On Future Coal Mining and Human Underground Activity

Petras, L.

IIASA Professional PaperOctober 1980

Petras, L. (1980) On Future Coal Mining and Human Underground Activity. IIASA Professional Paper. IIASA,

Laxenburg, Austria, PP-80-010 Copyright © October 1980 by the author(s). http://pure.iiasa.ac.at/1515/ All

rights reserved. Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom

use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage.

All copies must bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. For other purposes, to republish, to post on

servers or to redistribute to lists, permission must be sought by contacting repository@iiasa.ac.at

ON FUTURE COAL MINING AND HUMANUNDERGROUND ACTIVITY

Lubomir Petras

October 1980PP-80-10

Professional Papers do not report on work of theInternational Institute for Applied SystemsAnalysis,but are producedand distributed by the Institute asan aid to staff ｭ ･ ｭ ｢ ｾ ｲ ｳ in furthering their profes-sional activities. Views or opinions expressedarethose of the author(s) and should not be interpretedas representingthe view of either the Institute orits National Member Organizations.

INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR APPLIED SYSTEMS ANALYSISA-2361 Laxenburg, Austria

CONTENTS

BACKGROUND

HUMAN ACTIVITY UNDERGROUND (GENERALLY)

BACKGROUND TO THE PROBLEM

FUTURE TECHNOLOGICAL POSSIBILITIES

WHERE IS THE MAIN BARRIER?

POSSIBLE ROLE OF IIASA

CONCLUSIONS

REFERENCES

APPENDIX: Draft Agenda fortPlanning for Planningt

Task Force Meeting

-v-

1

2

3

5

7

9

10

11

12

ON FUTURE COAL MINING AND HUMANUNDERGROUND ACTIVITY

Lubomir Petras

BACKGROUND

The IIASA ResearchProgram for 1980 includes two IndustryStudies under the general heading "Issues for the Eighties".The first of these industry studies is in Coal, in particularhard coal mining underground. The activity in this study todate includes:

A task force meeting, to initiate the study held inMarch 1979 at which eight coal producing NMO countrieswere represented;

A seminar held in Szczyrk, Poland in November 1979 atwhich technical paperson the following topics werediscussed:

(a) planning for planning (including new mining technologies),(b) managementand organization,(c) environmentalproblems.

This seminarwas attendedby representativesfrom theUSSR, UK, Poland, FRG, Czechoslovakia,Italy, Hungary,USA, and Austria.

A planning meeting was held at IIASA in April 1980 whichwas attendedby representativesfrom the UK, Poland,FRG, Czechoslovakia,and the USSR. At this meeting itwas agreedto arrangea task force meeting on "Planningfor Planning" in the coal industry in November/December1980 at IIASA (see Appendix A for draft agenda), andthat this would include a discussion,proposedby thepresentauthor, of new mining technologies,e.g., robotmining devices, to be consideredin the context ofanticipatedshortageof undergroundmanpower.

-1-

-2-

This ProfessionalPaperprovides backgroundmaterial forthat discussion.

HUMAN ACTIVITY UNDERGROUND (GENERALLY)

Coal mining is by far the most dangerousmajor occu-pation in the US today. Over 100,000 miners havebeen killed in the mines since 1900. (Thompson 1979)

Undergroundwork in the future is going to remain unattrac-tive if the presenthazardsand occupationaldiseasesare not mini-mized beyond the incremental improvementprocessescurrentlyexperienced--fundamentalchange is needed. The general publicdo not have even half a true picture of what undergroundwork isreally like. It is only on those sad occasionsof great miningaccidentsthat they are shockedby the high numbers of casualties.

