Search Documents

By Margaret N. Maxey

Man's capacity far fretting is endless, and no matter what difficulties we surmount, how many ideals we realize, there is a stealthy pleasure in rejecting mankind or the universe as unworthy of our approval. - Will Durant Until recently, reasons for favoring one or another energy alternative were advanced on the basis of technical considerations and economic realities. However, it is an indication of the cultural climate of our society and growing realization of why energy is our master resource that many citizens have begun to express concern about the social and ethical implications of our energy deci¬sion-making. A vivid indication of this shift toward ethical concerns is reflected in the attention being focused on conservation - even to the point of regarding it as a virtual panacea equivalent to a "free energy resource." Among others, the authors of a publication by Resources for the Future cautions us about the difficulties of defining conservation. They also point out that unrealistic expectations for achieving the high levels of conservation claimed by true believers may boomerang if, at the same time, we are morally required to maintain economic growth and robust productivity for the basic well-being of more people. In its economic meaning, conservation signifies the most economic or cost-effective applications of energy, together with other resources, in a given process or activity. To achieve conservation that is cost-effective, saving energy alone is not sufficient; the cost involved in saving the energy must be no greater than the cost of the energy that is saved. Using its thermodynamic meaning, conservation and efficiency are viewed as constrained by physical laws and measured against ideal limits set by these laws and processes. Since achieving higher levels of technical performance is not without costs, the economic meaning of conservation must be factored into technical possibilities. It is the ethical, equity and environmental meaning of conservation that concerns us here. In its third meaning, conservation consists in moderation as a value which appears inherently worthwhile both in itself and in relation to social choices dedicated to achieving distributive justice. The value of moderation seems predicated on the assumption that natural resources and the environment have fixed, finite, exhaustible capacities for satisfying human needs. Hence norms for moderating human behavior appear to require prescriptions by some authority. Such norms presuppose some agreement on "essential" uses of energy. However, the difficulties of setting behavioral norms loom large, because "... it is as difficult to determine essential energy consumption as to determine what is essential in any other phase of consumption, whether it involves food, clothing, shelter, or recreation." The ethical meaning of conversation is further complicated by a centuries-old argument over the proper exercise of stewardship - i.e., how best to develop natural resources. On the one hand, the preservationist position insists on an inviolate, "hands-off" policy and stands opposed to ongoing development of wilderness areas and mineral resources. On the other hand, the "scientific conservationist" who preaches the "gospel of efficiency" insists on development of resources based on principles of sustained-yield, multiple use and - in the case of competing claims - reserving resources or land for their "higher use." Current confusion reigns among opinion leaders in the environmental movement because they appear to have lost the genius of the original Conservation ethic, developed in the 19th century. They seem to think that conservation is preservation. The question I wish to explore is whether a single-minded, exclusive pursuit of "conservation" in its economic, thermodynamic and preservationist meanings may actually do more harm than good in serving the ethical goals of conservation. There

Jan 1, 1986

By Glen A. Knox

The writer has been asked to set forth for this Institute, the experience of the past eleven months in the mining operation conducted at Sweetwater Mine in which coal has been produced by the use of Link-Belt Conveyors on long faces. The coal in this mine has an average of six feet three inches in thickness, and lies on an average pitch of five degrees. The roof is a sandy shale of medium hardness and has been generally considered as good top in the room and pillar method of mining. When our company became interested in conveyors, the writer visited most all of the mines in the East where conveyors and other mechanical methods of mining were in use and decided that the modified method of w-hat is in use at the Norton-West Virginia mine would be the most feasible for our conditions. We in- stalled three hundred feet of conveyor as an experiment to see whether or not our roof could be handled and taken care of on long faces. This three hundred feet was installed as two separate conveyors, one as a face conveyor-100 feet in length, the other as a heading conveyor that delivered the coal into the mine car on the main entry. This face was worked directly on .the strike and down the pitch. This did not prove to be a success as the caving of the roof carried over to the working face and necessitated propping between the conveyor and the face and it was also necessary to shovel coal on the conveyor up the pitch. After working out this block, 200 feet in length, we installed these two conveyors at a place adjoining this worked out block, but on a half V shape shown on the sketch. This block of coal was sixty feet wide. This method proved to be very successful. We cut a place, moved the conveyor against the face before shooting and carried two rows of cribs between the conveyor and the cave, and caved the roof every second cut. After working out this block we were satisfied that this system was feasible with our mine. We then ordered twelve hundred feet more of the same type as the trial conveyor with the exception of a very few modifications. We then installed this fifteen hundred foot unit on the four faces shown on the sketch, with one hundred feet to each face, two hundred feet on each heading and three hundred feet on the main conveyor that delivered the coal into the pit cars. We also had a head and rear section for each of the four advancing places shown on the sketch. As the sections were taken out of the heading conveyors they were installed on the advancing conveyors, and when the faces approached the main conveyor, the main conveyor was taken out and installed in the next uphill or main conveyor place. The roof caved very well in line of the points and was broken about every twenty feet. It broke in a straight line and did not curve at each V. We encountered no trouble unless we permitted one of the points to get behind. The maximum tonnage possible to be produced on this method was estimated to be seven hundred and twenty-five tons a day, assuming that all places were cut and cleaned up in one shift, and this we did for several consecutive days. While this was a success from a cost standpoint, we felt that we could

