Search Documents

By Glen A. Zumwalt

Coal's Dynamic Legacy The first session presented by Mr. Zumwalt emphasized Western coal development, the heritage of the industry and its growth in the West. The session began with a brief description of the geologic origin of coal followed by a short history quiz given the audience to stimulate their curiosity and involve them in the presentation. Slides and flip charts were used as visual aids and a demonstration of energy resources and uses was made by playing the famous Skyline jelly bean game. Coal Mining Today Today's coal mining practices were dealt with in the second session as Mr. Zumwalt appeared dressed in the garb of the modem day miner. He then led a discussion of coal production in the Western states, its uses and the different techniques used in extracting coal from both a surface and an underground mine. Current coal transportation and markets were also touched on. Our Exciting Future Recent coal growth in the marketplace and new uses of coal products to the year 2000 were dealt with in the final session. Mr. Zumwalt covered things that currently impede the expanded use of coal and things that can negatively or positively affect the future use of coal. In each of the three sessions, Mr: Zumwalt was ably assisted by Mrs. Janet Gwilliam, his secretary at Utah Fuel Company.

Jan 1, 1984

By W. R. Deeths

The Great Plains Coal Gasification Project is the first commercial scale grass roots synthetic fuels (SNG) plant to be built in the United States. The plant will be constructed in two phases, with each phase producing 125 million cubic feet per day of pipeline quality (970 BTU per cubic foot) substitute natural gas from lignite coal. The plant is located north of Beulah in Mercer County, North Dakota. The first phase complex, when completed, will cost about 1.2 billion dollars and will include all necessary process units, oxygen production, steam generation, coal handling and preparation, utilities and infrastructure. The plant will be owned and operated by, the Great Plains Coal Gasification Associates, a partnership consisting of the following companies: ANG Coal Gasification Company, Mid Con Corporation, Tenneco, Inc., Transco Energy Company and Pacific Lighting Co. The Project began in late 1973 with a Phase I feasibility study and site selection study. The feasibility study was completed in 1975, at which time Kaiser Engineers and C. E. Lummus, the two engineering contractors, proceeded with a Phase II conceptual engineering design for the project. The culmination of the Phase II work was the publication of a detailed scope definition and control estimate, which was to become the cost guideline for procurement and plant construction. Following an engineering slowdown period in 1979, due to continuing delays in regulatory procedures, detailed engineering effort was reinstituted in early 1980 and by mid-1981 was approximately 35 percent complete. The total home office engineering effort amounts to approximately 3.5 million man hours of work split between Kaiser Engineers and Lummus. These totals exclude the engineering effort expended by Lurgi of Germany in the process design. The gasification plant shares the site and certain other facilities with the Basin Electric Power Station. Among these facilities are the plant access railroad, peripheral drainage ditch and raw water supply system. In addition, the gasification plant will draw its power directly from the Basin main substation, and Basin will receive coal from the gasification plant, consisting of the coal fines which cannot be gasified in the Lurgi units. The overall construction program covers a period of approximately 44 months with mechanical completion and initial gas production slated for late 1984. Craft labor requirements amount to approximately 11.5 million man hours and the work force peaked in excess of 4,500 people. In anticipation of an early resolution of both Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ruling and Department of Energy loan guarantee commitments, certain work on the site was commenced during 1980. This work consisted of site rough grading, driving of piles, and erection of three of the plant auxilliary buildings. Orders and subcontracts were placed for compressors, pumps, electrical equipment, material handling equipment, piping, structural steel, boilers, oxygen plant and cooling towers. Over 40 major Federal, State and local permits were required. Among these were such diverse permits as: ? Soil conservation ?Railroad and pipeline rights of way ? Certificates of site compatibility ? Permits for structures in areas controlled by the ? U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ? Environmental permits required by the North ? Dakota Department of Public Health. The preparation of an Environmental Impact Report began in September of 1973. FPC (now FERC) guidelines and North Dakota special requirements were followed except that, at the time, the highly structured form of environmental impact statements we know today was not in use. We were required to develop a number of new sampling and evaluation techniques and reporting procedures at a time when the requirements were vague and often contradictory. In March 1975, field studies were completed and submitted to the Bureau of Recla¬mation, which then began to prepare its own EIS. Two years later, in May 1977, public hearings began on the Project. The hearings and public review of the report drew over 400 comments or questions. Responses o the comments were in¬corporated in a Final Environmental Impact Statement issued in January 1978. In March 1975, the original filing was made for an FPC Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity which included: ? A technical feasibility study ? An Environmental Impact Assessment ? An Economic and financial feasibility assessment. An amended filing was submitted in 1976 to build the plant in two phases because studies then indicated that the cost of the plant had increased substantially. A second amended filing was submitted in 1977 to reflect the involvement of Peoples Gas (now Mid-Con Corporation) in the Project. At the time, it was believed that an FPC Certificate could be issued by December 1977. However, approval would be contingent on the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation having a complete Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Project. In 1977, with the formation of the Department of Energy, the FPC

