Search Documents

By C. N. Greene

I am sure it is obvious to all of you that a complete program of casualty and property insurance is as necessary for any tunneling contractor as it is for anyone else involved in trade in the United States today. Going beyond those general undefined terms, there are many areas that need specific attention, particularly for contractors, regardless of size. WORKERS' COMPENSATION Workers' Compensation is mandatory in all states and the District of Columbia. In most of the states, private insurance provides this coverage. In a few states, the state operates Workers' Compensation funds, some of which are competitive with the private sector and others are operated on a monopolistic basis. Under a monopolistic setup, you have no choice, you must buy coverage from the state. Self insurance of the Workers' Compensation risk is also an alternative in most jurisdictions. With a contractor operating only in the U.S., the coverage extensions are few in number. If your work brings you anywhere near navigable waterways or land extensions thereof, you should have both U. S. Longshoreman and Harborworkers' coverage, as well as Employer's Liability coverage for the master or members of the crew of a vessel.

Jan 1, 1983

By A. Johnson

When are SMART transmitters the smartest choice? To answer this question requires a closer look at SMART transmitter technology. It is necessary to understand this technology in order to recognize how it can best be utilized to give the greatest value for the application. And, once the decision to buy transmitters has been made, it becomes a question of whose SMART transmitter to buy. For, although the under-lying technology is similar, the differences that exist in how the technology has been implemented can make a dramatic difference in the end result. What prudent users of SMART technology do is to analyze their needs by application before making their buying decision.

Jan 1, 1988

By David van Cleave, David L. Rome

Whether you buy your minicomputer from a manufacturer or another vendor, the first thing you must do is define your needs. With good planning, the initial cost will be low and your return on investment will be maximized over the long term. Involving all members of your staff who will he using the new computer in the planning phase is also important. Their participation will alleviate any potential concerns they may have about new equipment, and their suggestions will provide valuable input for your specifications. After you define your proposed system, survey available hardware and software. The survey will help you in the next step, preparation of specifications. The specifications, along with a quote request, are then sent to various manufacturers. Consider the Manufacturer When selecting your minicomputer, one important item to consider is the manufacturer. Remember, when you buy a computer, you're also buying the services of a computer company. A firm that makes a commitment to its customers and provides a product that is field tested before releasing it for sale is preferable. Examine the company's maintenance and support packages, since every machine requires preventive maintenance. Does your manufacturer or original equipment manufacturer (OEM) support service sites in your area? Has their service record been commendable? Will they provide training for your personnel and a supply of circuit boards so you can retain a degree of self-service autonomy? Three methods of buying a computer involve the manufacturer, an OEM, and the systems house. Buying direct from the manufacturer means you go straight to the source, using no middleman. This gives you maximum flexibility; you can consider every alternative and many possible combinations of computers, peripherals, and software until you find exactly the right system for you. The OEM buys computers direct from the manufacturer and builds them into his own computerized, special purpose product. He usually sells a complete package, including software and hardware, and often noncompetitive equipment as well (a scientific or engineering instrument, for example), designed for the mining market. Because he offers a packaged product, the OEM can often charge less for the system than if you put the pieces together yourself. In many ways, the OEM also provides a unique system. And while the OEM sells a packaged solution, he also usually has the special market knowledge necessary to modify the system to meet your unique needs, if necessary.

Jan 11, 1981

The United States is being invaded... by foreign capital: marks, francs, pounds, yen, lire, riyals, you name it: On almost any given day the Wall Street Journal will contain a new report on a department store, newspaper, bank, hotel, agricultural land, supermarket chain, et a1 being bought into by overseas investment. Xenophobic reaction to this revised national condition has begun to set in. Several farming states have and are introducing legislation to monitor foreign land buying. In Congress a mandatory reporting requirement for foreign purchasing is currently under study. In a relatively short period the country has reverted from world leader- ship in overseas acquisition and involvement to become itself one of the prime investment opportunities in existence. Interestingly enough, one of the industries where this changed status has become most apparent and pronounced is within that small/regional/segmented/low value-to-weight bulk commodity enterprise ranked as the backbone of the nation's construction activity. U.S. cement making is not only undergoing internationalization in its ownership, but also in its product, equipment, and engineering expertise.

