Injury Incidence in Underground Coal Mines

Introduction The use of diesel engines as an alternate power source in US underground coal mines has been a controversial step towards more efficent mining practices. Three areas of potential benefit are foreseen. First, diesel-powered mining equipment is believed to be more efficient, resulting in less occupational risk for any given amount of production. Second, diesels are believed to pose fewer intrinsic hazards, especially those related to fires and ignition of combustibles. Finally, several other health and safety advantages are foreseen for diesel units. Each of these issues will be discussed separately. Diesel Efficiency Proponents of the use of underground diesel-powered mining equipment point to increased production efficiency due to greater maneuverability, speed, power, and payload (Bradbury, 1973; Jorgensen, 1982; Ogden, 1978; Wenberg, 1979; Olsen, 1980). Units most suitable for diesel power include LHD vehicles, shuttle cars, personnel carriers, and maintenance vehicles. Estimates of increased efficiency vary from 60%-300% and more (Wenberg, 1979). Increased diesel mining efficiency is usually viewed as making it practical to mine lower grade seams. Diesel units can also operate over a wider range of floor pitches and distances than electrically-powered units, thus allowing mining of seams with special mining problems (Olsen, 1980). Diesel application is not a universal substitute for electrical power. For example, continuous miners are unlikely diesel candidates. Reduced Intrinsic Hazards Proponents of diesel use have pointed to the increased safety potential due to a reduction in electrocutions, arcs, burns, underground cable fires, and methane ignition (Ogden, 1978). Diesel units are frequently employed in maintenance activities for lifting and moving, and for coal cleanup. Thus the case is made that diesel use, by making powered operations more conveniently available, reduces the incidence of lower back injuries and related causes for days lost due to disability (Olsen, 1980). Several other issues relating to diesel safety have also been suggested. Diesel units can continue operation even during power outages allowing, for example, personnel evacuation. The maneuverability of diesel units make them particularly attractive in difficult physical conditions, such as long haulage from the face to the belt and in areas where water is deep. The case for diesel use focuses heavily on the potential for a "per worker" reduction in accidents, or a reduction in the severity of accidents. Since accidents are a major part of the health impact of mining, a reduction in accidents and resulting injuries would make a major contribution to the health of coal miners. Opposition to Diesel Use Opposition to the use of underground diesel mining equipment in the US seems to have started with the United Mine Workers of America. Some opposition to US diesel use has been based on a widely publicized 1976 letter from NIOSH to Mine Enforcement and Safety Administration administrator Robert Barrett (NIOSH, 1982). In essence, this letter warned that while insufficient evidence existed as to diesel effects on underground coal miners, NIOSH had concerns based on prior knowledge of separate diesel exhaust constituents and the potential for interaction between these constituents and coal mine dust. Current opposition to underground diesel use has focused on respiratory health effects related to diesel emissions, particularly nitrogen dioxide (NO,), carbon monoxide (CO), and particulate content (Barrett, 1982). Through