Much less, in fact virtually nothing, is known of the hun-dreds of miners who, due to an every day accident, are compelledto draw a life-long invalidity pension. This shadowy part ofundergroundmining is not publicized and the statisticsare sel-dom clear. No industrial sectorclaims so many victims every dayas the coal industry, particularly hard coal mining. Any airtransportaccident results in an immediate and thorough investiga-tion into the causes,followed by an attempt to avoid any similardisasterin the future, i.e., the body of the plane is changed,remodeled, togetherwith each part, navigation equipment, etc.And all this is done under the watchful eye of the public. Thesteadywhittling away of human life and health undergroundgetsno such publicity. Nor is causerelated to effect. How many ofthe usersof energy produced from coal are aware of the toll theyexact when they turn on a lamp? How much does the generalpublicknow of the numbersof miners who have to stop working undergrounddue to silicosis, have to change their job and in spite of thatchange end their lives prematurely? On keeping problems of duston one side, the generally high morbidity of coal miners andconditions are getting worse. The increasingmining depth bringsabout higher temperatures(30 by each 100m), higher pressuresandother problems. Alleviation can only corne through an all-roundand thoroughly thought-throughinnovation process.

Energy forecastsindicate that within two decadescoal out-put will have to increasemanifold. But that increasewill notcome unless human ingenuity and technical know-how are appliedundergroundas much as they are to activities on the surface.It is neither technically possible, nor humanly acceptable.Undergroundman is no less worthy of concern than the cormorant.This means, amongstother things, that man's work undergroundshould be consideredas a consistentwhole, an inter-relatedclosed system.

We must draw on knowledge obtained in other spheres,on thesurface or in the air, so far as we can but neverthelesswe needa complete systemsstudy of undergroundso that we can see howbest to createan undergroundproduction systemin which man can

-3-

survive without self-denigration,and so that we can develop thenecessaryequipment for this high task.

Clearly it is necessaryto explore all likely variants ofthe future developmentof those areasof human activities whichare most likely to have thier impacts on mining, e.g., the ｣ ｯ ｮ ｾ

struction of future extraction devices. This must not be a hap-hazardexploration. On the contrary, the close cooperationofmining expertswith those from other selectedsectors, includingpure science,will be required, and that at the internationallevel. A national technologicalassessment,carried out at thislevel, could provide the information necessaryfor decision, andwould be of value to: .

experts from the mining industry and selectedcooperat-ing industrial branches,including specialistsfor work-ing out prognosesin the areasconcerned;

systemsanalystsof the mining industry, ecologists,demographers(migrations), concernedwith economic andsocial planning;

expertsconcernedwith energy and power scenarioswhowould thus influence the future demand for coal (especi-ally coal for synfuel) in relation to new technologies.

MOdernization in the coal industry has, in all its history,been lagging behind (seethedelay in the usageof air and elec-trical motors, transportequipment, etc.). This situation can

" only be changedif the undergroundactivity is consideredas arelatively independentsystem (as far as researchis concerned),arid an ·open system" (when we think of the cooperationwith ex-perts from other branches)•

BACKGROUND TO THE PROBLEM

•.. technologicaldevelopmentin the coal industry andthe supply of skilled labor are unpredictableand makemajor investmentand planning decisions in the EIGHTIESmore difficult and complex than ever before•••(IIASA ResearchPlan 1980-84)

For long-term planning of the developmentof many nationaleconomies, it is necessarywunderstandthe future potential oftheir coal industries, especially that of deep mined hard coalwhich is an essentialelement for steel production. It is,therefore, necessaryto take accountof the fact that in 10-20years technologicalprogressin the mines will have to compensatefor an anticipatedlack of manpower. This is not a simple taskfor mining research,as pointed out, e.g., by the Chairman of

·the NCB (UK), who said:

We know what we are aiming for at the moment in termsof our mining resourceeffort, but mining will undoubt-edly change. How will it change towards the end of the

-4-

century or beyond? What new techniquesor deviceswill be employed?, etc. If we can guessat themnow, then we should be instituting immediately theresearchthat will bring them to fruition in duecourse.

By implication this is a major element in IIASA's project'Coal--Issuesfor the Eighties', for decisionsabout that researchare preciselyone of the major issuesfor the industry in theeighties. What is known about this in the different nationalindustries?What information is necessaryfor a decision?

The answersto such questionsare not simple, and has beengiven different forms according to the author'sparticular sphereof interest. There must inevitably be many approaches. If, forexample, we want to know somethingmore about the possibilitiesof improving presentconventionalmining methods by using newtypes of explosives in the future, we would view this quite dif-ferently than a similar object of mining research,such as mea-suring the characteristicfeaturesof surroundingrocks. Suchperceptionsof the need for mining researchis quite differentfrom that of the plannerwho is concernedwith integratedsystems,or health specialistsconcernedwith safety and morbidity.