Jan 1, 1979

By John Matthews

During 1982 and 1983, it became increasingly clear that North River No. 1 Mine would have to buy a set of replacement longwall shields. Despite extensive efforts to make improvements, the shields that were in place at that time were incapable of holding the roof. North River Energy had limited experience in specifying and acquiring longwall roof supports, but a great deal of experience with our conditions and needs. We there- fore compiled a shield evaluation method that uniquely responded to our situation. The resulting system emphasized teamwork among operating, maintenance and engineering personnel. The charge from management was threefold: select shields to support maximum expected loads, optimize face operations, and pay attention to detail. Final selection was made objectively, based on all available information. We chose a 5516 KN (620 tons) support with a minimum yield load density of 760 KN/m2 (7.9 tons/ft2). This paper reviews our process of specification, design, prototype testing, and fabrication, and offers some relevant suggestions.

Jan 1, 1986

By T. M. “Mike” Gurr

"U. S. marketable phosphate rock production for the 2018 crop year (July 1, 2017 to June 30, 2018) showed an increase to 27.7 Mt (30.5 million st) from the 2017 crop year production of 27.1 Mt (29.8 million st), as reported to the U. S. Department of the Interior by the mining companies operating in the United States during crop year 2018 (Table 1). Domestic consumption decreased in the 2018 crop year to 23.9 Mt (26.3 million st), as compared to the 27.2 Mt (30 million st) consumed in crop year 2017. U.S. imports of phosphate rock increased to 3 Mt (3.3 million st) for the 2018 crop year from the 1.81 Mt (1.9 million st) for crop year 2017. Imports of phosphate rock were from Peru and Morocco. There was an increase of 2.85 Mt (3.1 million st) in producers’ stocks from 7.45 Mt (8.2 million st) in crop year 2017 to 10.3 Mt (11.3 million st) in crop year 2018 (Table I).For calendar year 2018, Florida and North Carolina phosphate rock production accounted for 75 percent of the total U.S. production, with the balance being produced in Idaho and Utah. The Florida and North Carolina percent of U.S. production is declining. U.S. production of 25.7 Mt (28.3 million st) in calendar year 2018 was produced by five companies at 10 mines in four states and accounted for approximately 9.6 percent of the world production of 267.7 Mt (295 million st) for calendar year 2018 (Table 2).In calendar year 2018, U.S. phosphate production decreased by 2.2 Mt (2.4 million st), while companies increased stocks of phosphate rock by 1.7 Mt (1.9 million st). The domestic production for calendar year 2018 of 25.7 Mt (28.3 million st) represents 78.4 percent of the domestic production capacity of 32.8 Mt (36.1 million st).At present, China reportedly produces more than 50 percent of the world’s phosphate rock. As a result of planned expansions, Morocco production has increased from 27 Mt (30 million st) in 2017 to 33 Mt/a (36 million stpy), which is approximately 12.3 percent of the world’s production, moving ahead of the U.S. production. In calendar year 2018, the U.S. phosphate rock production was 25.7 Mt (28.3 million st), which is less than 10 percent of the world’s production of phosphate rock (Fig. 1)."

Aug 1, 2019

By B. Boberg

Annual requirements of uranium to fuel the 441 currently operating nuclear reactors in the world is 170 million pounds U3O8 (65,385 tonnes U). 2005 global production was 108 million pounds (41,595 t U), of which only 2.7 million pounds U3O8 (1,039 t U), was produced from US uranium deposits. US nuclear utilities represent 26% of the global nuclear capacity but only obtain 2.5% of their supply from US uranium mines. Since 2002 annual global production increased from 93 million pounds U3O8, a 15% increase and the US production increased from 2.3 million pounds to 2.7 million pounds, a 17% increase. Reasonably Assured Resources (RAR) of 12,332 million pounds U3O8 (4.7 million t U) are reported from a wide variety of countries and types of uranium deposits. This RAR suggests that there are significant global uranium resources potentially producible at a price of $50 per pound U3O8 ($130 per kg U). Table 1 shows the distribution of global uranium resources. This table, prepared from historic data maintained by the World Nuclear Association, does not include some areas of the world that are currently considered to contain significant resources of uranium such as Mongolia. Table 1 suggests that the United States contains the fourth largest uranium resource in the world with 890 million pounds U3O8, behind Australia, Kazakhstan and Canada in resources that are producible at a price of $50 per pound U3O8 ($130 per kg U). Within the US, the states that demonstrate the greatest amount of uranium resource are Wyoming, New Mexico, Texas and the Four Corners Area of Arizona, Colorado and Utah.