Jan 1, 1984

forated, allowing the completion of the removal of wash water. When discharged into the washed nut bin, the coal is moist but carries so little water as to not be objectionable to the trade, nor to give any difficulty from freezing during the coldest weather. The rock and bone from the primary jigs is elevated to a 15-ton bin by means of a single strand scraper conveyor 40 feet center to center operating on a 45 degree incline, carrying 12" x 5" scrapers every two feet. This conveyor travels at a speed of 100 feet per minute and has a capacity of 17 tons per hour. From this bin, this material falls into the third or rewash jig similar in all respects to the first two, which discharges the rock waste directly into a 15-ton refuse bin below and the bone into a short dewatering conveyor which delivers into a similar 15-ton bin from which the bone is taken to the powerhouse. The oversize and water from the shaker screen, the water from the dewatering conveyor for both the washed nut and bone, and the sludge and wash water from the three jigs, are delivered by launders to the first compartment of a three-compartment settling tank. Most of the coarser broken coal is deposited in this tank, from which is it continually removed by a bucket elevator carrying 8" x 5" perforated buckets operated on a 60 degree incline at 200 feet per minute, capable of delivering 25 tons per hour to the 50-ton washed coarse slack bin. The water passes successively through the three compartments of the settling tank and from thence through a six-inch pipe to a centrifugal pump, circulating 900 gallons per minute against a 32-foot head. A four-mesh screen 30" x 72" in the third compartment of the settling tank removes the chips of wood, paper, and the other trash, which otherwise would accumulate in the water. Water is provided from the camp water system, deriving water from the well located in an arroyo bed. During the summer months just passed, the water used, has been 108 gallons per ton of raw nut, or 146 gallons per ton of washed nut. The water meter had not been installed last winter, but it is estimated that operating at capacity, the washery will be found to require only about 75 to 100 gallons per ton of raw nut. It has not been found necessary, nor advisable, to attempt to dry the sludge from the settling tank, nor to save the water from leakage of the tanks and bins. The sludge from the jigs is washed into the settling tank and the sludge from the settling tank is washed through a tile drain to the arroyo. The jigs, shaker screen, circulating pump, washed slack elevator, and the rock handling conveyor, are all driven from line shafts driven by one 40 H. P. motor, each jig driven through a clutch. The belt conveyor and the washed nut conveyor, have separate motor drives of five and seven and a half H. P. respectively. The washer is housed in a corrugated iron building, which is partially heated by steam coils. One attendant is required for operation, regulating the feed of the jigs, the supply of water, removal of the rock, and oiling and maintaining the machinery. The rewash jig is operated only intermittently. About eleven per cent by weight of raw nut is removed as waste and four per cent goes to the washed slack bin. No control analyses of the products have been made; the efficiency of the plant being determined only by the physical appearance of the products; but the washery has been a source of pride and satisfaction to all those connected with it. As mentioned before, it has caused no interruption of operation and it has assisted materially in creating an unprecedented demand for ALAMO nut. MR. CHARLES: If there are any questions, I shall be pleased to endeavor to answer them. MR. LITTLEJOHN: Mr. Charles, do I understand it is the nut only that is washed there? MR. CHARLES: Yes, sir. MR. LITTLEJOHN: What did you say the size was? MR. CHARLES: Through three inch round perforations, retained on