Jan 1, 1925

By Geo. A. Murphy

MR. ARTHUR E. GIBSON (General Manager, Consumers Mutual Coal Company of Utah) : I suppose the reason I was called upon to read this paper was because I was at the mine for several years, but I have not been there for the past four years and the installation has been put in since I left. This article has been written by my successor-it follows: At the very urgent solicitation of your Secretary I have consented to prepare this paper descriptive of the spiralizing plant which is a part of the new steel tipple recently erected by the Spring Canyon Coal Company to serve its mines at Spring Canyon, Utah. I have been reluctant in giving this consent for two reasons: one of which is an excellent one, and the other isn't any good at all. First,, I find that it takes a long time to become familiar with the eccentricities of spirals-to get wise to their whims and peculiarities, and while this plant has been in operation for a number of months, something new seems to crop up nearly every time I see it, and -it would be impossible to describe all of these things even if I remembered them. The second reason is, purely personal. Among the many things I have learned by attending the sessions of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute is that if a man is not pretty sure of the ground he attempts to cover, he had better keep his mouth shut, because if he isn't right, he is dead sure to be called down by someone. However, as I will not attend the session, this feature will not hurt much, but it will make it necessary for someone else to read the paper and this will make it much better for those who are obliged to listen to it because I don't read English very well. To begin with I will say that what is said in this paper applies only to the plant under discussion as I have had no experience with any other plant. While spirals have been in use for quite a number of years, and there are some large plants in the East, their use has not been general, and I believe the plant at Spring Canyon is the only one in the United States west of the Mississippi River. The details of the plant were worked out by Mr. Thos. R. Stockett, General Manager of the Spring Can= yon Coal Company; it was manufactured by the Anthracite Separation Company of Hazelton, Penn., incorporated in the design and erected by the Link-Belt Company of Chicago, in connection with the balance of the tipple. It consists of five units. Each unit consists of a vertical wood column about 6 inches in diameter, and 9 feet 6 inches in height, around which the spiral is built. It is something like a triple screw conveyor, set vertically, with flights down which the coal and refuse travel by gravity in the process of separation. There are three of these flights, forming a sort of nest but about 7 inches apart, and they make 21 turns around the column in its length. These flights dip toward the column about 27 degrees; they have a uniform pitch downward of 31 degrees; they are 19 inches wide at the top (measured from the column) and taper gradually until they are about 9 inches at the bottom. They are not made with one continuous plate from top to bottom, but are made up of a number of plates. Some of these plates are slightly waved, others have small corrugations in them and still others are perforated with small holes, all of which are intended to accelerate or. retard the movement of the coal and refuse as they pass down, At intervals there are adjustable plates in the flights for the purpose of decreasing the maximum outside;

Jan 1, 1926

PRESIDENT MARKS: We have a letter from Mr. Frank N. Cameron, of the Utah Fuel Company, that perhaps I had better read to you. It is addressed to Mr. Shubart, Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute (hands letter to Secretary Shubart). UTAH FUEL COMPANY MINE SUPERINTENDENT Castle Gate, Utah, February 9, 1926 Mr. F. N. Cameron, Vice-President & General Manager, Salt Lake City, Utah. Dear Sir: It has now been about nine months since we started the system of having the fire bosses take charge of all shooting and gas inspections at the Castle Gate Mines. We had considerable trouble when we started. Like all other new systems which have been installed, this one was hard to get started and was criticised both by the miners and officials in our own organization, as well as by other organizations in the mines of this county. The older the official and miner was the stronger they seemed to be opposed to the new method. They have no arguments to offer against it, but they know it is not right "because their grandfather did not work it in that way." We know that when some of the other systems were started in the mines of this county, they were fought from all angles. The electrical shooting almost brought the miners at Sunnyside out on strike; their main argument was that they could not make a living if they had to obey the rules that the company was trying to enforce. They also claimed that they could not make enough coal for the day's work by only shooting once at the end of the shift. The same applies to the sprinkling the miners claimed that they would all die of some disease if they were forced to work in a sloppy, wet mine every day. The mining machine was another thing that was hard to install the miners claimed that the company was trying to rob the Door miner out of a chance to make living by installing mining machines to cut the coal. I do not think that the system we have at our mines is perfect-there is still room for improvement in the shooting and inspection of the mines, but I do really think that for safety and efficiency, the inspection department at our mines, working under the new system, is as good if not better than any other inspection department working under the old method in the other mines. I am giving some of the arguments in favor of the new system and would like to hear the arguments against it-if there are any. In cutting the men from monthly to day wages, I do not think it is only the company that benefits by the arrangement, but the fireboss is the one that gets the best of it by the change. How often have we heard the fireboss complain of the hours he had to put in just because he was a monthly man? Under the new wage scale he is paid for every hour he puts in the mines, and when the mines are working every day he makes considerable more than when he was being paid a monthly salary. When the mines are working slow, there is generally some work that has to be done on idle days, or in slow times the force could be cut to a point where some of the work could be done on idle days, and thus the fireboss could be given the preference in this extra work and in this way, his wage could be kept up to the standard monthly salary he was getting before. Under this arrange-

