DOCSLIB.ORG

Meqb Regional Copper-Nickel

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Meqb Regional Copper-Nickel In• I EBOOO E9000 Eloooo Ellooo E12000 £13000 £14000 £15000 N12000 Nl1000 N10000 N9000 N8000 N7000 MEQB REGIONAL COPPER-NICKEL This document is made available electronically by the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library as part of an ongoing digital archiving project. http://www.leg.state.mn.us/lrl/lrl.asp A PRELIMINARY REPORT DETAILS OF THE UNDERGROUND MINE MODELS Steven Po Oman William A. Ryan REGIONAL COPPER-NICKEL STUDY MINNESOTA ENVIRONM~NTAL QUALITY BOARD FEBRUARY, 1978 REPORT. The reader is cautioned t""""""",V","¥Y$i'li!! use, quotation or reproduction of this material without first contacting the authors, since the . document may experience extensive revision during review. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 INTRODUCTION 2 ADVANTAGES OF UNDERGROUND MINING 3 Environmental Impacts 3 Se1ectivi ty 4 Protection From Weather 4 DISADVANTAGES OF UNDERGROUND MINING 5 Economy 5 Development Period 6 Recovery of Ore 7 Safety 8 Labor Availability 9 Subsidence 10 MINING METHODS 11 MINE PLANNING 19 BLASTHOLE OPEN STOPING 21 PREPRODUCTION DEVELOPMENT 21 Shafts and Hoists 27 MINING OPERATIONS 34 Scheduling 34 Mine Design 34 Stope Development 37 Stope Mining 38 Transportation 39 Underground Crushing 40 Vent i1 ation 40 Compressed Air 43 Pumping Facilities 44 Ground Support 45 Underground Maintenance Facilities 45 Page MINING COSTS 47 Equipment Requirements 47 Supplies 51 Manpower Requirements 51 Summary of Costs 54 ROOM-AND-PILLAR MINING 56 Major Ad.vantages 56 Major Disadvantages 58 Development and Mining 58 Mining Costs 59 SUMMARY 64 APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY OF MINING TERMINOLOGY 67 APPENDIX B: UNDERGROUND MINING METHODS 69 APPENDIX C: DUST CONTROL TECHNIQUES 83 APPENDIX 0: HYDRAULIC BACKFILLING 93 REFERENCES 97 TABLES Table Page 1 Percent ore recovery for different underground 7 mining methods 2 Mine injury statistics for 1976 9 3 Underground mining methods 12 4 Applications of underground mining methods 14 5 Geologic and mechanical criteria in large-scale 15 mining methods 6 Advantages of various underground mining methods 18 7 Hoist design parameters 32 8 Underground mine equipment requirements - initial 49 and additional capital requirements 9 Schedule of capital additions and replacements 50 10 Supplies and materials requirements 51 11 Manpower distribution for the underground mine model 52 12 Average wage rates for hourly and salaried personnel 53 13 Blasthole open stoping capital costs 54 14 Blasthole open stop~ng operating costs in $/ton of 55 Cu-Ni ore 15 Room-and-pillar capital costs 62 16 Room-and-pillar operating costs in $/ton of Cu-Ni ore 63 17 Comparison of blasthole open stoping and room-and- 65 pillar mining models FIGURES Figure Page 1 Comparison of development rates during 22 preproduction and normal production operation 2 Generalized cross-sectional view of the blasthole 24 open stoping mining levels 3 Typical circular shaft arrangements 31 4 View of a stope in a blasthole open stoping mine 35 5 Room-and-pillar full face and multibench mine 57 6 Section through room of typical full face and 60 bench mining operation 7 Life cycle of the room-and-pillar mine 61 8 Variation of mining costs with capacity 66 0-1 Flow diagram of a hydraulic sandfill system 95 Page 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report creates two models of hypothetical underground copper-nickel mines located near the basal contact of the Duluth Complex in northeastern Minnesota (St. Louis and Lake counties). The mine models have been developed by the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (MEQB) Regional Copper-Nickel Study in order to determine potential environmental impacts, approximate mining costs, and the requirements of an underground mine in terms of equipment, supplies, land, and manpower. Several assumptions form the framework for development of the hypothetical mine models. The mines are designed to produce 7,938,000 metric tons (mt) (8,750,000 short tons (st)) of ore per year over a mine life of 30 years. An additional 635,000 mt (700,000 st) of waste 'rock will be produced annually. The cut-off grade (stated in terms of percent copper) is set at 0.60 percent copper. The average grade of the ore is 0.80 percent copper and 0.20 percent nickel. The mining methods chosen as the most applicable to underground mining of the Duluth Complex are room-and-pillar mining and blasthole open stoping. For modelling purposes, room-and-pillar mining will be used where sub­ stantial reserves of fairly flat lying ore exist. The dip angle must be less than 20 0 and the thickness of the mineralization is restricted to less than 25 meters (m) (82 feet (ft)). Blasthole open stoping will be employed when the height of the ore zone is greater than 25 m (82 ft). Using the models as examples, the report outlines: 1) the activities of the pre­ production development period; 2) the major features of the mining methods, including the equipment involved; and 3) the costs associated with each mining method. ' A work force of about 1000 people will be necessary for the mine to function