Search Documents

The Tuesday morning session of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute was opened at 9:00 a.m. by Bob von Storch, in the absence of the President. Mr. von Storch appointed the following new members to the Resolution Committee in the absence of three of the members: Albert Keenan, E. S. O'Connor and Howard Crandell. This committee was asked to be ready to report at the Wednesday morning session. Mr. von Storch then introduced Lyman Fearn, State Mine Inspector for the State of Wyoming, who presided over the morning session. Mr. Fearn introduced the first speaker for the morning, Louis A. Engstrom, Engineer at Kemmerer Coal Company, Kemmerer, Wyoming, who delivered a talk illustrated with slides in the absence of Mike Zakotnik, Jr., who was unable to attend. (Please refer to the index for printed text of this paper.) The next paper, "New Horizons -Coal for the Steam Plants of the West," was delivered by Don Newberry, superintendent of the Castle Gate Mine of the Independent Coal and Coke Company, Castle Gate, Utah, in the absence of W. J. O'Connor. (Please refer to the index for printed text of this paper.) Bob von Storch then introduced Edward G. Fox, President of Bituminous Coal Operators' Association, Washington, D. C., who delivered a paper on "A New Era in Labor Relations."

Jan 1, 1957

John Chrystal Richard R. Fenner G. D. Grayer Albert M. Keenan C. E. Osborn Stanley C. Shubart George Sumers Cal Witmer Death is not the end, but the beginning, Not the surrender of life, but of earth Not a time for tears ... but faith.

Jan 1, 1982

The meeting was called to order by the President, Mr. B. J. Matteson, in Dining Room No. I of the Albany Hotel, at 10 a. in., with thirty members present. After an address of welcome by the President, the Convention proceeded to business. First on the program was the reading of the minutes of the' previous meeting, by" the Secretary.' There being no alterations or amendments they were approved as read. A motion was regularly moved and carried that the Secretary provide membership cards to be mailed, or presented, to the members upon payment of dues in lieu of the receipt which has heretofore been used since the organization of the Institute. Mr. R. A. McAllister then presented his paper, the subject, being: "Mine Haulage." Mr. Robert A. Marshall had prepared a paper upon the subject of "Efficiency in Shot Firing," but as he was unavoidably absent, it was read by Mr. Sam Andrews. At the conclusion of the reading of Mr. Marshall's paper, Mr. Andrews presented his own *paper: "Some Facts About Coal Mining." As Mr. George A. Brown was unable to be present, the President requested Mr. R. S. Morton to read his paper, subject: "Flexoid Tubing and Its Application to Coal Mines as a Means of Temporary Ventilation." There being no further business 'the meeting adjourned.

Jan 1, 1921

[Page Officers of the Institute 5 Minutes of Twenty-first Meeting 9 The U. S. Fuel Company's Tipple at the Hiawatha Mine John M. Jennings 11 Some Experiences With Mechanical Loading in Central Pennsylvania¬ O. G. Sharrer 13 Mechanical Loading Underground- A. W. Dickinson 25 Operation by Long-Face Conveyor Method at Sweetwater Mine Glen A. Knox 39 Discussion of Mechanical Loading 44 Discussion-Safety in Mechanical Loading 45 New Steel Tipple, Spring Canyon, Utah- G. A. Murphy 46 A Theory on the Cause of Spontaneous Combustion-C. P. Crawford... 48 Rock Dusting in the West-D. Harrington 50 Mudite-L. C. Clare 57 Discussion of Harrington's and Clare's Papers 59 Material for Rock Dust-Prepared Discussion-Edward K. Judd 60 Tipple and Mine of the Columbia Steel Corporation-T. C. Harvey 63 Mechanical Stoking of Domestic Fuel-Joseph Harrington 67 The Garrison Automatic Domestic Stoker-Lloyd Garrison 70 Discussion of Domestic Stokers 71]

Jan 1, 1925

Meeting called to order by President Herres, eleven o'clock A. M., Monday, August 27, 1928. Address of Welcome by Mr. T. S. Taliaferro, Jr. Address by Mr. William Redshaw, Chairman of the Rock Springs Chapter of the Institute. Paper, "The Effect of Mechanical Coal Mining on Mine Safety," by Lyman Fearn, State Mine Inspector, Wyoming. Paper, "Safety," F. C. Miller, Chief Chemist, Colorado Fuel & Iron Com¬pany, Trinidad, Colorado. Afternoon session, meeting called to order two P. M. On suggestion of Mr. William Littlejohn, the President appointed a special resolutions committee, consisting of Messrs. P. J. Quealy, R. L. Hair and William Littlejohn, to draft resolutions protesting against the granting of a franchise for piping natural gas into Salt Lake City, to be sent to the City Commissioners of Salt Lake City, with carbon copy to the Utilities Commission of Utah. The Committee submitted resolutions which, upon motion of Mr. Littlejohn, and seconded by Mr. Butler, were adopted and sent by telegraph to the Utilities Commission and the City Commissioners.

