Miners pronounced saved, then dead

[.Andy]

On a side note, too bad the environmentalists won't allow for strip mining. With strip mining it is much safer and many issues that affect horizonal mining are not present.

How often is strip mining an alternative though? Doesn't it go after after more alluvial/shallow deposits than horizontal and vertical mining?

 

[zimv20]

How often is strip mining an alternative though? Doesn't it go after after more alluvial/shallow deposits than horizontal and vertical mining?

that's my understanding, yes.

so, sushi, i'm interested in you providing rational/proof for:
1. strip mining was a viable method at sago mine
2. actions by environmentalists forced sago to do anything
3. why you'd rather blame environmentalists for what happened, rather than 1) the mining company for not fixing its violations, and 2) the federal government for having such weak enforcement standards for said violations

 

[MongoTheGeek]

How often is strip mining an alternative though? Doesn't it go after after more alluvial/shallow deposits than horizontal and vertical mining?

Newer technology(read as bigger machines) allows deeper deposits to be strip mined. The current limit is now a couple hundred feet which is enough to get a lot of WV coal.

The way the companies want to do it is move the top of the mountain into the valley; take the coal; and cover everything back up with trees. After 20 odd years the land will look the same but the topography will be different.

This is not currently banned per se but the rules and procedural hurdles make it almost impossible to actually do.

 

[.Andy]

Newer technology(read as bigger machines) allows deeper deposits to be strip mined. The current limit is now a couple hundred feet which is enough to get a lot of WV coal.

I assume that limit is a financial not practical one. Unless the deposits were close to the surface wouldn't it cost far more to spend months stripping off waste to reach the paydirt = far less profits?

The way the companies want to do it is move the top of the mountain into the valley; take the coal; and cover everything back up with trees. After 20 odd years the land will look the same but the topography will be different.

This is not currently banned per se but the rules and procedural hurdles make it almost impossible to actually do.

I kind of agree too. Razing mountains for short term financial gain seems really myopic .

 

[MongoTheGeek]

I assume that limit is a financial not practical one. Unless the deposits were close to the surface wouldn't it cost far more to spend months stripping off waste to reach the paydirt = far less profits?

There are limits to how much dirt you can pull off. You really need someplace to move it. Also eventually you spend more energy getting to the coal than you get from it. Yes, part of the whether it is strip mine-able or not is financial but there practical considerations.

I kind of agree too. Razing mountains for short term financial gain seems really myopic .

There are still rules that they follow about restoration. Strip mined land gets reclaimed. There are areas that were strip mined back in the 80s that today are woods that you would never know were once strip mined.

 

[pinto32]

Myth vs. fact:

Strip mining is not inherantly safer, its just that the risks are presented in different ways. Subsidence, collapse, methane, and flooding are still major concerns that cause injuries and take lives. Also, active and abandoned strip mines are a major safety hazard to non-miners. In coal regions, kids like to play in mine shafts and stripping pits. It is very rare for injuries to result from kids entering a mine shaft (usually people setting fires is the greater concern). It is very common for kids to be killed or injured in stripping pits. The cause: falling into them and dying from either trama or drowning (as they often become flooded). In the past three years, my area has had five drown and four die of trama when falling into a stripping pit.

Strip mining IS very bad for the enviroment. The land will NEVER be the same again. No matter what the coal companies say they will do to reclaim the land, they rarely act on their promises. The watershed of the entire region of a strip mine is damaged by the sulfur run-off from the strip mine. Sulfur contamination kills all plant and animal life that rely on that water, including people (if it is not filtered properly, which costs a great deal of money). If you ever have driven through a coal region, and seen an orange creek or lake, your looking at useless, contaminated mine runoff.

If anyone still beleives that strip mining is a good way to go, I'm more than happy to post pictures and newspaper clippings.

 

[MongoTheGeek]

Strip mining IS very bad for the enviroment. The land will NEVER be the same again. No matter what the coal companies say they will do to reclaim the land, they rarely act on their promises. The watershed of the entire region of a strip mine is damaged by the sulfur run-off from the strip mine. Sulfur contamination kills all plant and animal life that rely on that water, including people (if it is not filtered properly, which costs a great deal of money). If you ever have driven through a coal region, and seen an orange creek or lake, your looking at useless, contaminated mine runoff.

To hear the old timers tell it the creeks around here were running red 50 years ago.

Besides we can just tarp the mountains in black plastic

 

[zimv20]

this article covers why it was the environmentalists fault.

Safety Violations Have Piled Up at Coal Mine

Time and again over the past four years, federal mining inspectors documented the same litany of problems at central West Virginia's Sago Mine: mine roofs that tended to collapse without warning. Faulty or inadequate tunnel supports. A dangerous buildup of flammable coal dust.

