Search Documents

The Tuesday morning session opened at 9:00 a.m. and was presided over by Mr. Homer Hyatt, Safety Director, North American Coal Corporation, Western Division, Castle Gate, Utah. Mr. Hyatt introduced Mr. Richard F. Walker, Vice President, Engineer & Planning, Electric Department, Public Service Company of Colorado, Denver, Colorado. Mr. Walker is a native of the State of Nebraska, a graduate of the University of Colorado with a BSEE degree in 1949. He has been associated with the Public Service Company of Colorado for almost twenty years and in the above capacity for the last one and one-half years. Mr. Walker?s subject was "Our New Plants and Coal. (See index for printed text of Mr. Walker's paper.) Mr. John F. O'Leary, Director, U.S. Bureau of Mines, Washington, D. C. spoke on the ?High Cost of Economy.? Mr. O'Leary graduated from George Washington University in 1950 with a degree in Economics. In 1950, he joined the Bureau of Mines. In 1963 he was appointed Deputy Assistant Secretary, Mineral Resources, U.S. Department of the Interior. In 1967, he was appointed Chief, Bureau of Natural Gas, Federal Power Commission. In 1968, appointed Director, U.S. Bureau of Mines, Washington, D.C.

Jan 1, 1969

By R. Dawson Hall

R. DAWSON HALL (The Coal Age, New York City) : Mr. Chairman and gentlemen: I do not feel that I have anything in particular to say. I have not prepared anything for an occasion such as this. I just came from New York City, and as one man said to me today, "That is not any recommendation in particular." (Laughter.) In answer to your request for a few remarks of a timely character I would say: One of the possibilities in the Rocky Mountain Region coal mines is the use of steel arches, posts and straps. The timber of the region seems unusually subject to dry rot and does not last long, especially in those places as in southern Wyoming, where the mine atmosphere is likely to contain a large quantity of carbon dioxide. It is true that, in many mines, much care is taken to drive out this gas and to arrange that the timber will have the fresh air that will prolong its life, but despite such provision much timber is subjected to speedy rot. Steel has made rapid progress in England, Germany and France and is recognized as an economy, not an extravagance. Frequent replacement of rotting wood and removal of broken rock are a source of great waste, risk and inconvenience in operation that together spell great cost. The very dryness of the mines and the lack' of acid water are favorable to the use of steel where support of roof or sides is necessary.

Jan 1, 1932

By John Bevan

In a discussion of the personal dangers that may arise from mine gases, it is necessary to take into consideration the gases which may result from an underground fire, or a fire in or about the downcast shaft, and the methods of avoiding or minimizing the danger arising therefrom. In all cases of the combustion of carbonaceous material such as coals and timber, carbon dioxide and water vapor are formed. In cases where the air supply is limited, some carbon monoxide is produced, the quantity varying with the readiness with which the oxygen from the air can get into intimate contact with the consuming carbon; in addition to these products there may be produced large volumes of irritating fumes consisting of unconsumed vapors' distilled from the burning material. Apart from the physical distress that may be caused by the irritant action of the fumes, the chief danger to life underground arising from a fire in or about the downcast shaft or intake airways is due to the carbon monoxide which the smoke is almost certain to contain. The physiological effects of this gas have already been discussed in mining papers and ref¬erence should be made to this. The prevention of fires at the surface near to the mouth of the downcast shaft, or in the shaft itself, or at the bottom of the shaft, usually lies outside the duties of the fireboss. An outbreak of fire at such places would, however, immediately foul the air current passing into the mine, and, assuming the men were in the mine, create a situation demanding urgent attention of the fireboss. As a rule, each case of fire creates its own problems, but in all cases the guiding principle should be to restrict the poison-laden 'air to the smallest part of the mine that is practicable, by opening separation doors, or breaking down selected stoppings at the most accessible points near the seat of the fire, so that the gases and smoke may pass directly into the return and so to surface. In the case of a shaft fire it will have the effect of fouling both shafts and in the case of a fire in an intake airway, both roadways leading to the shafts. It requires the use of some judgment. Therefore, in circumstances as to whether men inside the mine should attempt to escape to the shafts or should remain in the mine, and attempt to protect themselves from the poisonous air by suitably short circuiting the air-current and retiring from the main air-ways. In order to make such restraint easier, it is very desirable that all mines should be equipped with telephone communication from all sections of the mine to the surface so that men in the mine may be informed of what is being done at the surface to secure their safety, or instructed as to what they themselves should do. In cases of fire in or about the shafts, the question of the reversal of the air-current will probably arise. Should this be decided on by the management at the surface, the fireboss in the mine may have to give some attention to the effects which this action will have on the circulation of the

