given the obvious trend toward greater demand for even basic commodities.

While the impoverished populations of many Third World countries may not soon be able to successfully demand their fair shares of the global pie, no one can deny that the populations of China and India are palpably striding in that direction.

It is incontestable that figures don't lie (it's the liars that are doing the figuring). When you are dealing with numbers that have more zeros that there are ants at a picnic, it is hard to ponder the implications.

One conclusion that does seem to shine through, however, is that the future of mining for commodities is secure. Let us all hope that a good percentage of that mining will take place in Alaska.

Happy holidays!