Some see the questionas concernedwith improving existingmethods such as a "long-wall face" by better automatedsupports.Others are interestedin more revolutionary achievementssuch asa remote control mining robot system. So far as Czechoslovakia'scoal mining researchof these future possibilities for humanactivities undergroundis concerned,there isvery intensive andpermanentresearchinterest in future "manless" mining (this meansnot quite without miners). It is clearly realisedthat if we wantto utilize the advantageof the future mining method by the year2000, we must implement R&D strategiesin the EIGHTIES!

Let us try to take the matter further by identifying some ofthe requirementsfor an 'ideal' mining system (Petras, 1980-1).

(a) To minimize the number of workers whose activities areunderground;

(b) To minimize the number of drifts, corridors, and shafts(this means avoiding production of stone);

(c) To improve the recovery factor;

(d) To simplify the ventilation systems (through bore holesfrom the surfaceor from main drafts just above theexplored seam) so as to save costs and improve workingconditions;

(e) To transportundergroundcoal without the breakdownsthat arise in conventionalequipment;

(f) To reduce operationalcost (especially for supports) andinvestmentcost (especiallyfor undergroundroadways,corridors, etc.);

(g) To develop means of exploiting 'difficult' seams,e.g.,seamswith rock pumps, pressurepumps, etc.;

-5-

(h) To simplify the developmentof mines; and

(i) To increasethe safety of miners.

No single mining method with the above nine characteristicsexists. It was, therefore, necessaryto develop a survey of cur-rent and future technologicalpossibilities in undergroundminingof coal from different R&D programs. Some important methods inthis areaare briefly describedin the following section.

FUTURE TECHNOLOGICAL POSSIBILITIES

1. Mechanical Cutting: At the presenttime the bulk ofhard coal extraction in NMO countries, and indeed in the world asa whole, is done by mechanicalmeans, whereby a tool such as acutting pick or plough blade is used to break lumps of coal fromthe solid face.

2. Use of Explosives:

Conventional techniques,Peacefulnuclear explosion.

3. Cutting by PressurizedWater:

Hydraulic mining of coal (in most casesthe water pres-sure has been less than 35 MPa),

For cutting rock much higher pressureshave been used,up to 1500 MPa (the processis at presentinefficient,the consumptionof energy per unit mass of material re-moved being about ten times that for mechanicalcutting).

4. Remotely Controlled 'Moles': Robot devices that carryout quasi-manualexplorationswhen instructedby

(a) hot too remote human operator (e.g., under a long-wallface) ,

(b) remote human operator, from a manned undergroundcontrolbase, of the machine'ssituation is brought to him viamonitoring systems, sensingsystems,electromagneticsystems,etc., (better sensorsjncorporatingmicropro-cessorsand improved data trans·,issionand a small com-puter would steadily improve tte protection), and

(c) human operator from surfacewith utilization of computersand other special equipment.

5. UndergroundGasification: Researchwork is being car-ried out internationally. Field trials are going on, or beingpreparedin the USSR, USA, Belgium, FRG, and Czechoslovakiawiththe latter two specifically intending to investigatethe problemof gasification in depth. Other methods pertaining to this groupare, e.g., pyrolysis, complete and quenchedcombustion (coal oroil is fed with air and ignited, after which water is pumped into pursue the flame front and generatesteam).

-6-

6. Solvent Digestion: The method is basedon the digestionof coal in coal-derivedoil, e.g., authraceneoil. In recentyears interesthas been shown in the application of this techniqueto in situ processing(in the USA and the UK).

7. Chemical Combination: A US patentexists on a processinvolving the use of materials such as ammonia and aqueousmotuguolwhich act as surfaceactive agentsand reducesinterlayer forcesat the natural interfacespresentin coal and thereby causethecoal to fragment. The nature of the fragmentationapparentlyalsoassistsin the subsequentseparationof sulphur and other inorganicmaterials.