Jan 1, 1922

By Charlie Monroe

Savage Company History ?C.A. Savage & Son was founded in American Fork, Utah in 1946 by Kenneth Savage and his father. ?Kenneth?s brothers, Neal and Luke joined the company soon after, and remain involved today. ?Since 1988, the company has focused on its strength, expertise in providing high-quality Operating Services & Logistics Management. ?Today, Savage provides comprehensive services in the following Industries: ?Crude Oil Refining ?Sulphur & Fertilizers ?Coal Production and Mining ?Electric Power Production ?Industrial/Chemical Services ?Lumber and Forest Products ?Railroads

Jan 1, 2005

GREETING Hail! Hail! the Coal Miner, Damn the operator, damn the operator, Hail! Hail to mining coal We'll tell 'em how to run the mines. Oh, we'll send out a questionnaire And we'll quiz 'em, we will razz 'em for fair, We'll ask about the profits and order them to stop it Tell the world we're going to stop right there. Hail! Hail! etc. NASH AND PRYDE Tune, "Gallagher and Shean" There are two mining men, the best I've ever spied, One is Mister Harry Nash, the other Mister Pryde. When these two fellows meet it surely is a treat, The things they do, and the things they say, And the funny way they greet. Say, Mister Harry Nash, Oh, Mister Harry Nash, Tell me what's on your mind this evening, Mr. Pryde; I have heard an awful lot of that steep coal mine you got, And I wondered if some one had up and lied. Oh, Mr. Pryde, Oh, Mister Pryde, It's so steep it seems to lie upon its side. If it were steeper than it is, it would put us out of biz, Absolutely, Mister Harry Nash, positively, Mr. Pryde. Oh, Mister Harry Nash, Oh, Mister Harry Nash, Somebody said that at this new mine you've begun 'Fore you mined a lump of coal, had to burrow like a mole, And of rock you dug out many a million ton. Oh, Mister Pryde, Oh, Mister Pryde, I hate to think of all the dough I supplied. I believe the Moffat Tunnel bore won't cost a single dollar more I don't think so Mister Harry Nash, I agree with Mister Pryde. PARTING Tune, "Leave Me With a Smile" Though a sea of strikes and low price squabbles, Follow us the while; Once a year we gather just to show them whether We still wear-a smile; Rocky music coal still packs a barrel full Of timely fun sans guile, Rocky Mountain Institute can follow such And smile its yearly smile.

Jan 1, 1924

By A. C. Watts

The question of disposition of the slack and dust so troublesome to coal mine operators of the West has been divided by your committee chairman into three heads, viz: The preparation and transportation of fine and powdered coal. The developments along the line of low heat carbonization. The uses to which fine and pulverized coal have been put. The development of low heat carbonization has been assigned to me. This is really not a part of the subject but as it has a most important bearing on the future use of coal, I presume the chairman thought best to include it. An English committee on smoke abatement makes the statement that the burning of raw coal is "dirty, wasteful and unscientific". I will go a step further and characterize it as an "economic crime." It has been predicted by eminent scientific men that eventually no raw coal will be burned for heat or power purposes. All this will take time, experimentation and large expenditure, but it will surely come. The question of disposition of slack and dust so troublesome to coal and utilization of its by-products has been retarded by the abundance and cheapness of the raw coal, and by the abundance of suitable coking coals for metallurgical purposes. But necessity is surely, if slowly, demanding that the enormous waste ensuing from the burning of raw coal for heat and power must cease. For instance, smoke abatement investigations in Manchester, England, showed that the increased cost of household washing was about $1,250,000 per year due to smoke and soot. It is estimated that in London 200 tons of soot and smoke particles are suspended in the atmosphere over that city during dense fogs and that much more than this is emitted from the chimneys each winter day during the forenoon. As an example of what benefits a smokeless fuel gives, it is cited that in the mill town of Shaw, England, the burning of smokeless fuels in the factories has reduced the so-called fogs by about 80%. Necessity, caused by the war led Germany into the field of low tem¬perature carbonization because of the shortage of motor fuel and lubricating

