Search Documents

Jan 1, 2001

[Abbott, Jay Union Supply Co., 5460 Colo. Blvd., Denver, Colo. 80022 Achziger, Ronald H Midwest Rubber Co., 6404 E. 39th Ave., Denver, Colo. 80207 Adams, Bob Energy Fuels Corp., Box G, Steamboat Sprlngs, Colo. 80477 Adams, David Empire Energy Corp., Box 68, Craig, Colorado 81625 Adams, Dell H Consolidation Coal Co., 3300 One Oliver Plaza, Pittsburgh, Pa. 15222 Adams, Douglas K General Electric Co., P.O. Box 2331, Denver, Colorado 80201 Adams, Kenneth L Arch Mineral Corp., 33 Carnation, Belleville, Ill. 62221 Ahlborg, William Joy Mfg. Co., 1911 Denver Club Bldg., 518-17th St., Denver, Colo. 80202 Albert, Darrell Safety Appliances Co., 400 Penn Center Blvd., Pittsburgh, Pa. 15235 Albrechtsen, Ray H Mountain States Resources Corp., 1399 So. 700 East, Suite 11, Salt Lake City, Utah 84105]

Jan 1, 1975

Jan 1, 1976

Jan 1, 2009

MR. SHUBART: Mr. Miller's paper mentioned the two processes that seemed to be a success, the Smith process and the Piron process. I suppose the main difference is this, that Smith's process is to furnish domestic fuel and the by-products while the Piron process that Ford is installing is for fuel for power plants. I would like to ask Mr. Miller something about the commercial cost of the process. With the briquette you must make it cheap enough to sell. What are the commercial possibilities of Smith's briquette? MR. MILLER: It is pretty hard to say what the cost would be at this time, owing to the fact that slack has advanced double, or even more at the time I was in New York with the plant, but at that time it was costing $1.10 for the operation. You can add to that, of course, the cost of the coke. One dollar and ten cents was the entire cost of plant operation. It takes about one and one-half tons of coal to make a ton of briquettes. One dollar and ten cents takes care of all the material, cost, labor, handling, etc. Labor was much cheaper then. I would say it would cost about $2.20 now. The cost of coal is what you can buy it for on the market. I don't think, however, that the carbocoal process will ever meet with any great favor for the simple reason that it is really a prepared fancy fuel. It is going to be nice for people in offices where they want a grate or for families where they want a nice clean fuel. It leaves no stain on the fingers, no odor to it. It seems in carbonizing coal we change the carbon molecule. For instance, we are all familiar with the diamond. It is carbon, yet it requires a tremendous heat to burn a common little diamond. But you can set a piece of charcoal afire, which is also carbon, with a match. The molecular form has been changed in carbonizing coal, i. e., it is larger. Carbocoal will fire very readily, it can be started with a piece' of paper. I think the Piron process will be the process, i. e., to simply take out the tars and light oils, then fire direct-have the distillate plants right on the job. CHAIR: Can Mr. Shubart tell us something of the mechanical part of the Piron process? MR. SHUBART: The Piron process is of interest because Mr. Ford is taking it up. He has made so few mechanical mistakes it makes us feel that it is a success. Piron is a chemist of high accomplishment and reputation. The thing about the proces is its simplicity. Mr. Smith's is a very elaborate process, but Piron has gotten around all that. Piron feeds the raw coal in at about one-half inch mesh or smaller. He feeds it into a retort about 55 feet long, 16 feet wide over all. He has a hearth about 6 feet wide and the length of the retort. The base of the hearth that carries the coal is a conveyor, a flat cast iron conveyor, a very massive affair, very accurately made, so that there is no loss of coal. Between the upper and lower strands of the ' conveyor is a bath of molten lead which gives an accurate control of temperature. For best results he must have temperature of not under 800 F., not over 1,300 degrees F., about 1,100 or 1,200 F. seems to be ideal for getting greatest yield of oils and the best tars and other by-products. This lead bath has a system of flues running through it that

