Page added on April 24, 2014
So when was the last time, reading an article about the coal industry, that you saw a photograph of the land after the mine has closed, and the site reclaimed? Or, in talking about an oil or gas rig, how many times do you see the relatively small footprint at the site, once the rigs have left, and the site is reclaimed so that all that is left is the production tree?
The fossil industry tends to be vilified at regular intervals with very few voices raised to murmur slight protest as to the picture painted of its evils. The Economist had an article this week which said, in part:
And coal would indeed be a boon, were it not for one small problem: it is devastatingly dirty. Mining, transport, storage and burning are fraught with mess, as well as danger. Deep mines put workers in intolerably filthy and dangerous conditions. But opencast mining, now the source of much of the world’s coal, rips away topsoil and gobbles water. Transporting coal brings a host of environmental problems.
Note that there is no comment about putting the topsoil back in place after the mine has passed, or re-establishing the land fertility. Laws passed in the 1970’s have ensured that the land reclamation is to a much higher standard than previously, and reclaimed land in Ohio, for example, is now harvested for hay and used for pasture. And it was possible to get 43 acres of recreational land filled with lakes full of fish etc for some $107,000 only a couple of years ago.
Figure 1. Reclaimed mine land that was for sale in Illinois (MidWest Energy News).
Now it is true that working underground will get you dirty – in the same way as it will if you are working in the tunnels of a subway system, or on a farm, not to mention repairing sewers – but unless it is the color of the dirt that leads to the discrimination – working in a job that can get you dirty has not, in the past, led to the disapprobation that one sees in papers such as the Economist these days.
The concept of working underground by itself cannot, surely be something of concern. There are all sorts of buildings that have been built underground – either in regions where the site was first an active mine which then converted into offices, warehouses and storage facilities, or where the plan, from the beginning was to mine the space for a specific purpose (whether a subway line, an underground school or public baths or other useful place). For example, consider Springfield Underground which I first visited over four decades ago, and which can run up to 100 ft below the surface, although there are entries where trains and trucks can have access.
At 2.4 million square feet, Springfield Underground continues to grow; we have ample space available for your unique application. While we can accommodate all sorts of businesses, Springfield Underground is home to warehousing, laboratories, food storage, records storage and data centers. Our location is convenient to railways and highways – which makes us ideal for distribution centers and manufacturers.
Figure 2. Cutaway showing the location of available space at Springfield Underground (Springfield Underground)
By utilizing the space between pillars (shown in white against the blue available space) and building temporary walls work spaces of thousands of square feet are located underground where they are safe from tornadoes, which are a hazard for the state, at a constant temperature and in relative quiet and security.
Similarly there are facilities under downtown Kansas City and in a number of other locations around the country.
“Intolerably filthy and dangerous” – well that dates the information that the writer is basing this on. Of course there are the images and stories of the past:
Figure 3. The Penitent by Hildebrand
When I was young I lay on my side and worked with a pick and shovel in low coal, not that much different from the conditions shown in Anthony Burton’s “The Miners.”
Figure 4. Mining in Low Coal at Condering Colliery. (The Miners)
But that was over 50 years ago, when Britain still desperately needed the coal to fuel its restoration and modernization, and where there was also a provision to keep mines open to help with employment.
Now those narrow seams are largely not economic to mine (though there are ways) and modern coal mines use large mechanized methods to remove the coal, often remotely from the work force. But the image remains.
Increasingly mines are much safer, there is a fair amount of white stone dust on the walls so that, as well as being better lit, it is also just a brighter place to be.
Figure 5. A modern longwall production face (Maple Creek via West Virginia University )
While, in the unregulated mines of the past there were death rates of up to 1,500 or more in the United States (at one time explosions underground could kill all the miners underground at the time of the explosion, and this could add up to more than 200) there were 19 miners killed in 2012. And while one death is too many there are sadly other industries that have a worse record.
According to Forbes, the ten most dangerous jobs in 2012 were:
1. Logging workers
2. Fishers and related fishing workers
3. Aircraft pilot and flight engineers
4. Roofers
5. Structural iron and steel workers
6. Refuse and recyclable material collectors
7. Electrical power-line installers and repairers
8. Drivers/sales workers and truck drivers
9. Farmers, ranchers, and other agricultural managers
10. Construction laborers
Mining didn’t even make the list, nor of the more extended list of the 15 most dangerous jobs, as listed by AOL.
Sadly the industry has been stereotyped with an antiquated, and largely out of date set of images. (Though admittedly in parts of Asia particularly the low cost of labor and the need for both jobs and fuel can still lead to the odd dismal picture, yet even there, as regulations set in the picture is improving by the year).
One has to look no further than to the photographs of power stations that use coal to see the evidence of this bias. The only visible vapors that leave a modern plant are the steam clouds and yet in paper after paper the photographer has maneuvered so that, with the sun behind the steam, it looks grey or black.
These distortions are having less and less impact, as the real long-term need for coal is clearly evident, but it just makes the debates less honest. Unfortunately the image of underground workers are too often associated with the Trolls and Orcs of Tolkien’s Middle Earth in contrast to the desired world where we see the contrast to the idyllic but unrealistic dream of us all living in the Shire in bucolic joy for ever.
7 Comments on "Tech Talk – is coal that dirty?"
bobinget on Thu, 24th Apr 2014 1:00 pm
The real problems arise when coal catches fire.
penury on Thu, 24th Apr 2014 1:10 pm
I don”t know, Lets see some pictures of W. Virginia after reclamation, or maybe Wyoming,
ghung on Thu, 24th Apr 2014 1:23 pm
… as if the consequences of mining coal end at the mine; that that’s where the danger is.
J-Gav on Thu, 24th Apr 2014 3:08 pm
I shoveled it up from the basement to heat my apartment in Cologne, Germany for a year. I shoveled it up from the basement to heat our apartment in Paris for 6 years before we got Natgas. That didn’t happen before the cast iron central furnace in the kitchen cracked open. The landlord said basically “put some resin on it, that’ll work.” (Why not chewing gum?) We had to pay and bring in an independent expert who’d just come from a place where the sucker blew. As in, blew out everything – nothing left! Fortunately, no-one was at home there at the time. Coal is dirty and dangerous and always will be.
Davey on Thu, 24th Apr 2014 3:23 pm
Gav, I remember mid eighties in Madrid where my 1st wife and I lived for a time. On a winters morning the fresh smell of pine starter fires then the smell of coal. My wife being Spanish didn’t much notice but it played havoc on my lungs. I can only imagine China now. How horrible!!
Kenz300 on Thu, 24th Apr 2014 4:34 pm
There are cleaner, safer and cheaper ways to generate electricity than using coal which damages the environment and is a contributor to climate change.
Wind, solar, wave energy, geothermal and second generation biofuels made form algae, cellulose and waste are a better choice.
We Could Power All 50 States With Wind, Solar and Hydro Washington’s Blog
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/03/solar-wind-mix-baseload.html
jlbaerg on Thu, 24th Apr 2014 9:13 pm
When they started to mine coal and burn it in Montana in the 1970’s, the companies were required to post a reclamation bond, that would be held until the land could again sustain itself. The last time I heard, none of the money has ever been released.