8. Microbiological Degradation: Method which has beendevelopedespeciallyin the USA (University of North Dakota), inthe UK (Microbiological ResearchEstablishmentof Portou) and theUSSR. Coal, being an organic chemical, can conceivablyprovide alife support medium for a micro-organism. It is possible that indigesting coal some micro-organismsmight produce a significantyield of low molecular weight degradationproducts. No micro-organismhas yet been identified but apparentlyno detailed searchhas been made.

Points 5-8 are, however, unlikely to be for hard coal. Wetherefore need to concentrateon methods 1-4. In the author'sopinion method 4 offers real potential for researchdevelopmentperspective. The main part and condition for method utilization(especially 4(b) or-4Tc» is the robot device (electronic miningequipment). In some countries a great deal of attention is beinggiven to the limited form of robotry (e.g., USSR, UK--"telechirmining", or Czechoslovakia--"EFIDESmining modul"t.

However, today's reality, so far as the R&D robot miningdevice is concerned, is. relatively the same as it was 5-10 yearsago. The main reason for this is that the major effort of R&Dhas been the developmentof automation in hydraulic supportsandmining combined. In Czechoslovakiathis has been becauseof thefollowing assumptions:

long-wall face is the best mining method;

it is necessaryto improve the presentlevel of automa-tion of this method;

it is not possible to mine without a support in a long-wall face; and

the presentway of ventilation is suitable.

These opinions have changedand the effort has been concen-trated especially in:

1. R&D of different mining methods than long-wall face ones;

2. R&D of geological exploration methods which are necessaryfor the work of robot devices in a coal seam (removinggeological uncertainty); and

-7-

3. Clarifying the main features, functions, etc., of therobot electronic device ("EFIDES") and problems of itstesting in presentlong-wall faces.

In responseto the first item, since 1978 mining researchinCzechoslovakiahas been developing an entirely new mining method,which has been called "UndergroundExploration of Coal Seamsbythe Method of Concave CentrifugationContinuous Caving Mining"with the robot device "EFIDES" and with hydraulic transportandexhaustionof mixed air and CH4, C02, CO, H2' etc. It is alreadyclear from the name of the method (in short "PEEM") that it isquite different from presentmethods (see Czech. invention No.PV535280).

In responseto the seconditem, a solution of geological un-certainty was consideredto be the most important condition forfuture successfulmining by robot device. Thus, a survey of theseismic method has been developing since 1970. This method hasbeen called "transverseseamwave" (see Czech. patent; in the USthe patent has the number 3,858,167).

So far as the third item (robot device) is concerned, it isa main part and condition for method utilization, as previouslymentioned, and this problem of developmentof the robot device(mainly its reliability) cannot be solved only by the coal indus-try, as other problems--e.g.,seismic survey outlook, new ventila-tion methods, etc. And as it is the central core ofmany futuremain problems of undergroundmining, it is necessaryto find howthe problem can be solved and in what stages.

WHERE IS THE MAIN BARRIER?

The potential value of the robot device fur the coal industryhas been known since the last century. This is quite natural, asthe processof utilizing some mechanicalor later electronicmoles directed and controlled from the surfaceby coal mining'has been a very seductiveone. However, some authorsof this"method" ignore the many scientific, organizationaland engineer-ing p£oblems that exist (e.g., they do not account for suchessentialmatters as transportof coal, ventilation, maintenanceof devices, etc.).

The robot device problem appearsas the "tip of the iceberg",whose main body is much more general than other branchesofindustry and economic sectors. This is a logical concept, as therobot device will be producedand composedof different parts andequipment from the following:

1. Electronic industry: microprocessors,monitoring systems,sensingsystems,electromagneticsystems, small computers,etc.

2. Chemical industry: new hard materials for cables, cath-ing, diving suits, etc.

3. Light industry: automationequipment, remote control,closed-circuit television, phones, transmitters,etc.

-8-"

4. Transport sector: hydraulic transport, ducts, pumps,etc.

5. Machinery sector: equipment for ventilation or exhaus-tion and cooling equipment, etc.

6. Heavy industry: equipment for measuringtemperatureinto dust,environmentaland other experienceswithoperation in rigorous conditions.