Jan 1, 1922

By R. A. McAllister

The haulage system employed to convey coal from the face to the outside, dates back to 300 B. C., when slaves carried the mineral from the face to the consumer. The British discovered coal on their island about 800 A. D. and they were the first people to make practical use of coal and make coal mining a successful operation. The Britons carried cargoes of coal in their trading expeditions long before Columbus discovered America. The early history of mine haulage in the British mines relates to women with baskets, a practice still in use in Korean mines. Coal was discovered in America in 1679. The first mine worked in the United States was opened at Richmond, Va., in 1770. The haulage inside consisted of a crude sled loaded with, sacked coal ready for the market and drawn by a mule. The tipple consisted of the very simple operation of loading the sacked coal to the back of a lame mule, which represented the transportation system between mine and boat. The capacity of the boat was one ton and this large production of coal was intrusted to a small boy, who delivered to any place in town his bushel basket filled' with winter fuel. One daring coal operator shipped fifteen tons of coal by boat to Philadelphia and the man in charge had to seek employment to pay his board while finding customers for his fuel. A production of five tons per day would hardly attract attention to any system of haulage, add three ciphers and the importance of mine haulage is made very plain to the management. I will consider a production between 3000 and 5000 tons in eight hours and endeavor to bring out the essential features necessary to make the haulage system a regulated precise factor. There are two phases to mine haulage, the mule trip from the room to the motor or gathering party and the main haul to the outside. The motive power, whether done by mule, wire-rope or electric motor cannot be effective if left to the power alone. Conditions must offer no obstacle and it is the removal of obstacles that make the haulage system. This paper will consider a flat seam with the usual jump ups and downs or natural obstacles to be met and mastered by the successful tail-rope or electric system. The pit car is no longer a screening system scattering the fine coal from the room to the outside, adding to the costs by giving employment to road cleaners and polluting the ventilating system with a fog of coal dust. It is not a contrivance with four flat wheels and a labor killer in the room or on the tipple The large producing mine has a pit car with a tight body, roller-bearing wheels, with a self-oiling system that offers the least possible draw-bar pull to overcome the friction resistance, a hand brake conveniently placed and positive in action, a wheel base short enough to make room necks and long enough to

Jan 1, 1921

By C. B. Huntress

"We have ourselves to blame in the steel industry for our condition." These words were addressed twelve days ago by James A. Farrell, President of the United States Steel Corporation, to his "comrades" at a meeting of the American Iron and Steel Institute. They carry a note of challenge to all industry, and particularly to the coal industry, where they point the way to the pressing need for operators everywhere to get their feet under one table. It is that note which I would stress to all producers. You have yourselves to blame for your condition. True, there are inter-district competition and competition of substitute fuels, but they'll always be with us, more or less, and the only sensible, sane course is to remove the evils within our respective districts, which can be done only by constructive effort along cooperative lines. It's the same story in Alabama, the same in Illinois and elsewhere. The larger number of the men gathered here are at the front, as it were, in the business of mining coal. They are the men who are doing a remarkable operating job. And naturally, the sessions of this annual meeting treat of news from the front, of technical problems. But, as in actual warfare, those at the front are often uninformed of developments in the rear. They keep on fighting without fully sensing the significance of a disaster at headquarters. You've played your eighteen holes today and evidenced the efficiency of your technique in the, production of coal. It is not amiss to take advantage of this moment, the nineteenth hole, to ponder over what it's all about. After all, what do improvements in the art of mining mean if business policies engulf you in red ink? To the extent that mechanization is a factor in increased overhead, which in turn increases the pressure to produce regardless of market demand, it only aggravates our troubles unless there is the controlling influence of coordinated effort.