Jan 1, 1926

Presiding was Robert E. Murray. The first speaker was Frank L. Natta, Administrative Manager-Trapper Mine, Utah International, Inc., Craig, Colorado. Subject - "Long Term Coal Contracts." Mr. Natta graduated in 1973 from Colorado School of Mines with a B.S. in Metalurgical Engineering and a M.S. in Mineral Economics. Since 1974, he has been employed by Utah International having spent 5 years in San Francisco as Senior Market Analyst. In this capacity he was responsible for market development efforts for Utah's U. S. coal reserves. Recently, he was transferred to Craig, Colorado, as Administrative Manager of Utah's Trapper Mine. In this position, he is responsible for purchasing, warehousing, accounting and sales contract administration. The second speaker was Brucks Mitchell, President, Human Resources Management, Inc. Richardson, Texas. Subject-"Making Unions Unnecessary in the Coal Industry." Mr. Mitchell has a B.A. degree in English-Oklahoma State University. M.B.A. degree in Organizational Behavior-Southern Methodist University. Ph.D Candidate - Organizational Behavior - North Texas State University. Mr. Mitchell formed an Association of Consultants to perform assignments in Industrial Psychology and Human Resources Management. Particular emphasis has been to establish policies and procedures to make labor unions unnecessary. He has been consultant to various industrial and municipal organizations.

Jan 1, 1979

Please note all Proceedings of the Institute were taken verbatim by stenotypists from Hyatt & Associates of Denver and editing has been minimal. MR. MORTENSEN: On behalf of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute, I take great plea¬sure in saying good morning to you at Vail. With a few clouds in the sky, at least we won't get sunburned. We won't have to worry about our kids in the swimming pool, perhaps. It is delightful for me to have been able to have represented the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute for the year 1982-1983. This has been our 71st year and this is our 79th meeting. In recognizing the attendance here, that dinner we had last night, and some of our entertainment must have gotten to some of us, or it is a little early. But I'm sure as the day goes on, and with the speakers outlined, it will be very beneficial for those who do attend. We do appreciate your attendance. I'd first like to make an introduction of our head table. Doris Finnie, she is our executive secretary. As most of you are aware, Gussie Whiteside retired as secretary. This will be the first time since the Institute started that there has not been a Whiteside present at one of our conventions. I'm sure Gussie would appreciate any calls or letters that any of you would care to make to her. Doris, I might add, has been a great help to me and all of the people who have been working on the program for the Institute this past year. There's been lots of reorganization and we are very pleased with Doris's ability to take hold from Gussie without any waves. Much credit must be given to you Doris for this and we do appreciate the help you have given us and believe me she has kept us out of trouble. Next, we have Art Neill. He is our vice president of the Institute from Montana and he also works with Western Energy Company. We appreciate the help that all of these session leaders and chairmen give to us. We have other names on the head table, but they will fill in as the morning goes on, so we won't bother you with any of those at this time. To set the stage for business, first I would like to call on Doris for a motion to approve the minutes of last year. MS. FINNIE: Thank you, Vernal. Mr. President, I suggest that the reading of the minutes be dispensed with and that the members refer to pages 9 through 80 of the Proceedings for the 78th regular meeting of RMCMI, as published MR. MORTENSEN: Thank you, Doris. Do we have a motion to so approve? MR. LINVILLE: I so move. MR. MORTENSEN: Loren Linville so approved. Do we have a second? MR. GARR: Second. MR. MORTENSEN: All in favor say aye. (Audience responded affirmatively.) MR. MORTENSEN: Those opposed? Hearing none, the motion is carried. I'm sure glad we didn't have to read those 80 pages. Is Doug Hammer in the audience? He was going to give us a list of new members of the Coal Institute and ask for your approval. But because of his absence, the names will be listed so that you can read them at a later date, I will entertain a motion that we approve the new members who have joined the Institute. Do I so have a motion? MR. BERNSTROM: I would make that motion. MR. GARR: I second. MR. MORTENSEN: Do we have any questions? All in favor¬ (Audience responded affirmatively.) MR. MORTENSEN: Any opposed? Hearing none, the motion is carried. Next, we'd like to proceeed with our Nominating committee report from the chairman, George Nugent, and the election of next year's officers. George, would you please take the stand? MR. NUGENT: Mr. President, and members of the Institute, your Nominating committee consists of five past presidents of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute. From Colorado Roy Coulson; from New Mexico, Bob Wilson; from Utah, Bob