Jan 1, 1928

Disclaimer ?You may hear something today that surprises you. If you are pregnant or have a heart condition, you may elect to stop hearing now. ?Some of what you are about to hear you may already know. ?Much of what you are about to hear and see is information that is from and can be found via other sources. ?If any of my statements during the course of this presentation are thought or found to be incorrect, I am not responsible for these comments.

Jan 1, 2006

By Wm. H. Woodhead

Improved methods of mining have accompanied the introduction of mechanical loading, of which there are a great many varieties, but this multiplicity of mining brings new problems and greatly increases the importance of managing over a few years ago. Few mines operating today have been opened with the intention of mechanizing throughout. The problem of mechanization is to change over a mine heretofore operated by hand methods and to select machinery that will fit the old system with the least number of changes, the aim being not to disrupt or to completely change the original plan. The organization of mechanical and electrical forces is a problem in mechanical loading, and each individual mine presents its own problems. Plans which may succeed in one mine may fail in another and upon the management rests the responsibility of deciding the best method in each case.

Jan 1, 1930

By Bill Gray

Jan 1, 2008

By Jessica Smith

Jan 1, 2009

T. W. BUTLER JAMES CAMERON WILLIAM MORGAN J. F. CALLBREATH FRANK C. MILLER J. T. RYAN BENEDICT SHUBART Fading away like the stars of the morning, Losing their light in the glorious sun: Thus would we pass from earth and its toiling, Only remembered by what we have done.

Jan 1, 1941

By John Pfisterer

Leadership Priorities in a New Business Environment ?Komatsu Equipment Company ?Health and Safety of Our Workforce ?The Green Economy & Market Challenges ?Equipment Trends ?Our Business Approach

Jan 1, 2009

"Let us not think of our departed dead As caught and cumbered in these graves of earth; But think of death as of another birth, As a new Freedom for the wings outspread, A new adventure waiting on ahead, As a new joy of more ethereal mirth, As a new world with friends of nobler worth, Where all may taste a more immortal bread." FLOYD W. PARSONS N. CHRISTENSEN JOSEPH F. PETERS GEORGE B. PARKER ROBERT WILLIAMS B. F. DEVINNY

Jan 1, 1942

The Role of Partnerships ?Industry history ?Companies were their own kingdoms ?MSHA and NIOSH were out of touch and focused on enforcement with no direction ?Labor and management were constantly at odds with each other

Jan 1, 2002

[Adams, Douglas K General Electric Co., P.O. Box 2331, Denver 1, Colo. Adams, Kenneth L Peabody Coal Co., 301N, Memorial Dr., St. Louis, Mo. 63102 Allen, Earl W Mine Safety Appliances Co., 257 Rio Grand St., Salt Lake City, Utah Allen, Dr. Harry C U. S. Bureau of Mines, Washington, D. C. 20906 Alston, George L Mine Safety Appliances Co., 201 N. Braddock, Pittsburgh 8, Pa. Archer, Bryan J., Jr Peabody Coal Co., 421 Glenwood St., Grand Junction, Colo. Arentzen, E. M Lee-Norse Co., P.O. Box 582, Charleroi, Pa. Arentzen, L. E Lee-Norse Co., 6030 W. 55th Pl., Arvada, Colo. Arentzen, Rolf F Lee-Norse Co., Box 582, Charleroi, Pa. Artis, Cliff E Big Horn Coal Co., 247 Sherman Ave., Sheridan, Wyo. Atchison, Lee Atchison Construction Co., Drawer D, Aztec, N. Mex.]

Jan 1, 1967

By O .. G. Sharrer

Loading mechanically has of late become the most widely discussed subject in connection with coal mining and has even equalled. the discussion of safety measures as a topic of interest. The subject has been discussed in the various mining journals and by well. informed persons at the Mining Institutes, so it would appear; that all has been said that can be said until further experiments bring out new lines of discussion. It is, therefore, not the intention to present this article as a technical discussion of the subject of mechanical loading as a whole, but rather as a plain talk on machines with which the writer has had personal contact. In 1919, during the first period of post-war depression, a Pennsylvania coal company employing union labor became interested in the possibilities of mechanical loading with the hope of reducing their mining costs, which were and are yet too high to meet competition from the non-union fields of Somerset and Westmoreland counties. Of several loaders presented for their consideration the model of the Joy loader shown by Mr. Joseph F. Joy, seemed to hold the greatest possibilities, and after extended study, the management decided to invest in a machine of this type. A machine was built, which as far as the writer knows was the only one of its type ever put on the market. This machine arrived at one of the mines early in 1920 and was put to work immediately. It was a forerunner of the present 4-BU and 5-BU types, but differed from them very radically as to design. In general the machine consisted of the familiar Joy gathering arms and a short conveyor which discharged into a steel tank which held about four and one-half tons of coal. This tank was emptied by a second conveyor which placed the coal in the mine car. The object of this conveyor tank was to provide storage room while changing cars and to allow the machine to load on the entry while the room was short. This plan was very efficient and from our experience was worth retaining, but has been abandoned by the Joy Company on account of its making the machine unwieldy. The whole machine was mounted on caterpillar tractors which were driven by two 10-H.P. Westinghouse series wound motors, each having its own controller, the controllers being arranged in tandem so as to be operated by the same handle. This very ingenious scheme which is shown in Figure 4, was supposed to make it possible to steer the loader by the controllers. By swinging the handle one way both motors moved forward, by swinging the handle the other way both motors moved backwards and by twisting the handle as shown by arrows, one motor moved ahead and the other back, thus causing the machine to turn. This scheme proved a failure as the loader was too temperamental and erratic in its operation. After Mr. Joy, himself, narrowly escaped serious injury, this device was taken off and the controllers manipulated separately. This system never proved satisfactory and was abandoned' for