Jan 1, 1923

Amercable, Inc. Andalex Resources, Inc. ARCO Coal Company Behre Dolbear & Company, Inc. Colowyo Coal Co. L.P. Continental Conveyor & Equipment Company Crane & Hoist Sales Crested Butte Mountain Resort Cyprus Amax Coal Co. Energy West Mining Company The Falkirk Mining Company Fleischli Oil Co. Inc. Halbach & Braun Industries Hemscheidt Corporation GH Henley Industries Ingersoll-Rand Co. Jennmar Corporation Joy Technologies, Inc. K & P Sales Engineers, Inc. Kennametal, Inc. Kerr-McGee Coal Corporation L & H Welding & Machine Co. McLanahan Corporation National Coal Association The North American Coal Corporation Northwestern Resources Company Peabody Western Coal Company Phillips Machine Service Pincock Allen & Holt Ramsey Technology, Inc. Rust Tractor Company Salt River Project Schroeder Industries Stamler Corporation TerraMatrix TIC (The Industrial Company Wyoming, Inc.) Trapper Mining Inc. Wagner Equipment Company Western Energy Company Wheeler Machinery Company

Jan 1, 1994

Public perceptions about coal remain neutral to negative But gains are slowly being made as the public becomes more aware of coal as ?abundant, affordable, and increasingly clean?

Jan 1, 2006

This session was devoted to Surface Mining. Presiding was Virgil W. Carmichael, Vice President- Exploration, North American Coal Corporation, Bismarck, North Dakota, and John (Jack) F. Ratchye, Manager of Marketing and Resources, Peter Kiewit Sons' Co. Mining District, Sheridan, Wyoming. Subject-The new Federal Surface Mining Regulations-a thorough briefing as to content of law and how it will affect western mining. Introductory Speaker: William Hynan, Senior Vice President, National Coal Association, Washington, D.C. (See index for printed text of Mr. Hynan's paper.) Panel Members: The first speaker was George M. L. Robinson, Senior Hydrologist, Peabody Coal Company, Denver, Colorado. Mr. Robinson has a B.S. Degree from New Mexico University, Portales; Masters in Hydrology, Kent State, Ohio.

Jan 1, 1978

By D. A. Stout

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute: Your Secretary has asked me to write upon a subject' which is a most interesting one, and which has a very wide scope. In view of the great need for further decreasing costs at its coal mines, the Colorado Fuel and Iron Company began early in 1924 to experiment with methods of mining which had not previously been. tried out at its mines, and which were selected because of the greater possibilities for the concentration of the work, better grouping of workmen, and increased tonnage per workman, with a resultant increased efficiency, better supervision, and lowered costs. Because of the great competition of the day, means and methods must be provided by which fewer mines can be made to produce larger tonnages and at a lower cost. Western physical conditions are such as to make our problems far more complicated and not so easy of solution as compared to many of the eastern fields where conditions are more favorable for the operation of the mines. The dry condition of our Western mines on account of a relatively low humidity, and with additional gaseous conditions, makes the problem still more difficult to solve. A study of new methods was necessary before adoption, and this was particularly true of the method of extracting the coal. Where mechanical means are used, particularly in the coking coal mines of this state, due consideration must be given to the type, and machines or conveyors should not be installed solely on the basis of their performance elsewhere, without the knowledge of local influencing factors. In trying out the newer methods of extraction at our mines, very careful consideration has been given to the question of safety and the adoption of any new methods must provide adequate means of protection to employes, and be approved by' the State Coal Mine Inspector. In any large industry there are a few outstanding operating costs, and usually the leading ones in their order are labor cost, material cost, and power cost. The things which we, hope to accomplish: 1. Reduce labor costs. 2. Reduce material costs. 3. Reduce power costs by the con 4. Reduce the amount of powder used per ton of coal produced. 5. Increase the lump percentage (particularly at the domestic mines). 6. Reduce accidents and annual compensation payment. 7. Reduce haulage costs. 8. Reduce cost for track work. 9. Reduce cost for timber and timbering, and increase the recovery of timber at a considerable additional saving. 10. Reduce the brushing costs. 11. Reduce the amount of rock hauled to the outside. 12. Reduce the cost for drainage. 13. Reduce the cost for ventilating. 14. Reduce cost of inspection and supervision. 15. Reduce the cost for shot firing. 16. Reduction of number of working places. 17. Grouping of men with increased sociability. 18. Increased tonnage per man. 19. Reduction in total number men employed. In the consideration of the methods used and now working successfully, there were three points which were considered outstanding, to make them wholly successful: ventilation, roof control, and transportation. For making the experiments, those mines were selected where conditions