Jan 1, 1983

By Thomas Foster

One of the most dreaded things which mining men sometimes have to contend with is underground mine fires, which are both dangerous and expensive. In the Reliance mines we have had considerable trouble with mine fires. We have at the present time five different fire zones, three of these zones give us considerable trouble and the other two have not given any trouble since they have been walled off. Fire Zone No. 1 comprises No. 2, 3 and 4 South Entries, about 50 acres are enclosed in this zone. Fire Zone No. 2 comprises the main drift entry from the mouth to the Old Boundary Plane and extends to the crop line, about 10 acres are enclosed in this zone. Fire Zone No. 3 comprises 1 and 2 North Entries from the main slope to the Old Boundary Plane, a distance of about 1,200 feet, about 15 acres are enclosed in this zone. Fire Zone No. 4 comprises 11/2 and 2 North Entries, a distance of 1,100 feet between New Slope and Old Boundary Plane, about 15 acres are enclosed in this zone. Fire Zone No. 5 comprises the inside end of No. 11/2 and 2 North Entries and 3 North Entry from the New Slope to 30 room, a distance of about 2,600 feet along No. 3 North Entry, about 20 acres are enclosed in this zone. The first mine fire started in No. 2 South Entry in No. 1 zone in 1914. Inside of No. 7 room on the high side of the entry, there was a soft piece of coal. There were no rooms driven in this coal and one day a fire was discovered in the solid pillar on the high side of the entry, work was started at once to load out this fire. and several places was driven into the pillar and cribs built where the coal was taken out, but this method proved a failure and a sand pack was put up along the entry between the track and the high rib. This consisted of timber set about 3 feet from the rib and 2-inch boards put behind the timber and sand or adobe put in between the boards and the ribs, and this method gave very good results except that it required close watching as the sand would settle and let the smoke out between the roof and the sand. Fire broke out in No. 3 South Entry in No. 1 zone in the summer of 1919. We sealed this fire off by building 36 fire stoppings, which also enclosed the fire in No. 2 South Entry and we have never had any trouble with fires in this zone since it was walled off. The fire started in No. 2 -zone in 1919 and has been very active ever since. When this fire was first discovered we built new stoppings in front of the old one in the room necks; we also opened up some of the room necks and loaded out part of the burning coal and rock but this did not help any, the fire, would burn out around the stoppings also burn along the roof between the top coal and the roof sometimes nearly across the entry. Several holes were drilled from the surface to the fire area and flushing the fire was tried but this was also a:\, failure, the rock above the coal was so hot that the mud would dry in the hole and fill it. In 1921 we started to take down the top coal along this entry, timber the entry and put 2-inch boards behind the timber and fill in between the coal and the boards with sand or adobe. We have at present over 1,000 feet of this work done and it has given us better results than any other method that we have tried. As the coal burns out behind the timber the weight breaks the timber and it is necessary to renew some of it. Fire broke out in No. 1 North Entry in No. 3 zone in 1922. There was a stopping in this entry that had been put in when the entry was finished some few years before. The fire burned around the stopping on the low rib of the entry, we built another stopping in front of the old one taking down the top coal and extending it up to the roof also digging in both ribs and setting the stoppings into the coal about 18 inches. This fire did not cause any trouble until June, 1924, when we discovered this fire was very active on the inside