Yesterday, the mine's safety record came into sharp focus as officials searched for explanations for Monday's underground explosion. That record, as reflected in dozens of federal inspection reports, shows a succession of operators struggling to overcome serious, long-standing safety problems, some of which could be part of the investigation into the cause of the explosion that trapped 13 miners.

In the past two years, the mine was cited 273 times for safety violations, of which about a third were classified as "significant and substantial," according to documents compiled by the Labor Department's Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA). Many were for problems that could contribute to accidental explosions or the collapse of mine tunnels, records show.

In addition, 16 violations logged in the past eight months were listed as "unwarrantable failures," a designation reserved for serious safety infractions for which the operator had either already been warned, or which showed "indifference or extreme lack of care," said Tony Oppegard, a former MSHA senior adviser.

"That is a very high number, and it is usually indicative of a very poor safety record," Oppegard said.

Sago, a relatively small mine that listed 145 employees last year, was operated by Anker West Virginia Mining Co. until two months ago, when it was purchased by International Coal Group Inc. "Much of the bad history you're talking about was beyond our reach and ability to control," company chief executive Bennett K. Hatfield said yesterday. "But there's been dramatic improvement, and I think regulatory agencies will confirm that."

In the hours after Monday's explosion, Eugene Kitts, a company vice president for mining, said the 46 alleged violations described in MSHA's most recent inspection report were all minor. "We addressed them," he said.

But in MSHA's reports, 18 of the 46 most recent violations were listed as "significant and substantial." Among the problems cited: inadequate safeguards against the collapse of the mine roof and inadequate ventilation to guard against the buildup of deadly gases.

Other inspection reports over the past two years fault the mine for "combustibles," including a buildup of flammable coal dust and a failure to adequately insulate electric wires. Sparks from electrical equipment can ignite coal dust and methane gas, triggering fires and explosions.

The mine is contesting some of the violations, while agreeing to pay more than $24,000 in penalties to settle others.

Government documents also show a high rate of injuries and accidents at Sago. Although no miners were reported killed at the mine since at least 1995, 42 workers and contractors were injured in accidents since 2000, records show. The average number of working days lost because of accidents in the past five years was nearly double the national average for underground coal mines, MSHA documents show.

Some serious accidents caused no injuries. For example, in the past year, large sections of the mine's rocky roof collapsed on at least 20 occasions -- but not when workers were in the affected tunnels. Some of the collapsed sections were rocky slabs as long as 100 feet. The most recent roof collapse occurred on Dec. 5, less than a month before Monday's explosion.

J. Davitt McAteer, who headed MSHA during the Clinton administration, said he was troubled by an apparent spike in accidents and violations that occurred beginning about two years ago.

"The violations are not the worst I've ever seen -- and certainly not the best -- but I'm concerned about the trend and the direction they're going in. It's indication to those running the operation that you've got a problem here."

not environmentalists, sorry... the mining company and weak enforcement of violations.

 

[adk]

Myth vs. fact:

Strip mining is not inherantly safer, its just that the risks are presented in different ways. Subsidence, collapse, methane, and flooding are still major concerns that cause injuries and take lives. Also, active and abandoned strip mines are a major safety hazard to non-miners. In coal regions, kids like to play in mine shafts and stripping pits. It is very rare for injuries to result from kids entering a mine shaft (usually people setting fires is the greater concern). It is very common for kids to be killed or injured in stripping pits. The cause: falling into them and dying from either trama or drowning (as they often become flooded). In the past three years, my area has had five drown and four die of trama when falling into a stripping pit.

Strip mining IS very bad for the enviroment. The land will NEVER be the same again. No matter what the coal companies say they will do to reclaim the land, they rarely act on their promises. The watershed of the entire region of a strip mine is damaged by the sulfur run-off from the strip mine. Sulfur contamination kills all plant and animal life that rely on that water, including people (if it is not filtered properly, which costs a great deal of money). If you ever have driven through a coal region, and seen an orange creek or lake, your looking at useless, contaminated mine runoff.

If anyone still beleives that strip mining is a good way to go, I'm more than happy to post pictures and newspaper clippings.

I have to agree here. Nobody can rationally argue that Strip mining isn't bad for the environment. The other issue is safety. The problem is that open pit mines cause a lot more safety risks to the surrounding community. Coal miners know that they have a realistic risk of being injured or killed on the job, and are reward with a good wage. But the kids that will inherently play in/around strip mines don't know. They'll fall, drown, or who knows. Sure, they could get hurt in a mineshaft too, but it is a lot easier to block off and seal a mineshaft than a 10 billion cubic foot hole in the ground. All most open pit mines do is put up a chain link fence with barbed wire at the top, which will not keep out the more adventurous kids.