Jan 1, 1925

By Cole A. Wist

?Twowinters ago, what had been a mediocre safety record at West Virginia?s Sago Mine grew dramatically worse. Over 23 months beginning in February 2004, two dozen miners were hurt in a string of accidents, some of them caused by rock chunks falling from the mine ceiling. Federal safety inspectors slapped the mine with citations 273 times, or an average of once every 2 ½ days. Despite this record, the price paid by Sago?s operators was light. Government regulators never publicly discussed shutting down themine and never sought criminal sanctions. The biggest single fine was $440, about 0.0004 percent of the $110 million net profit reported last year by the mine?s current owner.? -Washington Post, January 8, 2006

Jan 1, 2006

[ALLISON, D. S.. ...................... ,1331 Roberta St., Salt-Lake City, Utah AMBLER, J. B.. ........ c-o Ambler & Riter, Kearns Bldg., Salt Lake City, Utah ANDERSON, A. E.. ................ ,403 Midland Savings Bldg., Denver, Colo. ANDERSON, ARTHUR E.. .. .Colorado Utilities Corp., Steamboat Springs, Colo. ANDERSON, FRANK ........................................... Crosby, Wyo. ANGUS, WILLIAM.. ........... .99 South Downing St., Apt. 204, Denver, Colo. APPERSON, A. B.. ............................ .Tramway Bldg., Denver, Colo. ]

Jan 1, 1928

By Geo. B. Pryde

Dear Sir: Yours of July 23rd, relative to my appointment on the Safety Committee in connection with the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute. As you say in your letter, "The duty of this committee is to draft suggestions as to safer mining practices with the idea of preventing disasters in coal mines." Much has been written and many suggestions made on this same subject, and it is very hard to put up further recommendations than have already been made. The disasters you mention in your letter unquestionably have direct reference to coal mine explosions, which from time to time still occur in this and other countries. As far as our Western mines are concerned, you know that sprinkling and shot firing by electricity have been very extensively carried out. Notwithstanding these precautions; we have had a few rather serious disasters in the past in these mines. I do not care to place any blame or responsibility on the companies having these disasters, but it is a fact that in each and all of them, after careful investigation has been made, that the human element has had more or less bearing on the accidents happening. From most reports that we gain, either directly or indirectly, it is very evident that investigation shows after an explosion that the rules governing one or both of the above safety measures have been somewhat carelessly or negligently carried out. Much has been written and read about rock dust sprinkling, but it is questionable if this method is doing a great deal toward the eliminating of disasters. While it is true it may have the effect of preventing propagation, still I do not believe anyone claims for it a sure preventative against initial explosions. I had occasion not long ago to visit a mine, after an explosion, in which dust barriers were supposed to be hung, and from indications it was quite evident that the dust barriers had been in operation, but they did not prevent the explosion from reaching. all open parts of the mine. It is also true that profuse scattering of rock dust throughout a mine would have a beneficial effect, but there is a question arises here as to whether the sprinkling by rock dust or the spraying by water, if available, is the most effective. I am satisfied that if all coal mines are kept well sprinkled and all open workings maintained in a thorough moist condition, that the biggest factor in a coal mine explosion is in this way eliminated. There is no doubt but what the use of permissible powder, particularly if shot by electricity, has had a very marked effect on the number of dis¬asters in mines, and if this method of shooting was energetically carried out there would be a difference in the number of explosions, both minor and Major, all over the country. Some of the recent explosions have taken place where no shooting was being done, but there is no denying the fact that the other ingredient, namely, coal dust, entered in the elements very extensively. We have read and heard of hydraulic cartridges and other patents (substitutes for powder) that were being worked out for the purpose of

Jan 1, 1923

PRESIDENT MOSES.: The meeting will please come to order. Will you kindly state your names prior to making any statements, in order that we may deep the record straight? The first paper this morning is a joint one on vocational training, by D. W. Rockey, H. A. Tiemann and Wm. Moorhead. Mr. Rocdey. (Applause.) D. W. ROCKEY (State Superintendent, Industrial Education, Santa Fe, New Mexico) (Mr. Rocdey's notes not received in time for publication.) MR. TESCHER: I would like to ask you, Mr. Rocdey, you say you gave the Phelps-Dodge Corporation financial assistance; to just what extent was the State obligated, and how much assistance was given, etc.?