Jan 1, 1924

By T. H. Butler

The two most talked of questions in the mining industry today are rock dusting and mechanical loading. The one as a matter of safety, and the other as a matter of economy, and both are of vital interest to the mining fraternity. Rock dusting and other safety methods will be dealt with by others at this meeting, so I will confine my few remarks to the matter of mechanical loading. I will not attempt to tell you what mechanical loaders are doing in the different mining fields throughout the country, or what they should do, but will endeavor to give you an outline of the work being done with mechanical loaders in No. 4 Mine of the Union Pacific Coal Company, at Hanna, Wye. In order that you may better understand and be in a position to follow me it will be necessary to cite the conditions under which we are working. and the type of loaders in use. The seam pitches from 14 to 17 degrees, and is normally 32 feet in thickness, and is overlaid with a soft sandstone roof. The panel system of working is used, planes being driven on the pitch, and rooms driven on the strike. Owing to faults being encountered planes are driven between the faults, and the. rooms on either side are in some instances 800 to 1,000 feet in depth. Rooms are advanced eight feet in height, and 32 feet in width, by hand loaders and .Toy mechanical loaders, and when driven to the boundary,, 18 feet of the remaining 24 is loaded out with Thew electric shovels, and six feet left to protect the roof. In January, 1916 the company installed a Type 1 Thew shovel, equipped with a 1 1/4-yard dipper, and in July, 1917, they installed a Type 0 Thew electric shovel, equipped with a 1-yard dipper, and in the year 1918 two additional Type 0 Thew shovels, equipped with a 1-yard dipper, were installed, making a total of four Thew shovels for this mine. The introduction of these shovels caused the employees much concern, and like all departures from the old methods of mining, met with indifference by some and open antagonism by others, so that for some time they results obtained were not satisfactory. However, by constant supervision and changes in the method of haulage the results obtained at present, while not entirely satisfactory, are much better and the production and costs are reasonably good. The Thew shovels in use are mounted on traction wheels with swivel axle and move. in all directions by their own power, and while the weight of each is approxi¬mately 20 tons, they are not as cumbersome as. one would think and are easily operated. The system used in working these shovels is to shoot the coal clown ahead of the shovels and maintain two tracks, two cars being used on each track so that shovel is loading on one track while driver is, changing cars on the other. When place is finished the shovel is run back to the first cross-cut by its own power and lowered to the next room with block and tackle, the roof coal in cross-cut being shot down to a height of 16 feet to allow passage of the boom. With better results from the Thew shovels we soon realized that it was necessary to find some method of developing rooms faster than was being done with hand loaders in order to keep the Thew shovels in working places, and in November, 1923, the company purchased from the Joy Machine Company two Type 4 B U Joy loaders, and the installation of same met with the same indifference and antagonism from the employees as did the Thew

Jan 1, 1924

By J. L. Floyd

The Trapper Mine is a large surface coal operation located in northwestern Colorado US. The coal seams at the mine dip an average of 8 degrees so, historically, their dragline pits have been orien-tated parallel to the dip of the coal seam to balance stripping ratios. However, the mine plan in the future G and Z pits is designed to take advantage of pit orientations that are parallel to the strike of the coal. During the initial presplit and cast blasts in G pit, significant slope damage occurred. This damage included the opening of joints and tension cracking. There was also block movement directly above the L coal seam, which is the main plane of weakness in the slope. A detailed site evaluation was conducted to develop specific blast design modifications to protect the slopes during future blasting. The modified de-signs successfully controlled vibration levels during the blasting of the Z pit box cut. This paper includes a review of the blast vibration related factors that influence slope stability along with a detailed discussion of the field tests and design modifications developed.

Jan 1, 2004

[Mr. Jay Abbott Union Sply Co 7458 S Jackson St Littleton. CO 80122 Mr. Ronald H. AchZlger Midwest Rbr 6 Sply Co 6404 E 39th Ave Denver, CO 80207 Mr. Randy Acre Dorchester Coal C 9350 E Arapahoe Rd Englewood, CO 80112 Mr. Dell H. Adams Kenerco Corp 5480 Swanton Dr Lexington, KY 4051 Mr. Robert S. Affleck Anderson Mavor (USA) Ltd RD #1 Box 140-Lake R Bradford Woods, PA 15015]

Jan 1, 1984

President Robert Wilson opened the meeting at 9:00 a.m. He introduced William A. Bear, General Manager Bear Coal Company, Inc., Somerset, Colorado, who presided over the session. George Nugent, Peter Kiewit Sons' Company, Sheridan, Wyoming, presented a most interesting film "Montana Mine Reclamation." His biography follows: George Nugent first entered the coal business in 1943 when he developed Peter Kiewit Sons' Co.'s first coal mine-Big Horn Coal Company at Sheridan, Wyoming. Since that time he managed an expansion program for P.K.S. in mining that resulted in the development of two other producing mines - Rosebud Coal Sales Company at Hanna, Wyoming and Decker Coal Company at Decker, Montana, in which Pacific Power and Light is a partner. Applications are now pending for a third mine. Black Butte, a joint venture of P.K.S. and Rocky Mountain Energy Company, near Point of Rocks, Wyoming. Nugent is a Past President of the Wyoming Chapter, Association of General Con- tractors, Wyoming Mining Association and Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute. He was President of Big Horn Coal Company and Rosebud Coal Sales Company as well as Manager of the Mining Division of Peter Kiewit Sons' Co. and Decker Coal Company when he retired Jan. 1, 1975.