7. Nuclear sector: parts for manipulation under differentcircumstancesand which require particular reliability.

8. And others: (military sector, health sector, cyberneticresources,cosmic sector, researchinstitutesof thesesectors,etc.).

However, until a clear specificationis preparedit is notpossible to effectively draw in the industrieswith the necessaryskills.

In spite of the fact that the coal industry has been workingfor a long time on various predictions, short and ｬ ｯ ｮ ｧ ｾ ｴ ･ ｲ ｲ ｮ fore-casts, scenarios,prognosis, etc., there has been very littleconceptualizations(Hafele 1979). In other words, the requirementfor such new mining methods and robot devices need to be workedout on different levels of managementin the coal industry, andfrom different points of view. For example:

1. Technical (ventilation, transportingcoal, maintenance,etc.) ,

2. Safety (manned undergroundcontrol bases),

3. Management (monitoring, ｣ ｯ ｭ ｰ ｵ ｴ ･ ｲ ｾ ｳ ｹ ｳ ｴ ･ ｭ ｳ Ｌ etc.),

4. Organization (developmentof mines, utilization ofresults from developmentof robot devices step by step,etc.) ,

5. and others.

In order to overcome this, we need:

disseminationof needsof the coal industry (not onlyyesterday's)into public and other sectorsand industrybranches;

presentlevel of proceduresfor evaluating technologydevelopmentoptions (R&D strategiesfor mining research);

timing for working out of individual stagesof thisdevelopmentof the robot device (it is important forthe solution of present-dayand even yesterday'sprob-lems as well) .

-9-

This does not mean that existing researchshould be in any waydiscontinued. Rather it is necessaryto create a new communityto discussthese problems.

POSSIBLE ROLE OF IIASA

As stated in the introduction of this paper, these problemsin the coal industry relate not only to IIASA's Industry Studies"Issues for the Eighties" but also to work in other Areas andProgramsin IIASA.

Energy Program (ENP)--Task 3--mining coal by new methodsfor conversionprocessesbasedon nuclear or solar heat-coalplex, or for synfuel production (Petras, 1980/2),

Resourcesand Environment (REN) Area--Task 2 (environ-mental quality control and management),Task 3 (resourceassessmentand accounting--WELMM),

Human Settlementsand Services (HSS) Area--Task 3, Man-power Analysis (health of miners, hazards,etc.).

Within the framework of MMT's point of view a study of newmining robot devices for future mining methods would be relevantto:

Task 1 (problems of technologicalchange--innovation),-becausethe task exploring the direction of changesandidentifying the impacts, stimulants, and barriersof thistechnologicalchange for the new robot device is verysignificant (especially, if necessary,to start withworking out systemsanalysisof future possibilitiesofthose new mining methods);

Task 2 (organizationalmanagement),appreciationof to-day's applicationof small computers for modeling dif-ferent relationships ｢ ･ ｴ ｷ ｾ ･ ｮ today's and future miningtechnologies--thismeans to start work on a simulationsoftware tool which would form part of a decision supportsystem for coal mining industry managers;

Task 3 Ｈｭｾｾ｡ｧ･ｭ･ｮｴ of interorg nizational ｰ ｲ ｯ ｌ ｬ ･ ｭ ｾ Ｉ Ｌquestionsconnectedwith reliaJility (risk) of the robotdevice (e.g., EFIDES) in undergroundoperations.

Simultaneously,the problem of judging future mining methodsfor coal industrieshas other suitable features in IIASA research:

it is in a long-term task, whose intensity of solutioncan be variable;

it can be disseminatedinto severalpartial tasks withdifferent timing;

it requires experience,knowledge over achievementsfrom different industriesand researchsectors (see above),and for this reason IIASA is very suitable;

-10-

there can by very intensive internal collaboration(today 7 tasks) and external ones also.

It is important to undertake such a study from a comprehen-sive systemspoint of view, so as to compare the costs of alter-native mining methods in the light of their systemseffect. (Onemethod is given in Petras 1980/2).