Jan 1, 1927

DM&E PRB Project [ ] DM&E HISTORICAL MILESTONES ?Start-up in 1986 (former C&NW). ?Colony Line acquisition in 1996 (from UP). ?PRB Project Announcement in 1997 ?IC&E Acquisition in 2002 (former CP/IMRL). ?FRA Federal Refinancing in 2003 (RRIF-1).

Jan 1, 2006

Jan 1, 1995

DR. BANOWSKY: Thank you very much. That was the shortest introduction that I have had lately, and I didn't have time to get my coat on. But I appreciated it, and I'm delighted to be here with an industry with which 1 feel strong affinity. At the University of Oklahoma we have an energy history. We are a little more currently involved in oil and gas, and those of you who know the history of our state would be aware we have an early coal development back really before the turn of the century in the southeast part of our state what we call Little Dixie. How many of you have spent anytime in Oklahoma or are from the state of Oklahoma? I'm not going to ask how many are from OSU or the University of Colorado. We did send you a football coach here from Oklahoma, and 1 see you have exchanged him. Several of you were only interested in the lobby in asking about our football team this year. 1 would like to go somewhere where we can talk about something besides football. I'm just trying to build a University that our football team can be proud of. We're going to be strong again. 1 can assure you. We've got the best football team money can buy. It's not quite as bad as the college president who called the coach in and said, "Coach we're in trouble, you're losing games and the alumni is very unhappy." "What can we do?" the president asked. The coach said, "Well the football team is flunking the admissions test. We can't get them in with the standard achievement and SAT tests." The president said, "What can we do?" The coach said, "Well the coaching staff has substituted for the American College Test the simple fill in the blank questionnaire." The president said, "Let's use it. We have got to get the team in." The first question was, Old MacDonald had a (-). And a couple of the big tackles were taking it and one of them said, "Hey, what did Old MacDonald have?" His friend said, "Stupid, Old MacDonald had a farm." "Well how do you spell farm?" He said, "Stupid, e i e i 0." Now the gentleman who met me at the registration line from Lakewood, Colorado, was asking me about one of our great big tackles; and he is doing well. We call him Doctor Death; he is also a wrestler and that gentleman said, "1 don't know how bright he is." 1 said, "He is bright enough for our academic tutoring that he is going to get through all right." So I'm delighted to see you and be here with my very dear friend, Carl Terzian. Carl and 1 were in Los Angeles together for 10 or 12 years when I was president of Pepperdine University. He and I are exactly the same age. Born in 1935 and 1 a month or two later in 1936. Fewer children were born in that period than in any other period of time in this century. For those of you who remember anything about that period, you will know why no one was having babies during that period. But Carl called and said, "Bill do you know where Vail, Colorado is?" Well when you live in Oklahoma, you learn where Colorado is in a hurry. 1 not only know this beautiful area, but have made too much of an investment here at a place called Beaver Creek. The real estate is cheap over there. 1 play regularly in the Gerald Ford Invitational Golf Tournament here. Hope you will visit Beaver Creek. It's just 10- 12 miles to the west. The sight of the 1976 winter olympics until the people of Colorado voted them out. And now Vail Associates and I are good Oklahoma families. Bass family, Harry Bass of course, many of you know this story, who is chairman of the Board of Vail Associates, is making quite an investment in that year-round resort area. Beautiful golf course now. You can come out and afford the green's fee and beautiful, beauti-