Jan 1, 1931

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 T. H. Brien, O&apos

At nearly all of the copper smelters in the Southwest, at some time, calculations have been made having in view the economy of replacing fuel oil with pulverized coal as a heat-producing medium for smelting operations This matter has been, and is more so now than at any time heretofore, of very great importance. Due to the intensive development of oil-producing areas of the world and the tremendous use of fuel oil for many purposes, it seems that before many years the supply of oil will become so small as to prohibit its use for such operations as smelting. This may be caused by prohibitive prices, or even by government decree as a conservation measure. In the event that the use of fuel oil becomes out of the question, the copper companies have just two alternatives: the use of pulverized coal or electricity. The copper companies of the Southwest produced an average of 808,400,000 pounds of copper per year for the war years of 1916, 1917 and 1918. This figure is, of course, a higher one than has prevailed since the war, but at the present time nearly all of the mines and smelters are getting back to capacity. There is no doubt whatever that the consumption of copper is going to increase, perhaps for the next ten years. This means that more copper mines will be discovered and developed, and that the mines which are now producing will be called upon for a greater production. This all tends to show that the mine manager who is looking ahead must develop some substitute for fuel oil in the event of its use becoming prohibitive, and all indications seem to point in that direction. The only coal which is commercially available to the smelters in the district under discussion must come from Colorado and New Mexico. These coals are high in ash and volatile matter and comparatively low in calorific value. The proximity of the smelter to the coal mines is a large factor in determining which fuel is more economical. Most of the smelters within two or three hundred miles of the coal mines find it more profitable to burn coal, while those at greater distance find that the higher freight charges on the coal make the use of oil more economical.

Jan 1, 1923

By Joseph Harrington

It is sufficiently correct to say that domestic solid fuel is universally hand fired and it is almost as correct to state that a very large proportion of hand-fired domestic fires are extremely inefficient and smoky. This is particularly true with raw bituminous coal for the fuel. The smokeless and efficient firing of domestic coal affords one of the most difficult problems confronting the combustion engineer. This is due to the universally constricted combustion space in the domestic furnace, the complete ignorance regarding the laws of combustion on the part of the average person, and the fact that the laws of efficient combustion are almost completely nullified under these conditions. It is well to familiarize ones self with these laws. These are: 1. The gradual introduction of the fuel to the furnace. 2. The admission and mixing of the right quantity of air with the coal gases. 3. A temperature high enough to permit complete combustion, and 4. A furnace space of volume sufficient to permit of the combustion gases and the oxygen getting together within the confines of the furnace. Even a casual inspection of the domestic heater will show that none of these essential things are present in proper degree, and this is the reason why the problem of domestic firing presents such difficulties. I have analyzed these conditions in a paper published by the Black Diamond, and which has already had wide distribution, so that I will not repeat the rather lengthy discussion in this paper. A survey of the entire field indicates very clearly that a reversal of existing methods and equipment must be had before any real improvement can be expected. It is my firm belief that in this instance above all others it is necessary to build the efficiency and smokelessness into the equipment in such a manner that its performance will be entirely independent of both skill and interest on the part of the operative. To attempt to educate every man, woman and child who periodically throws coal into a domestic furnace would be literally impossible. Much can be done, however, if we could teach the householder the simple essentials of alternate firing, which I have explained at length in the above mentioned paper. This would go a long way toward making the domestic furnace problem more satisfactory, as well as efficient and smokeless. Many will argue, and with good reason, that the domestic fuel should be prepared coke and with this I agree up to the limit imposed by the practical considerations of quantity production, price and the possibility of marketing the by-products. It will be obvious that if enough raw coal should be processed to provide all of the required domestic fuel that the amount of by-products recovered during the coking process would be so great that there would be little or no market at any price which would justify the manufacture of coke. If the by-products were wasted they would not only be a tremendous economic loss, but the price charged for the coke would probably be so high that the market would be limited, and this would defeat the very idea of the whole thing. Much can be done, however, in advancing the use of coke, but I believe that much more extensive and careful experimentization should be had in order to determine the right size and quality of coke for the various domestic furnaces. If coke were to be developed for extensive domestic consumption it is more than probable that the coking process should and could be stopped at a point where the volatile content of the coke would be sufficiently high to permit of prompt ignition and combustion in low draft installations. If the volatile content were from five to ten per cent a very different kind of coke would be produced from that which is now produced with perhaps one per cent of volatile. A skillful manipulation of this feature would make coke adaptable and satis-

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

Note this date. This will be the biggest meeting we have ever held. It is arranged so as to permit you to go immediately afterwards to Salt Lake. City to attend the meeting of the American Institute of Mining and Metallurgical Engineers there on August 31, September 1, 2 and 3. Notify the Secretary of any change in your address.