Jan 1, 2007

By Michael Ferrell

The primary reason pigments are used in plastics is to impart a desired color to the plastic. Color is one of the more important assign considerations associated with today's market oriented society. Secondary reasons for adding pigments to plastics include: 1. Improved UV stability 2. Enhancement to selected physical properties 3. Changes in optical properties Pigments may be used at loadings as high as 20% or as low as .001%. Generally the loading levels are between 0.2% and 2.0%. Pigments may be added to the plastic either by the manufacturer of the plastic, or by the user of the plastic. If the customer buys material that is already colored, it is referred to as "pre-colored". If the customer buys uncolored plastic and adds colorants, the process is referred to as "in-house" coloring.

Jan 1, 1985

By Richard Addison

Rosario Dominicana, S. A. operates an 8,500 tonne per dayopen pit gold/silver mine in the Dominican Republic on the Caribbean island of Hispaniola. The mine is located in an agricultural area which is also an earthquake and heavy rainfall zone. In the 64 years from 1910 to 1974 there were 19 earthquakes within 300 km of the mine in the range of 6 to 8 on the Richter scale and the most recent earthquake in this range occurred in March, 1979. Average annual rainfall in the area is 1.7 m and is distributed throughout the year. Safe and environmentally sound tailings disposal in such conditIons has demanded the buiIding of an extremely strong dam wall and use of a fail-safe system of tailings disposal and solution reclaim. The type of dam, the system of tailings disposal and solution reclaim comprise an interesting example of the manner of handling tailings for a medium tonnage mine. The system is relatively costly but does assure a long-term, safe and trouble free structure and operating system. General views of the dam wall and tailings pond are shown in Figures l through 4.

Jan 1, 1980

By Donald K. Sparling, C. Edwin Baker

The White Mesa uranium/vanadium mill is six miles south of Blanding, UT, on the Colorado Plateau, which has historically spawned more than 200 uranium mines. As uranium prices approached an all-time high during the mill planning period, Energy Fuels Nuclear Inc. anticipated the reopening of many of these mines, whose low grade ore suddenly looked economic. The company located the White Mesa mill close to these mines, to minimize hauling distances to the mill and give vendors added incentive to reopen or expand mine operations. A receptive local community, a relatively unencumbered trip through the regulatory maze, and some mill circuit innovations all helped to make the White Mesa mill a well functioning reality. From a strategic standpoint, and to begin ore stockpiling as early as possible, Energy Fuels constructed two ore buying stations and began receiving ore in early 1977. The buying stations were located at Hanksville and at what is now the Blanding mill site. Ore receipts at Hanksville did not materialize as anticipated and the facility has since been closed. The Blanding ore buying station is now an integral part of the milling operation. All ores, whether company, vendor, or for toll milling, are received at the Blanding station. The Blanding site was central to the plateau mines, and was well received by area residents, who encouraged the introduction of industry to the area. Residents viewed mill construc¬tion as an economic blessing and were prepared to accept the associated im¬pacts. Energy Fuels hired as many local people as possible for mill opera¬tions.

Jan 4, 1981

By R. T. Swinderman

"Virtually every article you read on safety has a statement to the effect: “It’s obvious that safety pays”. If it is so obvious, why is it so hard to answer these questions? • How does the Maintenance or Operations Manager convince the Plant Manager to spend money from the annual budget for safety improvements? • How does the Plant Manager influence Corporate to prioritize safety improvements? • How does an engineering firm persuade the owner to spend more on design and equipment up front to reduce risk? There are many cultural and structural reasons why it is so difficult to prove the obvious. In my opinion the main culprits are: the almost universally used ‘Low Bid’ process, variations in reporting incident statistics between industries and countries, and, the Generally Accepted Accounting procedures (GAAP) [or International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS)]. Conventional wisdom is it’s smart not to spend more than you need to meet the minimum regulations and maximize production. But buying on price alone often harms people, degrades the environment, and reduces the company’s bottom line. How can this be? You met the minimum safety requirements and saved money by buying on price. Don’t those savings go right to the bottom line? When you buy on price you get minimum quality, minimum compliance and are often backed corner with no reasonable options to rectify the problems that arise from buying on price instead of buying on long term life cycle cost. Culturally few companies actually ‘walk the talk’. It is trendy to have giant billboards at plant entrances proclaiming world class compliance with quality and safety standards. Annual reports are embellished with safety slogans and sustainability statements. Behind the front gates and the glossy annual reports the message is clear: produce or be replaced. Only a few companies go beyond the window dressing and actually endorse, from the top down, continuously improving their safety culture. Those that do embrace safety, show significant performance advantages over their competition that are reflected in their safety, productivity and environmental records and, ultimately their financial statements and share price. Current accounting (and reward) systems make it unlikely financial managers will accept non-conventional approaches to justifying expenditures on safety because they are driven to report “hard” numbers that can be documented and are within the “GAAP or IFRS Rules.” But in reality, accountants quantify soft or intangible costs all the time in their financial statements. Justifying safety investments is greatly enhanced by quantifying what most financial managers would call intangible costs. Government agencies have no problem assigning intangible costs to justify regulations to improve safety. How many times have you heard that the regulation is justified because the cost to industry is X while the benefit to the society is 2 or 3X? How can they say that without including intangible costs? We find it hard to believe these government claims of benefits to society because we have been trained to think about saving hard direct costs to justify investments."