Jan 1, 1976

Jan 1, 1923

By Benedict Shubart

The subject of this paper may seem threadbare to, many of you, but even if I repeat what you already know, just smile to yourself and think how much wiser you are than your neighbor, for it is startling what a number of tipples are erected that violate the elementary fundamentals not only of good design but of practical operation. Possibly a coal screening plant is a simple plant. If so, we treat it like we do a great many other simple things. We treat it entirely too lightly and fail to take into consideration, not only the changes that may occur later, the conditions we may be compelled to meet as competition changes, but even the elementary physical conditions that exist right at the tipple site. If I get too positive over some particular point, don't blame me, but remember some of the heart-breaking experiences we have had correcting these omissions, trying to make a tipple do merely what it was designed to do, when the builder tied everything up in such a constricted space, that no room was left to get the results he must have. Perhaps some of the things will look too expensive. Don't say that you can't afford them. Many of them you can't afford to do without, and when you figure that a tipple is put up for possibly twenty years of operation, you can't afford to omit any reasonable precaution not only in taking care of the present, but in foreseeing the future. We will consider a tripple screening plant, suitable for Western conditions, capable of handling approximately 2,500 tons per eight hours. The largest screen sizes must be loaded into either open cars or box cars, and arrangement provided for screening and loading not less than five sizes of coal: lump, egg, nut, slack, dust, or any reasonable combination of these. As we are considering only the preparation of the coal, we will omit all consideration of the method of haulage, pit cars, methods of dumping, and will take the coal after it is in the dump hopper. The track arrangement will frequently be determined by the ground layout. Our sizes and tonnage can be loaded on three tracks, but four tracks are better. The two outer tracks should be left for loading lump coal, No. 3 track should be left for egg coal, and No. 4 track for loading nut, slack and dust. Where a fifth track can be provided, No. 5 track should be held open only for run-of-mine coal, to act as a storage where emergency coal can, be run, should there be any delay in the screening equipment or in changing cars. Track No. I should be used for loading lump coal into box cars only. Track No. 2 should be used for loading lump coal into open cars only, and may or may not be provided with picking table, loading boom, or both. Where picking is necessary, a picking table can frequently be put between the two "lump tracks, heading down track, pivoted at one end, so it may be raised or lowered to feed either open or box cars; with

Jan 1, 1921

MR. MARGOLF: Thank you very, very much Harris. There's sure a lot there to think about in terms, of our image, particularly. I think we should keep' in mind what Harris said about our history not being monolithic. Therefore our image can only be that, which is reflecting the weakest link in our industry and I think that's a burden on all of us. Perhaps to do some policing amongst ourselves to try to improve whatever might be our weakest link and thereby elevate our entire industry. Our third speaker this afternoon is another good friend of mine of long standing and I am very pleased to be able to introduce to the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute Bob Golten. Bob is a graduate of the University of Michigan with a degree in Economics and Harvard Law School. His professional experience encompasses private practice in Chicago where he was born and in the federal government as a public defender in Washington, D.C. and in the Department of Justice as a tax , attorney. Some of us have come to know Bob more in his present role as the senior counsel for the I National Wildlife Federation. He's also Adjoint Professor of Law and Director of the National Wildlife Federation Resource Clinic, University of Colorado. Boulder campus. In addition, Bob has served with the Rocky Mountain Center on Environment as one of its directors for a number of years. He's very active in a number of areas that are not only civic but he does reflect what I would present by way of introduction as a perspective

Jan 1, 1982

The meeting was called to order in the Albany hotel, with the President, John B. Marks, in the chair. At the request of the Secretary, the chairman brought before the Institute the question of a reorganization of the finances and system of conducting the Institute, explaining that, although the Institute is in good financial shape and the meetings are of great interest and are attended by a large and serious minded membership, the Institute is getting so large and of such value to the operators that it should be taken over by the operators, conducted by some man elected by and from the operators, and its financing put on a definite basis. At present, it was explained, the Secretary, not a coal operator nor interested in operating, arranges and conducts all meetings and finances the Institute from three sources: the very low dues, the advertisements published in the Proceedings, and by direct solicitation of contributions among the supply and machinery houses. Mr. James Dalrymple spoke vigorously on the need of having the Institute entirely free from any taint of commercialism. Upon motion by W. D. Brennan, seconded, a committee of four, one to represent each State, was voted. Appointment of this Committee was deferred temporarily. The reading of the minutes of the previous meeting was then called for, but upon statement of the Secretary, that the minutes were published in Volume 2 of the 1925 Proceedings, they were dispensed with. The Secretary-Treasurer's report was made informally inasmuch as the last report had not yet been audited. In brief, the Secretary reported on a cost of approximately $1,600.00 a year to publish and send out the Proceedings, an expense of approximately $1,800.00 to care for the Denver meeting, and an expense of approximately $1,200.00 to care for the summer meeting. The Secretary's salary of $25.00 a month has not been collected, but a certain portion of this has been used for stenographic expense. The Secretary asked for expression from the floor regarding the advisability of continuing the publication on the present elaborate plan. Mr. Gibson, Mr. Marks, Mr. Whiteside, Mr. Littlejohn, Mr. Dick and others spoke positively on the value of the present form of the Proceedings, and urged that no changes be attempted in this. Upon motion of Holbrook Mahn, it was moved, seconded and carried that E. H. Weitzel and W. F. Murray be made life members of the Institute in recognition of their services in the organization of the Institute, placing them with Floyd W. Parsons as the original organizers of the Institute. Mr. Murray spoke briefly in acknowledgment of the courtesy. Mr. Weitzel's words are included in the discussion A letter was read from George B. Pryde relative to the present emblem of the Institute. Upon motion by Mr. C. W. Sinclair, seconded by Mr. Dalrymple, it was moved that the consideration of a new emblem be