CONCLUSIONS

Coal remains the main source for the coke neededto produceｳ ｴ ･ ｾ ｬ and its associatedproducts such as cars and bicycles. It

·'is thereforevital to examine the potential and the implicationsof new mining methods, particularly in view of the need to reducethe number of men employed underground. Two major factors areimproving the certainty of geological predictionsand also ofequipmentreliability. In Czechoslovakiait is thought thatthese two factors will best be achievedby seismic techniques,in the first place, and by the use of a robot device on the other.However, if the necessarybreak-throughso far as a robot devicecould be obtained, many new possibilitieswould be created--therobot mining device would only be the tip of the iceberg.

The fact is that too often developmentshave only been con-sideredon an incrementalbasis, and that an overall strategyorconceptualizationis generally missing. In view of the presentstateof knowledge, some exchangeof ideas amongst peer groupsfrom many countries seemdesirable.

IIASA would be a natural focus for this work. It would bein full harmony with the third of IIASA's objectives, namely,'To achieve application to problems of international importance'.The problem is of a long character,suitable for collaborativework.

As a start some careful costing of current methods is desir-able for making comparisons. This could be comparedwith estimatedcosts of robot device (mole) mining. A start could also be madeat the forthcoming task force meeting on 'Planning for Planning'in the following discussions:

forecastingproductivity and the effects of the newmining technology (PEEM),

assessingmanpower requirements,availability and train-ing.

Beyond this, it would be necessaryto undertakedetailedsystemsstudies and to integrate the work with other IIASA tasks.

-11-

REFERENCES

Ehrenberger,V. and L. Petras. 1979. Utilization of the Resultsof a SystemsAnalysis of the Energy System in Czechoslovakiain the Framework of the University Educational Process.IIASA-RSI ConferencePreprints, July.

Hafele, W. 1979. Is There Any Energy Problem? Science, Technologyand the Human Prospect--EdisonCentennialSymposium,San Fransisco,April.

Haustein, H.-D. 1979. Factor Profiles of the Innovation Processas an Analytic Tool for Innovation Policy. IIASA, WP-79-127.

Kobert, P. and L. Petras. 1979. ManagementInformation System inthe Mining Industry. Paper presentedat Seminar on "Coal--Issues for the Eighties" held in Poland, November.

PEEM, New Coal Mining method, Czech. invention No. PV535280, see"Office for Inventions and Discover_ds", Prague 1, Vaclavskenamesti 19; 11346.

Petras, L. 1980/1. Task for SystemsAnalysis--R&D StrategiesforMining Research. IIASA Coal Seminar (MMT-80/4-8), April.

Petras, L. 1980/2. SystemsAnalysis of Future Coal Mining Tech-nology Possibilities (Initiated to Clarify Synfuel Potential-ity), forthcoming IIASA Working Paper.

Stachowicz, J. and R. Tomlinson. 1979. Coal--Issuesfor theEighties. IIASA WP-79-44.

Stahl, I. 1980. A Cost Model for Coal Extraction, IIASA, MMTInternal Note 23/5/80.

Thomson III, A.M. 1979. Technology, Labor and IndustrialStructureof the U.S. Coal Industry: An Historical PerspectiveN. York-London, p.375.

ResearchPlan for IIASA, 1980-84.

-12-

APPENDIX

TIASA INDUSTRY STUDIES: COAL

DRAFT AGENDA

PLANNING FOR PLANNING ｾａｓｋ FORCE

1Mon.

2Tue.

3Wed.

Mining Method

Evaluation/LayoutAssessment

RENtask 3

SystemsApproach for

ForecastingProductivity and

Effects of New Technology

MMTtask 2

o.m.

Intro- ReservesAssessmentduction

QuantityI -- Quality

Geology

RENtask 3

SystemsAnalysis Approach for

AssessingManpower

Requirements/Availabilityand

Training

The Effect of Risk or

Appraisal

MTask 1&3

4Thurs.

Site Selection including

Environmental Impacts

*These two sessionsdevoted to

identifying interrelationships

and to general discussion

Fri.

* ClosingRemarks

Ｎ ｾ._----

c==J - possibly cooperatingwith other IIASA tasks.