Jan 1, 2017

By T. V. Falkie

REMARKS OF DR. THOMAS V. FALKIE, DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF MINES, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, BEFORE THE FALL MEETING OF THE SOCIETY OF MINING ENGINEERS, AIME, ACAPULCO, MEXICO, SEPTEMBER 23, 1974 This is a time of uncertainty on the world mineral scene. For some of the world's so-called "developed" countries, reserves and production of key minerals are running low. And, we have learned that the energy so essential in recovering and processing minerals can suddenly be in short supply. The prospects for a "no growth" situation in energy or mineral consumption are practically nil. Moreover, the world's economy is in flux, casting doubt on whether traditional mineral customers will continue to be able to buy, or for that matter, whether traditional suppliers of minerals will continue to sell. It is clear that the mineral situation is contributing to world inflationary pressures, which incidentally are most damaging to developing countries. So it is appropriate that SME members devote this session to the world mineral situation, and consider some of the opportunities and responsibilities that we will inevitably encounter as the future becomes the present. The opportunities, to me at least, are especially intriguing, I have the good fortune to be part of an organization that has an enormous capability and responsibility for dealing with mineral problems. The Interior Department's Bureaus, including the Bureau of Mines, have been around for a long time. They are. a prolific and reliable source of both mineral information and mineral technology.

Jan 1, 1974

By Chee Theng

"In 2013, Coeur Mining had more than $55 million in general and administrative (G&A) costs and less than $100 million in cash flow. This year, its G&A costs stand at $30 million, down by more than 40 percent, its all-in sustaining costs have shrunk by more than 30 percent, and its cash flow is above $200 million. To realize this, the company aggressively reduced both its corporate overhead cost and operating cost and repaid more than $300 million in debt.The more robust balance sheet meant the precious-metals producer was well positioned to reap the rewards of an upsurge in commodity prices in the early part of 2016. Its stock price soared from $1.75 in January to $15.98 in August. Although the stock price has since dropped to around $9 due to a stronger dollar and a more hawkish Federal Reserve that recently raised U.S. interest rates, shifting the opportunity-cost argument away from buying gold and silver, Coeur remains attractive to analysts in light of its prudent spending and improved fundamentals.Focus on balanced portfolioCoeur is the largest primary silver producer and one of the largest gold-producing companies in the United States and one of the largest silver companies in the world. Incorporated in 1928, the U.S.-listed company has a total of five operations: three in the United States, one in Mexico and one in Bolivia. About two-thirds of its revenue comes from the United States.The company is conscientious about having a balanced portfolio, so no single mine accounts for more than about 30 percent of its business. Being in three different jurisdictions provides further diversification, and its revenue split of about 60 percent from gold and 40 percent from silver gives it some metals mix. This year, it expects to produce about 466 t (15 million oz) of silver and 10.3 t (330,000 oz) of gold."

Feb 1, 2017

By Mei Long, Tawum Juvert Mbah, Jianhua Zhang, Haiwang Ye

There have been many improvements and advancements in the application of neural networks in the mining industry. In this study, two advanced deep learning neural networks called recurrent neural network (RNN) and autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) were implemented in the simulation and prediction of limestone price variation. The RNN uses long shortterm memory layers (LSTM), dropout regularization, activation functions, mean square error (MSE), and the Adam optimizer to simulate the predictions. The LSTM stores previous data over time and uses it in simulating future prices based on defined parameters and algorithms. The ARIMA model is a statistical method that captures different time series based on the level, trend, and seasonality of the data. The auto ARIMA function searches for the best parameters that fit the model. Different layers and parameters are added to the model to simulate the price prediction. The performance of both network models is remarkable in terms of trend variability and factors affecting limestone price. The ARIMA model has an accuracy of 95.7% while RNN has an accuracy of 91.8%. This shows that the ARIMA model outperforms the RNN model. In addition, the time required to train the ARIMA is than that of the RNN. Predicting limestone prices may help both investors and industries in making economical and technical decisions, for example, when to invest, buy, sell, increase, and decrease production.