Jan 1, 1926

Jan 1, 1924

PRESIDENT PRYDE: I am sure we have all listened with interest to the presentation of this subject. Anything that promises economy in coal mining today is welcomed by all of us. We will now have a discussion on this paper. If any of you gentlemen want to ask any questions, you may do so. I think we will develop something of interest and along the lines of economy. That is the first consideration of a coal mining man. MR. H. D. RANDALL: It is an interesting fact that in manufacturing we find the greatest economy results from giving a man the simplest possible act to perform, while there is nothing too complicated for a machine. If we want to put up a set screw we find it cheaper to let one man set it up and the other screw it in. The maximum economy is what we are after. Similarly, one of the points of greatest interest which Mr. Ickis has emphasized, is that this automatic equipment not merely dispenses with a manual operator, but also performs certain functions which the operator cannot do. It provides an inherent protection to the apparatus and service not possible under manual operation. We very rarely have cases of failure with these automatic equipments, .and consequently have the advantage not only of having eliminated the operator's salary, but also his mistakes. We have had a large number of these equipments in use for several years, so that their practicality is now thoroughly proven, and the trend of practice now indicates that the automatic idea will be further extended and will become universal for such classes of service. MR. D. C. McKEEHAN (Union Pacific Coal Company) : My notion of an automatic sub-station is one that does not necessarily require new equipment beyond the control equipment; so that any of you that are interested in it can take up with the manufacturers and find out how much it would cost to change any equipment. The greatest point I think is the fact it eliminates the several nationalities from operating the set, either on day shift or night shift. They can so lock the control as to make it impossible for anyone to start or stop it, except the one who has the authority. Another point I do not believe was brought out very clearly: It would be particularly advantageous to people who buy power, and if you could have several sets in parallel, it would allow you to start the shift with one set and cut in the additional sets as the shift progresses. There are various operations that stop at the end of each shift, and-one or two or three sets can be cut out, leaving the load on one set, providing the size of the copper is sufficient to supply all the points of the mine. Another point I want to bring out: In case you have quite a number of sets distributed along transmission line, the switch trips, the operation restores the service, and you may have several hundred-or in case with us, we would have several thousand-K. V. A. of Motor Generator Sets and Rotaries, that would be starting at once, and the switch would automatically trip out again. MR. RANDALL: Another form of control was described as the so-called supervisory control. This control could be started up so the starting would not be synchronous, but could be spread out over a sequence. MR. McKEEHAN: I think that is rather a theoretical consideration for coal miners. They are standing at the controller ready to shut it off unless there is some selective method of starting various sets- MR. RANDALL: I had in mind this supervisory control, one man, a central operator who would determine which station should start and he would take time enough to have his load come on gradually. He would not permit all the installations to come on simultaneously, but come on in succession: MR. McKEEHAN: You misunderstand me. Suppose we had the main switch at Rock Springs, which supplies several camps, and there are several

Jan 1, 1924

By D. A. Stout

The Rouse Mine, belonging to the Colorado Fuel & Iron Company, earlier known as the Santa Clara Mine, is located at Rouse, Huerfano County, Colorado. Operations at this property started about the year 1899, after the old Rouse mine had been drowned out by a large flow of water coming from the strata underlying the Cameron seam. The present new Rouse mine was opened by a slope on what is familiarly known as the Walsen seam in the Walsenburg district. This slope has an average grade of 12 per cent bearing approximately, south 45 degrees west, and having at the present time a total length of 6300 feet. This seam has an average thickness at that property of five and one-half feet; however, there are sections of the mine where the thickness is from seven to eight feet. The mine has been developed. since the time it was opened on what is known as the Room and Pillar system ; water level entries have been driven right and left off the slope, and in some cases the rooms are driven directly up the pitch; and in other cases entries have been driven with rooms turned on water level courses. The first flow of water of which we have ally record was encountered in 1901 in what was called the "Second West Entry." This flow, however, was small, and did not require the installation of any large pump unit. From 1901 up until 1909 the flow increased normally as the field was developed. In January, 1909, the first large inflow occurred, coming from a break in the seventh west entry, making a total flow at that time of about 500 gallons per minute. This necessitated putting in larger pumps, and the first pump to be installed of the centrifugal type was a 600 gallon Worthington. By the year 1911 the water had increased, due to additional development, until it was found necessary to install an additional 600 gallon Worthington centrifugal type pump. In December, 1912, a break occurred in the eighth west entry, between the fourth and sixth cross entries, making 2000 gallons per minute. This flow decreased after a period of three weeks some 500 gallons, but on account of the quantity of water then being handled at the mine, and in view of the fact that we needed some reserve pumping equipment to take care of these flows, and additional 600-gallon Worthington centrifugal type pump was installed in June, 1913. An the latter part of 1914 a 250 gallon Reese roturbo was installed to take care of the water, which was being made in the lower workings of the slope. We found after the installation of the centrifugal pumps that the water decreased to a certain degree in the uppermost workings. This led us to believe that the field was being drained, more or less, and the head reduced ; however, our ideas in regard to this were again upset in December, 1915, when we encountered a flow in room 6 off the first cross entry on the ninth east entry. This flow was not as large as previous flows had been, but made 200 gallons per minute.