Jan 1, 1926

By D. C. McClure

MR. McCLURE: Mr. Chairman, you sprang a surprise on me; I really came over here for a good time. Gentlemen, I am not at all qualified to pose as an expert on pulverized fuel; I have merely been making some rather interesting observations, and unfortunately at the present time, a great deal of substantial data, the technical data, I don't happen to have with me; it is still in the process of being calculated, but I will be very glad to tell you some of the observations as I have made them, and in as truthful and complete a way as I can. The question of how we would handle fuel became a very pressing subject in this new Valmont electric plant, which is now under progress. We have studied the methods of burning fuel for a number of years on different types of stokers at the existing plants in Denver; we are burning it with a natural draft chain grate and with underfeed and with forced draft chain grates, and I am very frank to confess at the present time that I have no answer as far as stokers are concerned for a better solution of the problem of burning lignite. In other words, I could not tell you that this or that is a better type of stoker to use for that coal. However, to boil the thing down, after considerable trials, the underfed stoker was chosen as the one most adaptable for the utilizing of lignite fuel if stokers are to be used. In other words, the chain grate was put aside. I might say in support of the chain grate, the prime reason for which that type of stoker was condemned, as far as lignite goes, is the initial investment charge and the large maintenance which is involved.

Jan 1, 1923

(The following discussion took place on this screen lecture in the dark.) MR. SHUBART: Would you give us a little .explanation as to the operation of this machine and what you are doing with it? MR. TESCHER: There is a 20- horsepower motor, rheostat, crusher, and a fan mounted on one base plate and operating on one shaft. The fan is overhung on the shaft. The only bearings you have are the bearings on each side of the crusher and the motor hearings. On one side of the ma- chine there is an opening for feeding shale. The machine is operated at 1,200 revolution per minute and as the shale is pulverized, the fan automatically exhausts fine dust from the crusher from an opening in the top of the crusher. The machine pulverizes 3,000 pounds in eight hours, reducing the materid to one hundred mesh. The last ma- chine we put in has been operating continuously fifteen hours a day for the past sixty days, without repairs of any kind. PRESIDENT LITTLEJOHN: Where is the machine in operation? MR. TESCHER. At the Royal mine. We have used ordinary mining ma- chine cable in local movements of the machines. This has enabled us to have twenty-two locations throughout the mines. The mine is highly gaesous, and the machines had to be placed on intake air. MR. SHUBSRT: What type of crusher do you use? MR. TESCHER. A No. 16 Universal, operating at 1,200 revolution per minute. M. SHURART: What material do you feed to it? MR. TESCHER: We have shale three-quarters of a mile from the mine. In the winter months we have been troubled with moisture. We build a kiln and get this shale and load it into the kiln for drying and then place it into a pit car and take it into the mine. The material must be dry. We have also used slate in the mine and have had good success. The slate at the mine is fairly hard. I presume, however, that the slate will probably carry a high silica content. MR. SHUBART: Mr. Harrington claims that silica does not do the harm, as was formerly supposed. MR. TESCHER: There is still a question as to whether it is harmful or not. PRESIDENT LITTLEJOHN: Are there any of these machines in operation closer than Aguilar? MR. TESCHER: There is one at the Alamo mine. Mr. Quealy also purchased a couple of them for use at his Wyoming mines. PRESIDENT LITTLEJOHN: Are there any other questions you would like to ask Mr. Tescher regarding his rock dusting machine while it is on the table for discussion? MR. DALRYMPLE, SR.: How many men does it take to operate it? MR. TESCHER: One man operates the machine. Sometimes we put the