Jan 6, 2021

By L. F. Ruppert, W. D. Watson, S. J. Tewalt, L. J. Bragg

The U.S. Geological Survey recently completed a digital coal resource assessment model of the Upper Pennsylvanian Pittsburgh coal bed which indicates that of the original 34 billion short tons [31 billion tonnes] of coal, 16 billion short tons [14 billion tonnes] remain after subtracting mined-out coal. When technical, environmental, and social restrictions are applied to the remaining Pittsburgh coal model, only12 billion short tons [11 billion tonnes] are available for mining. Our assessment models estimate that up to 0.61 billion short tons [0.55 billion tonnes], 2.7billion short tons [2.4 billion tonnes], and 8.5 billion short tons [7.7 billion tonnes] could be available for surface mining, continuous mining, and longwall mining, respectively. This analysis is an example of a second-generation regional coal availability study designed to model recoverability characteristics for all the major coal beds in the U.S.

Jan 1, 2000

By F. Freme

Coal production in the United States increased in2004 by 36 Mt (39.7 million st) to end the year at 1 Gt(1.11 billion st), according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). This was a 3.7-percent in-crease from 2003’s 971.6 Mt (1.07 billion st) (Table 1).(All percentage change calculations are done at the short-tons level.) Although U.S. coal consumption rose in 2004, not all coal-consuming sectors had increased consumption for the year. Coal consumption increased in the electric power sectors by 1 percent and declined slightly in the other industrial sector, while coking coal consumption dropped by 2.4 percent. U.S. coal exports rose for the second consecutive year, while coal imports again increased to record levels. Coal stocks declined during the year, as electric generators used their stockpiles to helpmeet increased demands and missed shipments. Coal producers used their stockpiles to supplement their production levels.

Jan 1, 2005

By Fathi Habashi

THE MINERAL monazite (µ?v??e?? = to be alone) is a rare earth phosphate containing some thorium and small amounts of uranium. It is widely distributed in the earth's crust. It occurs in small proportions in granites. Table 7-1. Mineralogical analysis of Rosetta black sands, U.A.R. (Nakhla, 1958). [Black sands Concentrate Augite 10.8 - Calcite 1.1 - Felspar 0.1 - Garnet 1.8 - Hornblende 2.4 - Ilmenite 50.7 8.0 Magnetite 15.3 Monazite 1.1 84.3 Quarz 7.3 - Rutile 1.0 0.5 Titanite 0.2 - Zircon 7.3 7.1 Others 1.0 0.1 100.0 100.0]

Jan 1, 1970

By W. G. Prast

Investments in fuel minerals and non-fuel minerals by petroleum companies are not a new phenomena. During the past 25 years, oil firms have entered mining via the acquisition route as well as by the direct development of grassroots mines. In the early 1980s, the "merger mania" in the natural resource industries came to a head. Oil company takeovers of mining firms, as well as other mergers between oil producers, captured headlines repeatedly, and speculation ran wild as to who would next acquire whom. Table 1 summarizes leading mining company mergers in the past two decades. There are some special features to the latest round of minerals investments undertaken by oil companies. First, direct takeovers of mining companies have become the preferred means of entry into minerals, with entry from scratch being relegated to the sidelines. This was not always the case. While there are instances of oil firms buying coal and copper companies dating back to the 1950s and 1960s, most of the early minerals work by petroleum firms was from internally generated projects. When the oil companies first became involved in uranium, for example, the uranium mining industry was in its infancy. There was not much market structure to buy, and it was relatively easy for everyone to get into uranium on the ground floor.

Jan 1, 1983

By Luther J. Russell

Mineral development in South Dakota is aggressively encouraged by both state statute and county ordinances. Yet, an increasingly conservative philosophy is taking hold, resulting in expanded regulatory controls and concomitant increases in direct and indirect costs to permit and operate a mining operation. This paper examines the hidden costs associated with protracted permitting timeframes, land buy-outs, attorney's fees, etc., associated with the increasing emphasis for stiff controls on mineral development in South Dakota.

Jan 1, 1998

By J. M. Pachter

Property sales and acquisition are prominent features of today's coal industry. Before selling or buying a site, a company must know the property's economic net worth. Any evaluation of economic net worth would be inadequate if determinations of a property's environmental liabilities and costs were omitted. Short-term and long-term costs can result from liabilities related to reclamation, water treatment, subsidence, and hazardous waste disposal. A structured, interdisciplinary approach can aid in the delineation, summation, and scheduling of these costs and liabilities.

Jan 1, 1986