Jan 1, 1925

of our good friends and fellow members: William D. Brennan Charles Beuchat who left the world better for their having lived in it.

Jan 1, 1931

By Peter B. Lilly

Thank you, Tom, I appreciate that generous introduction - and your generous welcome. When Doris Finnie asked me to speak here today, my decision to join you couldn't have been easier - for two reasons. First, I can't say no to an opportunity to return to Steamboat Springs. My family has wonderful memories of skiing here. And this time of year, golf in the mountains is so good you almost don't miss the skiing. The second reason this was such an easy decision is that The Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute is such an important forum for the coal industry, and it's certainly important to Peabody. We have mines in five western states - Arizona, Colorado, Montana, New Mexico and Wyoming. Last year, our western mines produced more than 110 million tons of coal. That's about two-thirds of our total domestic production. So western states are obviously critical to us. A couple of weeks ago, the west became even more significant to Peabody. Of course, I'm speaking of PacifiCorp's planned acquisition of The Energy Group - including Peabody - announced the middle of this month. Admittedly, when I agreed to speak here - some months ago - I had no idea just how much change Peabody would face in this relatively brief period. Still, not knowing then about the PacifiCorp announcement, I chose change as the subject for this talk. I'll update you on our recent news. But, first I want to establish a broad context for the PacifiCorp/Energy Group announcement and other change in the electricity business, change here in the United States and all over the world. ? We'll see how change is driven by two major trends - privatization in emerging markets and deregulation in mature markets, In turn, those two trends will cause ever-increasing consolidation - in both the coal industry and the broader power industry. ? After outlining those trends, I'll discuss the change that will dramatically affect Peabody following the announcement a week ago that PacifiCorp and The Energy Group intend to join forces to create one of the world's largest international integrated energy companies - an event that adds considerable credibility to the prophesies I'll outline in my remarks today. ? Finally, I will discuss an issue that threatens our industry's future - and, indeed, the economic future of all Americans. That issue is the inappropriate response to the unproven possibility of global climate change. Let's set the stage for change. And let's begin with the first trend I mentioned - the trend to privatization in developing economies. What drives the trend to privatization? Economics. It's all about the supply and demand of capital. And the engine that drives the supply/demand ratio is growth in electricity demand - tremendous growth in demand in developing economies. The U.S. EIA projects worldwide growth in electricity demand at 63 percent between 1990 and 2010, most of it in developing countries. This strong growth means that a new 500 MW power plant will be needed every three and one-half days until the year 2010. Now, if we say that a 500 MW plant will cost about $500 million dollars, we're talking about a bill of about $1 billion dollars a week - through 2010. That voracious demand for capital drives the trend to privatization. It means countries in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union want to sell generating assets. And Asian countries - for example, India, Indonesia and the Philippines - want to find private investors to build power plants. Privatization already is well underway. In the future, it will grow, with countries in South America, Central America, and Africa joining the trend. Bottom line: The privatization trend means rich new opportunities for companies willing to think beyond "business as usual." Meanwhile, developed economies face a different but no less fundamental change. Western European countries, the United States and Australia face deregulation. Why does deregulation represent such a big change? Consider a few basic facts about the U.S. electricity market to see what a big change -

Jan 1, 1997

Producers with Zero Reportables 2007!: ?New Horizon Mine, Western Fuels Colorado LLC ?Isaacs Run HWM, ICG ADDCAR Systems, LLC ?Savage Mine, Westmoreland Savage Corporation ?South Hallsville No 1 Mine, Sabine Mining Company ?Black Butteand Leucite Hills, Black Butte Coal Company Black Butte and Leucite Hills, Black Butte Coal Company ?Buckskin Mine, Kiewit Mining Group ?Coal Creek Mine, Thunder Basin Coal Company, LLC

Jan 1, 2008

Jan 1, 2008

By Grainne A. Matthews

Jan 1, 2008