Jan 1, 1925

The 78th Regular Meeting of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute (hereafter referred to as RMCMI) convened at the Marriott's Mark Conference Center, Lionshead Village in Vail, Colorado. The meeting was called to order at 8:45 a.m. by the President, Ira E. McKeever, Jr., who is President, Western Mining Operations, Natural Resources Group, W. R. Grace & Co. McKeever was introduced by Past President Edward F. Ziolkowski, Senior Vice President and General Manager, Energy Development Company in Hanna, Wyoming. MR. ZIOLKOWSKI: The first order of business this morning is to introduce the president and for a business meeting as well as other items on the program. It is my pleasure to introduce Ira McKeever to you this morning. Ira was born and raised in Kit Carson, Colorado, and served in the U.S. Navy prior to obtaining his geological engineering degree in 1952 from Colorado School of Mines in Golden. He then spent the next 20 years involved in mining sulphur, pot ash and coal with Texas Gulf Sulphur at that time and Gulf Resources Chemical Corporation. In 1972 he joined W. R. Grace & Co. as president of the Mining Division, Natural Resources Group. He was named Colowyo Coal Company's president and general manager in 1976 to develop what is currently Colorado's largest coal surface mining operation. Last year he became W. R. Grace's president of Western Mining Operations which is the position he presently holds. Ira is active in civic affairs; he is currently serving on the Colorado Energy Impact Assistance Advisory Committee. He is a member of the Colorado's Metropolitan Water Roundtable, he is also a director of Project Colorado, a member of the committee for the Colorado Division of Commerce and Industry. He has, in the past, served as chair- man of the Craig Hospital Board. In 1967 Ira was the recipient of the Colorado School of Mines van Diest Gold Medal Award, and in 1981 was given the individual service award for outstanding accomplishments in the field of health, promotion, physical fitness by Colorado's Governor's Council for the Health and Promotion of Physical Fitness. Memberships are also held in Denver Coal Club, the Colorado Mining Association, and the American Mining Congress. Will you please welcome Ira McKeever? I do have one other piece of business here. If you will all join with me, yesterday was Ira's birthday. I asked what year that was, but I couldn't get that out. So, I'm not going to lead the singing. Someone is going to lead the singing. But I think it would be appropriate if we did sing happy birthday this morning and I think it would also wake us up. How's that? All right, will you join me please? (A chorus of the Happy Birthday song followed.) President McKeever's address: MR. McKEEVER: The secret is that I'm double nickles. So I've got a few more years hopefully to be with you and this wonderful industry that we represent. Thank you Ed. I realize now more than ever, the tremendous effort that you put in the program last year and the magnitude of the job that is placed in the presidency of the Institute. It was indeed with tremulous hands that I undertook to lead the Institute this year, and I found a tremendous amount of strength and guidance in my friend Ed whom we've known since college days and worked together. On behalf of that lifetime of memories and good thoughts, Ed, I would like to present to you a little token of appreciation. 1 would like to join Ed in welcoming you all to Vail. Ed arranged the weather, 1 arranged the program along with Charlie Margolf. This is the 70th regular meeting of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute; and in accepting the leadership a year ago, 1 obligated one very special person to fill the role of chairlady and hostess for this meeting. I would like to have you all, if you haven't already, meet my wife, Linda. I would like to thank her publicly for her guidance and help she continues to provide me. It's absolutely necessary that you also meet and recognize Charlie Margolf our program chairman who will be helping through the meeting to present and monitor our program; and anyone who knows Charlie knows the sincerity and dedication he brings to anything or any phase of life he touches. We will be seeing him in action this afternoon when he chairs the most interesting panel presentations. Don't miss it if you can help it. A couple of logistical comments. We will have to keep our meeting on schedule so that any of our non-agenda items that we need to keep, maybe we

Jan 1, 1982

BHP-Utah International, Inc. Coal Magazine Crane & Hoist Sales, Inc. Cummins Southwest, Inc. Cyprus Coal Company Harnischfeger Corporation Hemscheidt Corporation Jennmar Corporation Joy Technologies, Inc. K&P Sales Engineers, Inc. Kennametal, Inc. Kerr McGee Coal Corporation McLanahan Corporation National Mine Service Company The North American Coal Corporation Peabody Coal Company Pittsburg & Midway Coal Mining Co. Roberts & Schaefer Company Santa Fe Pacific Coal Corporation Southern Pacific Lines Tamarron Resort Utah Power & Light Company Utility Fuel

Jan 1, 1991

By James J. Bryja

The production capabilities of today?s longwall systems have resulted in significant increases in retreat rates. This has in turn resulted in a heightened demand on panel development rates to assure that subsequent panels are completed in time to avoid a longwall production outage. As a means of reducing the pressure on the panel development activity a trend has developed towards the use of wider face lengths. The aim of using a wider face is to reduce the longwall retreat rate without sacrificing productivity and thereby reduce the pressure on increasing panel development rates. However, as the face width increases so too does the number of hydraulically powered roof supports that are required to control the longwall face roof. This increase in the number of units inherently translates into increases in the level of required maintenance relative to the multitude of mechanical and hydraulic components, and an increase in the time required for tear-down and installation time during the moves between panels. An obvious method of mitigating the maintenance and move-time impacts of wider faces is to employ the use of individual roof supports having a wider center-to-center spacing. This practice would serve to minimize the number of roof supports and maximize the time availability for longwall face production. With this target in mind a joint research project with DBT was initiated in 1998 to study the feasibility of using 2 m wide shields to replace the then standard 1.75 m wide shields. After four years of comprehensive work, the technical team from DBT and RAG American Coal completed the design and development of a prototype shield that would later become part of the world?s widest longwall face employing the use of shields having a spacing of +2 meters. The final spacing of the shields actually became 2.058m in order to match the standard pitch of the rack bar shearer haulage elements on the conveyor. In July 2002, the 2 m wide shields were successfully installed in LW-46 panel at RAG Cumberland mine in the U. S. The authors in this paper summarize the design considerations of and operational experiences with the world?s widest longwall face using +2 meter wide roof supports.

Jan 1, 2008