Jan 1, 1921

The final session on Wednesday morn¬ing was given over to a panel discussion of safety questions submitted by members of the institute. Mr. Murray presided, and Lyman Fearn, chief, Wyoming Dept. of Mines & Minerals, Rock Springs, Wyo., was moderator. Members of the panel were: John A. Garcia, chief mine inspector, New Mexico; Leonard Ford, mine foreman, Frederick- mine, CF&I, Valdez, Colo.; A. C. Moschetti, chief, coal mine inspection branch, USBM, Denver; Kirk V. Cammack, mining engineer, USGS, Denver; Joel N. Van Sant, chief engineer, St. Louis, Rocky Mountain & Pacific Coal Co., Raton, N. M.; Emery Olsen, safety engineer, coal mine and quarries, U. S. Steel Corp., Dragerton, Utah; F. J. Peternell, safety engineer, Union Pacific Coal Co., Rock Springs; and J. J. Reddy, mine inspector, Colorado Dept. of Mines, Grand Junction, Colo. On a question concerning the effect of roof-bolting on the maintenance of a breakline in pillar removal, Mr. Van Sant reported that some experience at his company's mines indicate that wood supports are not necessary to make the break although shooting is sometimes done to get it. Furthermore, bolting improves the roof in these pillar areas and extraction has increased about 20%. Mr. Fearn concurred in describing operations in parts of Wyoming.

Jan 1, 1953

By F. C. Miller

The briquetting of fuel is an industry centuries old and has followed the hammer and tongs method of making use of any by-product fuel by the simple process of sticking the mass together with anything that will stick. If fuel briquetting, as an industry, once in the lead over coal mining, had kept pace by introducing science, there would not at this time be the mad scramble to look up the fuel briquette family tree and accept every new method as fruit without the cultivation that makes fruit worth while. Cultivation of industry is a mass of evidence showing a tremendous expenditure of money for mistakes paving the way to success. Cultivation of the mining industry is practiced by nations and low temperature distillation and fuel briquetting will in the near future receive the same consideration. Fuel briquettes were used as a winter fuel in Ireland and Scotland before the discovery of America' or the introduction of coal as a fuel to replace briquettes in Ireland. This industry was practiced by the peasants who collected peat from the bogs and cut it into brick-shaped blocks, which were set up to dry in the sun and stored under cover for use or for sale. Demand for peat briquettes led to competition that resulted in a highly refined fuel. In some localities the peat was ground and purified from the earth by washing before placing in presses to squeeze out the excess moisture and form a block of peat about four inches thick. These blocks, after standing in the sun for a few weeks, were cut into briquettes about four inches square by twelve inches long and moved under cover where they remained until thoroughly dry. In this form peat makes an excellent fuel with considerable heat, small amount of smoke while burning, and tough enough to stand hauling in carts and boats without breakage. Slack from domestic coal, non-coking and anthracite, has until recently commanded a very low price and the attention of briquette men has centered on ways and means of preparing this class of fuel for the market in the form of briquettes. Industrial plants with automatic stokers have taken kindly to cheap slack or slack that was cheap because the price has been boosted to a figure where the cost of slack plus the cost of binder and operation makes fuel briquettes somewhat expensive. However, fuel briquettes are being turned out in commercial quantities to compete with prepared lump coal and the demand is in favor of the briquette man. Science has been called to aid the briquette and it is possible to purchase a complete coal briquetting plant that will turn out between four tons per hour and thirty tons per hour of briquettes at a calculated cost per ton to cover material and every item down to insurance on the plant. A few briquettes are being ' made with a mixture of- Portland cement and pulverized coal, where this class of briquette is cheap in the making, there is the increased amount of ash due to the cement to contend with and the briquette is not one that can compete with lump coal. Most binders have a fuel value, such as coal tar, pitch, asphalt residium, flour, glue and secret binders. Most briquettes are of an egg shape, weighing between one and one-half ounces and five ounces, pressed to form with a pressure varying between 1,000 pounds and 2,500 pounds per square inch. This' pressure, together with the binder, make a lump of fuel harder than most grades of soft coal. Most of the briquettes are free from pitch odor, and any tendency to leave a trace of the binder on the fingers, easy to handle, quick to, ignite, high in heat value and capable of indefinite storage without any change. Evaporative efficiency of briquetted fuel in stationary, marine and locomotive boilers has proved that a great many low-grade coals can be fired successfully in the briquetted form, where the same fuel without briquetting failed to give boiler rating.