Jan 1, 1925

Jan 1, 1980

CONCLUSIONS: Our experience, where we attempt to remove a continuous face with a seam more than six and one-half feet in thickness, has been rather disastrous. We have been able to open up faces and retreat for a distance of 75 to 100 feet in this particular character of coal, but after the supporting timbers have been removed for the second or third time we have found that the roof has a tendency to ride over the props and break off at the face of the coal support. However, where our coal is below six and one-half feet in thickness we have had very good success in handling the roof and breaking it off systematically with our break line of props, which are usually from 12 to 15 feet from the face of the coal. Our practice in to set props at about two-foot intervals in each direction and remove two sets of props, at the same time two additional sets are placed along the coal face. At all times we are very insistent that all props be removed from the gob and that entire coal be taken out so that it is possible for the roof to break freely and all come down, not having any supporting pillars in the gob. The conclusion of our experiments to date is that if all the supports beyond the breaking line of props are taken out as the long face retreats and the closer the breaking line of props is kept to the face the better the results will be. We have never felt it safe to have less than four rows of props to protect the machinery and men working along the coal face. We feel that the time element as to the rapidity with which these faces are advanced or retreated, is of vast importance, but to date have not had an opportunity or experience enough to reach any conclusion as to what time element is proper here with us. We feel that the crushing strength of the overlying strata will govern this to a large extent, and as ours varies considerably, it is going to he very difficult for us to reach a definite conclusion. My opinion is, that conditions may be such that rather than have a short face and retreat rapidly, it will be found that a longer facewith a slower retreat will work out better. Such a condition might give the overlying strata time to settle. The caving of roof or of control of this caving, with us, is quite closely associated with the ventilation. We find that the places where the strata overlying the coal are composed of shale, that the effect of the air on this is of very great importance. It is our endeavor, at all times, not only to remove obnoxious gases, but to keep a current of fresh air moving along the face and, of course, a portion of this travels over the gob and comes in contact with the roof and overlying strata. This, we find, helps materially in keeping the roof on the move. As it is our practice to keep water for sprinkling purposes at all places, we also use this water to keep the roof wet back in the gob. The effect of water on the shale is to cause it to disintegrate quite rapidly. MR. HOLMAN (Concluding): If there are any questions about this, I will be glad to answer them. I have some prints and also some pictures of the scraper loader and the shaking conveyors (distributes.) PRESIDENT MOSES: We wish to thank you, Mr. Holman, and also wish that you would thank Mr. Dupont for his paper. Are there any discussions? Do you wish to ask Mr. Holman any questions? (No response.) PRESIDENT MOSES: Mr. Holman, I would like to ask you how you take the photographs; were they taken by flashlight, or were globes used, or how were they taken, in a gaseous mine? MR. HOLMAN: Our mines being gaseous, we do not use the ordinary flashlight for taking underground photographs, but we have had considerable success, I think, with underground pictures by means of electric lights. We use 250 watt globes. We have six of these rigged up with tin reflectors, 18 inches in diameter, on standards, and we carry two or three hundred feet of wire connected with these six lights, and they can be turned on in the room where we take the photograph, by means of this extra wire. We set the kodak up and arrange the picture and take a long time-exposure. We usually take an

Jan 1, 1926

The first session of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute was called to order by John T. Maulsby, Superintendent of Maintenance and Planning, Columbia-Geneva Steel Division, U. S. Steel Corporation, Dragerton, Utah, representing the past-president. W. K. Dennison, Jr., Superintendent. Koehler line. Kaiser Steel Corporation. Raton, New Mexico, who was unable to attend. Mr. Maulsby welcomed the members and guests, and introduced the President, A. Z. Dimitroff, Mining Electrical Engineer, Health and Safety, District 1-L, U. S. Bureau of Mines. Denver. Colorado. The text of President Dimitroff's address of welcome is as follows: The President's Remarks Guests and Members of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute: The distinct honor and privilege of officially welcoming you to this, the fifty-seventh regular meeting of the Institute, is indeed a pleasure. Your officers and committees have tried to provide a varied program which I am sure should have something of interest to all of us. The theme of this meeting, "Where Do We Go From here'?", appeared rather fitting for the In¬stitute this year because, as most of you know, until only two weeks ago we thought that this is the last time we will be able to meet at the Colorado Hotel, which has been the favorite spot of most members. Your officers and many of you were literally asking just that question.

