<DrumBeat: June 28, 2007 The Oil Drum DrumBeat: June 29, 2007>

52 comments on Another thought on coal supply

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version

Alfred on June 28, 2007 - 1:18pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

The system where the roof is allowed to collapse behind the miners is called longwall mining. Obviously, it increases the recovery enormously. Equally obviously, it means that the land above the mine will sink.

My Dad was a mining engineer and worked briefly in a Welsh coal mine around 1938 when he was a student - the rest of his mining career was spent in Africa. I studied some of these things as a civil engineer as we did geology and soil mechanics and so on.

I really don't know why it is still deemed necessary to have humans at the cutting face. It would seem to me that if you can control a drone from the Pentagon that is shooting at cars in the Empty Quarter of Arabia, then you should be able to control mining machinery from above ground - a few miles away. I mean, no one sends divers down to great depths any more - that is a job for ROV's (Remote Operated Vehicles).

Once there are no people below, the safety margins can be redefined. Ventilation can be dispensed with. Escape shafts dispensed with and so on. In many mines, for example the gold mines of South Africa, the miners spend most of their time either being taken to or returning from the Face. Ridiculous and very dangerous and unpleasant.

Just think of it. A highly redundant communications system to the machinery (e.g. Internet Protocol). I guess if some of the money being wasted on "clean coal" went in this direction, it could be done.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Heading Out on June 28, 2007 - 3:46pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Alfred:
A couple of points, first it is actually not necessary to have the ground sink. Sometimes (as when mining under Duisburg) it is something that is wanted, other times, such as mining under the aircraft plants in Coventry, it was not. In the latter case they blew washery waste into the hole left as the supports moved forward, back filling the hole, so that the ground moved imperceptibly. (The story I was told was that the precision lathes were only stopped for recalibration once, and off-line for a day).

In regard to automation of mining, the Remote Operation of Longwall Mining Project ran in 1964. All the equipment on the face was automated, with no-one there. There were some teething troubles, but in the end it was closed because of union opposition (local Union said it was fine, National Union said it was fine, Area level union said no dice, as I heard the story), rather than because of technical show stoppers.

Bear in mind that many of the mines were kept open after Nationalization as part of the social compact and that coal could be purchased more cheaply from abroad by the time of the 60's. With a typical mine employing more than a thousand folk, the transition had to be handled somewhat carefully to allow the development of alternate jobs. Which arrangement went by the wayside during the Thatcher years.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Alfred on June 28, 2007 - 4:56pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

HO,

Thanks for the information. I guess it should be much easier to automate now.

BTW, I was a fan of Thatcher at the time - when all my friends detested her. Now, I am not so sure.

I guess the sudden wealth of her son has something to do with the reluctance of Blair and co. to allow a proper investigation of BAE over the Al Yamamah deal. If he were to allow her scandals to be exposed just think what some future conservative prime minister might do to him!

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

52 comments on Another thought on coal supply

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version