at a production rate of 7,938,000 mt/year. The costs associated with the two mining methods are summarized below. Blasthole Room-and- Operating Costs--$/mt of Cu-Ni ore Open Stoping Pillar Mining Development 2.05 0.52 Ground Control .26 Drilling .30 085 Blasting .12. .33 Haulage .76 1.82 Crushing and Hoisting .35 .33 Power and Fuel .30 .33 Maintenance (non-allocatable) .58 .58 Supervision and Services 1.05 1.10 General .35 .39 Total $5.86 $6.51 Capital Costs $130,400,000 $112,200,000 The m~n~ng glossary fo~nd in Appendix A may aid in understanding some of the mlnlng terms used ln this report. Page 2 INTRODUCTION The copper-nickel mineral resources of northeastern Minnesota can be removed from the ground by open pit mining, underground mining, or combina­ tions of both methods. A preliminary report on ~Ren pit mining of the Duluth Complex has already been prepared by the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (MEQB) Regional Copper-Nickel Study. Underground mining will be examined in this report. Underground mining methods must be considered when the depth of a mineral deposit is such that removal of the overburden makes surface mining tech­ niques unprofitable or when external factors prohibit the operation of a surface mine. Determining the optimum underground mining method requires careful analysis of geologic, economic, and environmental data. By using a less rigorous approach, room-and-pillar mining and blasthole open stoping were chosen as the mining methods most suitable to the development and mining of the mineral resources of the Duluth Complex. Both methods are high productivity mining methods which incorporate the latest developments in underground mining equipment. The hypothetical mine models developed in this report attempt to typify the mining practices that may be employed in northeastern Minnesota. Although no two mines are alike, there are enough similarities between mines (and mining methods) that much of the information found in this report will re­ main valid even if different mining methods are actually utilized. Page 3 ADVANTAGES OF UNDERGROUND MINING The advantages of underground mining are basically the disadvantages of open pit (or surface) mining. Similarly, the inverse is true; that is, the disadvantages of underground mining relate to those areas where sur­ face mining holds an advantage. The major advantages of underground mining over open pit mining are lessened environmental impacts, greater selectivity, and reduced exposure to weather. Environmental Impacts Much less land surface is necessary for the operation of an underground mine than for an open pit mine of the same production size. At the very least, an underground mine will require that land be available for the mine entrance and access roads. Commonly, additional land is utilized for ventilation shafts, multiple mine entrances, buildings, stor~ge areas, and waste rock dumps. (However, a mining company could decide to dispose of the waste rock in suitable underground openings and thus eliminate the problem of placing waste rock above ground.) Because less land is needed for an underground mine than for an equivalent open pit mine, there should be less disruption of the plant and wildlife species that inhabit or use the surrounding area. With less surface activity occurring, dust and noise generation should be reduced accordingly. Finally, the magnitude of the reclamation program for an underground mine is greatly diminished because of the absence of an open pit and a network of roads, and the reduced size of the waste rock dumps. This results in lower reclamation costs for underground mining than for open pit mining. DRAFT REPORT· The reader is calr~ioned c~ncernil1g use, quotation or reproduction of thIs ,material witllout 'first contacting the author:s, SlIlc,e, the , document may experience e~tenslve reVISion dUring review. Page 4 Selectivity Underground mining methods make it possible to economically mine mineral deposits which are too small, irregular, and/or deeply buried to extract using surface mining methods. Mining methods exist which can be applied to irregularly shaped deposits, narrow veins, discontinuous veins, and small pockets or lenses of ore. Using these methods, the mineral laden rock can be removed without having to handle large quantities of low- grade ore and/or waste rock. As a rule, the more selective mining methods are only applicable to deposits where the value of the ore is high enough to justify the generally lower productivity associated with selective mining. On the other hand, underground mining of low-grade deposits must be performed as efficiently as possible in order to be economical., which usually means that large scale total extraction mining methods must be used. However, even these large scale methods offer more selectivity than open pit mining which ultimately removes all the material that overlies the ore at a given depth.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Strip Mining Handbook