Jan 1, 1923

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 L. C. Clare

In a meeting of this kind where everyone present is connected with or engaged in coal mining, and where each one is present with the set purpose of learning new thoughts or ideas, the subject of the saving of life by any method in the industry is a vitally interesting and important one. On the cost per ton basis, it mounts to a formidable figure especially so during these days of depression and stagnant, or no business. But entirely outside of the human side of the question, to lose lives would cost more than saving them. Your insurance under haphazard safety measures would mount, loss of time due to accidents would impair efficiency among employees and the breaking of the morale of the staff, due to criticism of lax methods would cost more than an efficient safety program. Taking it for granted that most of you are looking at the question from the viewpoint of a yearly or five-year cost sheet, and that at this time you are doing all that can be done without bringing a ruinous cost upon your companies, I can offer only one suggestion: Raise the quality of your safety, or lower the cost. In this meeting, there should be no question of standing still or retreating in the quality of safety, so I will amend the suggestion with "Raise the quality and lower the cost." We have learned that when the coal beds were forming, nature sealed them in with a strata of mud that the ages have turned to shale, sealing them effectively against the deteriorating influences of the air. Mudite is carrying out nature's plan of coal preservation to the inside of the coal mine. Text books teach us that a large proportion of the vegetation that forms our present coal beds grow on what might be termed mud, later falling and being buried practically where it grew by mud, then on being subjected to heat, pressure and time, was changed to coal. The mud being subjected to the same three forces forms our present shale stratas. Now if nature saw fit to use this solidified mud as a preservative through countless centuries, isn't it reasonable to expect that occasional coatings on the ribs and roofs of entries and rooms will aid materially in preserving our coal and coal dust? Nature took mud and formed it into shale; mudite takes the shale, reduces it into dust, adds water and makes a mud, applies it to the ribs, roofs and floors of the mine in a thin coating

Jan 1, 1925

The first Mine Rescue Performance Evaluation for mine rescue teams was held just prior to the 1992 RMCMI convention meeting schedule on June 27 and 28. Six teams took part in this year's evaluation; Decker Coal, Decker, Montana; BHP Minerals' White Team and BHP Minerals' Purple Team, both of Aztec, New Mexico; Kerr McGee Coal Corporation, Jacob's Ranch Mine, Gillette, Wyoming; The Coteau Properties Company, Freedom Mine, Beulah, North Dakota and The Falkirk Mining Company, Falkirk Mine, Underwood, North Dakota. This was the first mine rescue evaluation program developed to measure a unit's proficiency in their skills rather than emphasis on a ranking order of teams. The objectives for the evaluation were to promote learning and to evaluate the current level of experience of the attending rescue units. The priority goal for this evaluation was to recognize current rescue skills, knowledge and abilities of each team participating. In doing this, each team is provided with individual evaluations and a path for improvement as needed. [ ] Realistic industrial related scenarios, closely simulating the stress of actual rescue incidents, was provided by members of the Hermosa Cliffs Colorado Fire Department under the direction of Dan Noonan, Fire Chief. On Saturday, June 27, five rescue scenarios were presented for each team to complete and on Sunday three of a more difficult nature were encountered by each team. On the final day of the RMCMI convention two of the teams performed rescue demonstra¬tions. Onlookers were afforded the opportunity to view the teams in action as they simulated actual rescue operations. The value and importance of mine rescue teams such as those participating in this year's Rescue Team Performance Evaluation are very evident as in many cases they are the only rescue personnel and medical staff on the work site in case of an emergency. Most of these persons are volunteers who spend many hours studying, practicing and perfecting their expertise in the lifesaving techniques needed in the event of a mine emergency. At the same time, they are very qualified coal miners who perform their respective duties at their mine locations, Their dedication to gaining the most knowledge they can get to handle these life and death situations is evident in their participation in evaluations such as this one. [ ] If a highly educational, informative, sharing of knowledge and expertise, while at the same time providing a very enjoyable experience, deems this evaluation a success ... the Rescue Team Performance Evaluation held during the RMCMI Convention at Tamarron this year was certainly a SUCCESS!! It is hoped that you can all enjoy this same experience with us next year! Linda G. Ash The Falkirk Mining Company [ ]