Jan 1, 1961

Jan 1, 1925

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

MR. HARRINGTON: I would like to ask Mr. Bottomley if they fire their shots while the men are in the mine? MR. BOTTOMLEY: No sir; the shot-firing law in our State requires the shots to be fired after the men are out of the mine. We fire more shots than we did under the hand method of loading. Where formerly four holes were drilled, now we drill eight, using the same amount of powder as we did formerly, perhaps a little more, but we use a slower grade of powder. CHAIRMAN LITTLEJOHN: Any further discussion, gentlemen? MR. GIBSON: Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask Mr. Bottomley, if, in his shot-firing system, as I understand it, he has a very high coal and is working something like eleven feet? MR. BOTTOMLEY: Something like that. MR. GIBSON: I read the article that you referred to. Did you use both the first and the second delay explo¬ders in shooting the coal? MR. BOTTOMLEY: We use the ordinary fuse. MR. GIBSON: That is what I wanted to find out; whether you use the delay exploders and the detonators. In Utah, we are getting away from the fuse altogether, because we do not think it is accomplishing anything to use the electric light on the cap, and' at the same time shooting with fuse. We are defeating the object we might gain in using the electric safety lamp. That is a point that might be discussed a little further. MR. E. H. JOHNSON, The Coloder Company: I would like-since it is a general opinion that mechanical loading breaks up the coal, to ask Mr. Bottomley, if he finds a larger percentage of small coal, or how much, through the use of the mechanical loaders? MR. BOTTOMLEY: We do not find any great difference. In fact, we have succeeded in improving our lump coal percentage, and that is important, because it is largely domestic. At first, when the machines were installed, the boys shot the coal too hard, and we fell down a little, about two or three per cent, the first month, in our lump percentage, and we tightened up a little and changed our methods in shooting and got on to the stunt of drilling more holes and getting a slower grade of powder. We could not load as much coal in one day as we could before, but we did succeed in in. creasing our lump coal percentage four and a half per cent over the hand method, and that is quite a factor-quite an important factor and since our domestic trade is over with, we loosened up on the shooting and we are running about the same as we did with the hand loading, maybe a half per cent more, or one per cent, but pretty much the same. MR. SHUBART: Your coal is very high? MR. BOTTOMLEY: Yes. MR. SHUBART: Have you tried sunbbing the coal before shooting? MR. BOTTOMLEY: No, we have not tried that. It is very hard coal to shoot; we have no defined cleavage in our coal. It is the worst coal I ever saw to shoot. We do not try to snub it. Formerly, as I said, the miners drilled four holes, pretty well up near the top, and then four holes down, within about three feet of the bottom. It is the same thing as a snub shot, and that we find is the best method for shooting the coal. We have not tried any mechanical device for snubbing as yet. SECRETARY SHUBART: At one mine I saw snubbing tried with a Jeffrey undercutter with a seven-foot Jeffrey bar. This mine, by the way, is very similar to Mr. Bottomley's condition. They have very high coal, so the snub cut is a small percentage. They cut a seven foot undercut and raise the machine on an eight inch tie and undercut five feet to give the effect of a snub cut, 14 inches at the front of the cut, and then six inches at the back of the cut. They made a very marked increase in lump. (The bug dust would be a small percentage of the total coal), and they increased the percentage of the slack at the same time. They found a decrease by reason of the easier shooting of about 15 per cent in their slack. In other words their nut and lump coal ran considerably higher and their slack decreased 5 per cent with the snubbing cut. Mr. Bottomley, I believe, understands those conditions.

Jan 1, 1926

By Bob Burnham

Agenda 1 Overview of forecasting process 2 Review of Pre and Post Recession Forecasts 3 US Demand/Supply Summary 4 Coal Demand by Region 5 Coal Distribution by Census Region 6 Coal Price Outlook 7 Carbon Cases 8 Takeaways

Jan 1, 2009