    1 FOREWORD 2 by 3 U.S. Rep. Morris K. Udall, Chairman 4 House Interior and Insular Affairs Committee 5 January, 1990 6 Congressman Morris (“Mo”) Udall, tireless champion of the federal strip mining laws, passed away on December 12, 1998. This foreword, which first appeared in the 1980 edition of this book, is included in its entirety as a tribute to Mo and to his extraordinary efforts to protect the public and the environment from the ravages of strip mining. 7 8 9 In the 1960's and early 1970's coal strip mining quickly overwhelmed underground mining as the 10 dominant mining method. But the new mining methods brought ravaged hillsides and polluted streams 11 to the once-beautiful landscape. State governments proved ill-equipped to prevent the severe 12 environmental degradation that this new mining method left in its wake. From our rivers, forests and 13 Appalachian Mountains in the East, to our prime farmlands of the Midwest, to our prairies and deserts of the 14 great West, stories abound during this time of reckless coal operators devastating landscapes, polluting 15 the water, destroying family homes, churches and cemeteries, and threatening fragile ecosystems. Perhaps 16 the most tragic case of abuse came on February 26th, 1972, at Buffalo Creek in Logan County, West Virginia, 17 when a crudely constructed coal waste dam collapsed causing a flood that killed 125 people, left scores of 18 others homeless, and caused millions of dollars in property damage. Something had to be done. 19 I was proud to stand in the White House Rose Garden on August 3rd, 1977, to witness the President sign 20 into law a bill that I sponsored — the federal Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA).
    [Show full text]
  • Underground Hard-Rock Mining: Subsidence and Hydrologic Environmental Impacts
    Technical Report on Underground Hard-Rock Mining: Subsidence and Hydrologic Environmental Impacts By Steve Blodgett, M.S. and James R. Kuipers, P.E. Center for Science in Public Participation Bozeman, MT February 2002 Abstract: Subsidence and hydrology impacts occur at every underground mining operation bringing about changes to surface landforms, ground water and surface water. Although the same impacts to mining operations, man-made surface structures and other features are relatively well known and studied, the environmental impacts related to subsidence and hydrology at underground mines are not well known and have not been extensively described. This report examines the occurrence and environmental impacts of subsidence and effects on hydrology at underground hard-rock metal mines in the U.S. and abroad. Technical and scientific literature is cited on the cause and effect of underground mining on surface landforms and water resources. Existing laws and recommended regulatory provisions to address these impacts are discussed. Conclusions about subsidence and hydrologic impacts at underground hard-rock metal mines are provided along with recommendations for addressing those impacts. Case studies are provided from copper, molybdenum, silver and other hard-rock mines where significant subsidence and hydrology-related environmental impacts have occurred. The Center for Science in Public Participation (CSP2) is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing professional technical assistance to public interest groups; state, tribal and federal governments; and industry. This report has been published with financial support from various foundations and individuals, and from the Mineral Policy Center and Amigos Bravos. The opinions contained in this study are those of the authors and are based solely upon their own scientific and technical knowledge and expertise.
    [Show full text]
  • Mining's Toxic Legacy
    Mining’s Toxic Legacy An Initiative to Address Mining Toxins in the Sierra Nevada Acknowledgements _____________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The Sierra Fund would like to thank Dr. Carrie Monohan, contributing author of this report, and Kyle Leach, lead technical advisor. Thanks as well to Dr. William M. Murphy, Dr. Dave Brown, and Professor Becky Damazo, RN, of California State University, Chico for their research into the human and environmental impacts of mining toxins, and to the graduate students who assisted them: Lowren C. McAmis and Melinda Montano, Gina Grayson, James Guichard, and Yvette Irons. Thanks to Malaika Bishop and Roberto Garcia for their hard work to engage community partners in this effort, and Terry Lowe and Anna Reynolds Trabucco for their editorial expertise. For production of this report we recognize Elizabeth “Izzy” Martin of The Sierra Fund for conceiving of and coordinating the overall Initiative and writing substantial portions of the document, Kerry Morse for editing, and Emily Rivenes for design and formatting. Many others were vital to the development of the report, especially the members of our Gold Ribbon Panel and our Government Science and Policy Advisors. We also thank the Rose Foundation for Communities and the Environment and The Abandoned Mine Alliance who provided funding to pay for a portion of the expenses in printing this report. Special thanks to Rebecca Solnit, whose article “Winged Mercury and
    [Show full text]
  • CORONAQUARRY Surface Mining Permit & Revised Reclamation Plan