Jan 1, 1992

By C. P. Crawford

Bureau of Mines Technical Paper 172, by S. H. Katz and H. C. Porter, entitled "Effects of Moisture on the Spontaneous Heating of Stored Coal", says at the outset, "Spontaneous fires in storage piles of bituminous coal' have been the source of trouble and loss since the industrial utilization of coal began. In Europe the idea arose that spontaneous combustion is more liable to happen during wet weather than during dry. Statements favoring or opposing this idea have crept into the literature. Conflicting conclusions, based on experiment as well as opinions based on observations of various degrees of reliability, are given in most of the recorded discussions of the subject. "Because of the uncertainty of the effect of moisture and its seeming importance among the conditions that affect spontaneous combustion in stored coal, the work described in this paper was undertaken by the Bureau of Mines. The experiments showed that a coal from Illinois oxidized faster when dry, whereas a sample of Pittsburgh coal oxidized faster when moist. These discordant results and similarly inconsistent results from the observations of different investigators may be coupled with the fact that under actual conditions of, storing, both coal and air always contain a considerable amount of moisture." The foregoing report of the investigations of the Bureau demonstrates that the mystery of spontaneous combustion has not yet been solved. This fact adds to the fascination of the subject. I became interested in the matter about ten years ago in observing what was probably one of the best exhibitions of this phenomenon. The old dump at Castle Gate No. 1 Mine contained boney coal and track cleanings generally. In winter when snow fell upon this old dump, the snow was soon melted by the heat of the dump which was comparatively warm at all times. Within 48 hours afterward little blue flames were in evidence on the surface of the pile. Few of the gas feeders were sufficiently constant to maintain a steady flame at any given point, but shifting emissions of gas were ignited one by another, resulting in a continuous popping and apparent running about of the flames. Another interesting exhibition of spontaneous heating was to be seen a few years ago in the storage coal piles of the local sugar factories. This coal was piled in concrete lined pits and the latter were filled with water. However, or this occasion the coal extended above the surface of the water. At every plant where this condition existed the coal was affected heating, and in each case the affected area was in a plane horizontal to and from 8 to 1.4 inches above the water level. The height of the hot area above the surface of the water appeared to be affected by the fineness of the coal. It is well known that oily rags have a tendency to heat when allowed to accumulate in some location protected from free air circulation. For some reason, as yet unknown, this does not apply to petroleum or its derivatives. Now, the most common explanation of spontaneous combustion is that the combustible material oxidizes by being brought into contact with air in the presence of moisture, the theory being that the moisture acts as a catalytic agent. My theory is that spontaneous combustion is due to oxidation of combustible matter by free oxygen carried in solution by a liquid, the oxidation taking place only as, when, and at the place where this oxygen is released from solution by the evaporation of the liquid. Also, this oxidation takes place to some degree regardless of the condition of the combustible-whether it be lump coal, coal dust, straw, wheat flour, coke, or any other combustible but, as the speed of oxidation is directly influenced by temperature, it follows that spontaneous combustion only becomes noticeable or serious in cases where the resulting heat' cannot escape as fast as it is generated.