Jan 1, 1982

Jan 1, 1955

PRESIDENT LITTLEJOHN: The paper of Mr. Emrick will now be open for discussion for about twenty minutes. The meeting is now open for discussion. MR. EMRICK: There is some question that may have occurred to you at different times, that is how are you going to tell when the bits are properly made? A fairly good rule to go by is when the used bits come out of the mine, if half of them are bent and half of them are broken, the average is pretty good MR. GEO. B. PRYDE (Union Pacific Coal Company): I would like to ask Mr. Emrick if he has any figures as to the saving of Dower with the different styles of its. MR. EMRICK: I suppose you mean chisel point bits and pick point bits? MR. PRYDE: Yes. MR. EMRICK: So far as I have been able to learn, the only reason why chisel point bits are used is to prevent coring that might be done by the cutter chain. The pick point bit, of course, is the proper thing to use. It can be used when the position of the cutter links in the cutter chain is right. I do not know of any figures which give power consumption ratings on the use of pick point and chisel point bits, but there are tests and ratings, etc., which have been taken- which have been tested as against different bits, which have been given proper clearances against bits not having been given proper clearances, and they will run,-in their saving in power, they will run 20 to 25 per cent. MR. A. C. WATTS (Chief Engineer, Utah Fuel Company) : I would like to ask Mr. Emrick if he has any record showing the saving in power on using the alloy steel chisel bits. I know that several experiments have been made; I do not recall the figures now, but we had a very decided saving in power. MR. EMRICK: I haven't any of the records. Do you think that is because of the steel that has been used? MR. WATTS: Well, they were all sharpened by the same man and used in the same machine, and at the same shop. I do not know the composition. It is "Red Star" Vanadium that I had in mind. MR. EMRICK: I have not seen any records. Some companies are using the tool steel bits because they stand up a little bit better. MR. BENEDICT SHUBART (Secretary) : I was going to ask Mr. Emrick about that question. There is one company that does not recommend tempering the bits. They recommend using not exactly self-hardening steel, but one that is bard enough without quenching-they use 80-90-point car- bon but about a 70-point manganese, not exactly self-hardening steel, but they do not temper this at all. Will Mr. Emrick state if a steel of that kind could be worked in the bit sharpening machine that his company makes, as it

Jan 1, 1925

Jan 1, 1960

By Peter B. Lilly

Thank you, Tom, I appreciate that generous introduction - and your generous welcome. When Doris Finnie asked me to speak here today, my decision to join you couldn't have been easier - for two reasons. First, I can't say no to an opportunity to return to Steamboat Springs. My family has wonderful memories of skiing here. And this time of year, golf in the mountains is so good you almost don't miss the skiing. The second reason this was such an easy decision is that The Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute is such an important forum for the coal industry, and it's certainly important to Peabody. We have mines in five western states - Arizona, Colorado, Montana, New Mexico and Wyoming. Last year, our western mines produced more than 110 million tons of coal. That's about two-thirds of our total domestic production. So western states are obviously critical to us. A couple of weeks ago, the west became even more significant to Peabody. Of course, I'm speaking of PacifiCorp's planned acquisition of The Energy Group - including Peabody - announced the middle of this month. Admittedly, when I agreed to speak here - some months ago - I had no idea just how much change Peabody would face in this relatively brief period. Still, not knowing then about the PacifiCorp announcement, I chose change as the subject for this talk. I'll update you on our recent news. But, first I want to establish a broad context for the PacifiCorp/Energy Group announcement and other change in the electricity business, change here in the United States and all over the world. ? We'll see how change is driven by two major trends - privatization in emerging markets and deregulation in mature markets, In turn, those two trends will cause ever-increasing consolidation - in both the coal industry and the broader power industry. ? After outlining those trends, I'll discuss the change that will dramatically affect Peabody following the announcement a week ago that PacifiCorp and The Energy Group intend to join forces to create one of the world's largest international integrated energy companies - an event that adds considerable credibility to the prophesies I'll outline in my remarks today. ? Finally, I will discuss an issue that threatens our industry's future - and, indeed, the economic future of all Americans. That issue is the inappropriate response to the unproven possibility of global climate change. Let's set the stage for change. And let's begin with the first trend I mentioned - the trend to privatization in developing economies. What drives the trend to privatization? Economics. It's all about the supply and demand of capital. And the engine that drives the supply/demand ratio is growth in electricity demand - tremendous growth in demand in developing economies. The U.S. EIA projects worldwide growth in electricity demand at 63 percent between 1990 and 2010, most of it in developing countries. This strong growth means that a new 500 MW power plant will be needed every three and one-half days until the year 2010. Now, if we say that a 500 MW plant will cost about $500 million dollars, we're talking about a bill of about $1 billion dollars a week - through 2010. That voracious demand for capital drives the trend to privatization. It means countries in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union want to sell generating assets. And Asian countries - for example, India, Indonesia and the Philippines - want to find private investors to build power plants. Privatization already is well underway. In the future, it will grow, with countries in South America, Central America, and Africa joining the trend. Bottom line: The privatization trend means rich new opportunities for companies willing to think beyond "business as usual." Meanwhile, developed economies face a different but no less fundamental change. Western European countries, the United States and Australia face deregulation. Why does deregulation represent such a big change? Consider a few basic facts about the U.S. electricity market to see what a big change -

Jan 1, 1997