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

Houston T. Aars Carter Mining Co. Sundance Rt. Moorcroft, WY 82716 Charles R. Ahlbrecht Western States Surveying Inc. 7030 So. Yosernite Englewood, CO 801 12 Dean Albon Monsanto Co. 800 No. Lindberg St. Louis, MO 631 67 Robert Anderson Mobil Oil Producing Inc. POB 17772 Denver, CO 8021 7 Stephen P. Antony Orbital Engineering 6789 So. Yosernite Englewood, CO 801 12 David Ariotti Boyle Mining Engineering Service Rt. 1 Box 15M Helper. UT 84526 Douglas Auck Falkirk Mining Co. 103 McKinley Ave. Underwood, ND 58378 Roger Backrnan N. D. Crockett & Assoc. 3467 Sorenson Way Salt Lake City, UT 84109 Richard Bailey Continental Conveyor & Equip. Co. 602 Park Point Drive Golden, CO 80401 Earl W. Baker Baker & Co. 4965 Jackson St. Denver, CO 80216 Allen P. Barber San Juan Coal Co. 705 Ocio Farrnington, NM 87421 Edward Barker Process Equipment Builders POB 7506 Paducah, KY 42001 Larry Barton Carter Mining Co. 101 5 Teewinot Circle Gillette, WY 82716 Hugh Bastian American Carbide Corp. POB 2650 Ronald N. Batdorf Monsanto Co. Box 701 Saratoga, WY 82331 Georgetown, KY 40321 Doris A. Bauer Mobile Oil Corp. POB 17772 Denver, CO 80217 Jan Beam Blount International Ltd. 2570 So. Dayton Way #E-308 Denver, CO 80231 Mac Beaudry Falkirk Mining Co. 1029 Cannon Ln. Washburn, ND 58527 R. C. Beerbower Gates Engineering Co. Drawer A Beckley, WV 25801

Jan 1, 1982

Good Morning. Thank you for your kind welcome, Lyle and thank you for having me here today. I spoke at the fall meeting of the Utah state RMCMI in Price and it's nice to be invited back. I can see by the program that you have two great days of interesting and informative meetings, including the mine rescue team exhibition and the safety recognition award presentations. As you all know, I am here standing in for Dave Lauriski, who is in China with Secretary of Labor Chao. As you also know, Utah is near and dear to his heart - and so is the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute. I want to assure you Dave would be here if it were at all possible. But it is my good fortune that I could come in his place. We have made great progress as an Agency thanks to the hard work and dedication of MSHA's employees. But we are always looking for new ways to solve problems and continue to send more miners home safe and healthy every day. And we have been working on some great ways to do that, including thinking strategically. During my presentation today I'm going to talk about where the Agency is in terms of our transformation to the MSHA of the 21st century, a little bit about how we got to be where we are, and then describe our roadmap to the future state. And I'm going to focus on the significance of our plan and the planning process to demonstrate the implication for the mining industry. Former President Dwight Eisenhower once said, "In preparing for battle I have always found that plans are useless, but planning is indispensable." Now I do like Ike, but I would have to take exception to the first part of the sentence. I have found plans and the planning process to be indispensable - the plan to give me a roadmap to my goal, and the process to focus me on the steps I must take to get there. We all know that having a strategic plan makes the difference between success and failure. We've seen it time and time again, in business, in our lives - and in government: Having a strategic plan is crucial to success. And the process of making the strategic plan is crucial to its success. Putting together a workable strategic plan - a good roadmap - that will successfully lead you to your goals requires a thorough, careful process that takes into account each factor that you may encounter along your way to success, as well as those with whom you will travel. In order to talk about our current plan I want to take you back to three years ago, when Dave Lauriski went to Washington to lead MSHA. He knew that change was in the air. Dave was confirmed as Assistant Secretary with 30-plus years experience in the coal mining industry, and more than 20 years of experience in dealing with

Jan 1, 2004

The following pages contain valuable information about the products and services offered by our advertisers

Jan 1, 1982

Jan 1, 1924

By Richard L. Lawson

The coal producers of the Rocky Mountain states have led in one of America's true industry revolutions - the leaps in productivity and competitiveness that deliver coal-fired electric power to the U.S. economy at prices that are the competitive envy of the world. You are a primary reason the average price of industrial power in the U.S. - the power that creates and upholds jobs - is: ? 10 percent below the French average, where nuclear power is dominant; ? 37 percent below the average for industrialized Europe; ? 49 percent below the German average, where subsidized coal and nuclear rule; ? And 73 percent below the Japanese average where nuclear and liquified natural gas dominate. There are interests ambitious to change all of that; and they will be a subject of my remarks, some by name, rank, and affiliation. Coal-fired power plants in the Rocky Mountain states deliver some of America's lowest cost electricity; and America's coal-fired plants deliver some of the world's lowest cost electricity. Represented here in one room are producers from states that deliver more than 40 percent of America's coal and five of her top 10 producing states. You are cornerstones of America's economic strength and future growth. The theme for this meeting is "The Many Partnerships of Coal;" and, in this keynote, I'd like to offer a variation on the theme. I'd like to discuss a determined partnership that is dedicated to overturning everything you have accomplished, plus the structure of our society - very dedicated, very patient, very determined. This partnership masks itself as being in the public interest but behind the mask a political alliance of three distinct private interests can be seen: ? One is ambitious for economic reward as a right and without the trouble of effort; ? One is ambitious for economic advantage in trade without the trouble of competing; ? And one is ambitious for the power to govern people without the trouble of winning consent in elections - to change the way other people choose to live in accord with their own passionately held beliefs. The international agreement on climate is being used as an artifice to advance these interests, and the interests are making the United Nations a mechanism for achieving those objectives - for turning the screw, so to speak. The President that Americans elect this year soon will come under intense pressure from these partners to: ? First, quickly adopt policies that will raise U.S. energy prices and restrict use under the climate agreement; ? And in 1998 - if they follow their own published plans - to begin the subordination of the independence of the United States to a collective sovereignty in economic, political, legal and other matters. The Worldwatch Institute inaugurated this pressure last year with a policy monograph entitled Partnership for the Planet: An Environmental Agenda for the United Nations. This is but one indicator of the situation I ask you to consider. The pressure will increase after the election. Worldwatch is one of those intellect-oriented "public interest" groups whose work often leads to policy proposals and debate. Worldwatch gets money from the U.N. Population Fund and the MacArthur Foundation among others. And so my remarks require wading waist deep into one of the more sporting current propositions of American public policy - discussion of ambitions for and within the United Nations to achieve that which the ambitious call global governance. Since last year's media focus on the militia movement - and talk of black helicopters - any

Jan 1, 1996

By J. J. Wilson

To explain in detail the manufacture of seamless pipe and tubes is something I venture to say that has never been done to a point entirely satisfactory. The manufacture of seamless tubes dates back to 1885, when Mannesmann Brothers invented the roll-piercing mill. Ten years later R. C. Stiefel invented the disc-piercer, which first came into general use in this country. At the present time the Mannesmann roll and the Stiefel disc-piercers are used, the Mannesmann rolls particularly for the larger size billets. Sizes produced at first were relatively small and the product was cold drawn to provide a smooth surface. The early uses of seamless material were chiefly for mechanical purposes, such as boiler tubes and bicycle tubing, and the latter for some years taking the heaviest tonnage. Improvements in the hot process were gradually made; the early Pilger type rolls were largely superseded by the two-high rolling mill for rolling out the tube after being pierced, the reeling machine for diagonal rolling, the sizing mill for giving exact outside diameter, and finally the sinking mill for reducing larger diameter tubes to smaller diameters.

Jan 1, 1932

By Harold J. Rose

It is a real pleasure to attend another meeting of the Institute. This is partly because I am a Westerner by birth and training. As a young man I had personal experience with firing Colorado and Wyoming coals. The coal industry of the United States has done an outstanding job of producing coal. We can all be proud of the industry's record of continuously adopting technical improvements in coal mining. NEED FOR MORE EFFECTIVE COAL MARKETING However, it cannot be said that the industry has done an equally good job of marketing coal. There has been a rapid growth in U. S. population, and an even greater expansion of industrial demands for heat and power. Yet coal consumption for the past several years has been no greater than it was 40 years ago, in 1912 and 1913.

Jan 1, 1954