    CORONAQUARRY Surface Mining Permit & Revised Reclamation Plan City of Corona Permit No. 93-01 State of California Mine ID No. 91-33-0027 Prepared for: 500 North Brand Avenue, Suite 500 Glendale, CA 91203 Prepared by: RGP Planning & Development Services 8921 Research Drive Irvine, CA 92618 Submi ed to: City of Corona Community Development Department 400 South Vicen a Avenue Corona, CA 92882 March 2013 CORONA QUARRY Surface Mining Permit & Revised Reclamation Plan City of Corona Permit 93-01 State of California Mine ID No. 91-33-0027 Prepared For: Vulcan Materials Company, West Region 500 North Brand Avenue, Suite 500 Glendale, CA 91203 (818) 553-8800 Prepared By: RGP Planning & Development Services 8921 Research Drive Irvine, CA 92618 (949) 450-0171 Submitted To: City of Corona Community Development Department 400 S. Vicentia Ave. Corona, CA 92882 (951) 736-2262 March 2013 Table of Contents 1.0 General Project Information ......................................................................................... 6 1.1 Purpose and Scope ............................................................................................................ 6 1.2 Entitlement History ............................................................................................................ 6 1.3 Objectives of Amended Project ......................................................................................... 10 1.4 PCC-Quality Aggregate Regional Needs Assessment ............................................................ 11 1.5 Comparison of 1989
    [Show full text]
  • Backfilling of Open-Pit Metallic Mines1
    BACKFILLING OF OPEN-PIT METALLIC MINES1 Stephen M. Testa,2 and James S. Pompy Abstract: Thirty years ago, the Congress of the United States required that coal mines be backfilled as a routine element of reclamation when it passed the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act. Until recently, that concept has not been generally applied to non-coal surface mines. In 2003, California’s State Mining and Geology Board (Board) evaluated reclamation of open pit metallic mines in the state and determined that they were not being reclaimed, despite California’s Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 (SMARA). As a result, the Board issued regulations for the backfilling of open-pit metallic mines. The need for such regulation reflected several issues. Open-pit metallic mineral mines often create very large excavations. In addition, metallic mineral mines that employ the cyanide heap leach method for mineral segregation and collection frequently generate very large leach piles which create long term soil and groundwater contamination conditions. It is the intent of SMARA that completed mine sites present no additional dangers to the public health and safety, and that the mined lands are returned to an alternate, useful condition. To date, no large, open pit metallic mines in California have been returned to the conditions contemplated by SMARA, and these sites continue to pose significant environmental problems. The goal of the Board’s regulations was to require mining companies to address the problems identified above and to take responsibility for cleaning up their mine sites after the completion of surface mining operations, and return them to a condition that allows alternative uses and avoids environmental harms, thereby meeting the purpose and intent of SMARA.
    [Show full text]
  • A Long Hole Stoping System for Mining Narrow Platinum Reefs
    A long hole stoping system for mining narrow platinum reefs by P. van Dorssen*, P. Valicek*, M. Farren*, G. Harrison*, W. Joubert*, R.G.B. Pickering†, and H.J. van Rensburg‡ Introduction ➤ Services requirement ➤ Ore removal and cleaning requirement In South African metalliferous mines, stoping operations are ➤ Training requirement largely confined to narrow, tabular orebodies making mechanization extremely difficult. Limited flexibility in terms of stope width has necessitated drilling by means of hand Safety targets held, pneumatic rock drills at most of our operations. As the All persons involved with the project had to adhere to the largest producer of platinum in the world, we drill in excess mine’s safety programmes including the zero-tolerance of forty million stope blast holes per annum. Cleaning of the campaign, and were required to report all hazards observed broken ore is also done by conventional means—utilizing immediately. Mine personnel and Tamrock carried out a full scrapers and scraper winches. Conventional methods such as risk assessment on the drill rig before transporting these carry high costs in terms of risk exposure as well as underground. A further risk assessment was carried out labour intensity. when the machine was in position underground. The purpose of this paper is to describe the development of a long hole stoping system suitable for the narrow platinum reefs. The new system had to be substantially safer Mining layout and more cost effective than conventional mining. We selected a site that was conducive to mechanized mining and See Figure 1 and Figure 2 for a detailed description. set out the parameters that we considered would meet our requirements.
    [Show full text]
  • Effects of Longwall Mining Subsidence on Ground Water
    EFFECTS OF LONGW ALL MINING SUBSIDENCE ON GROUND WATER LEVELS WITHIN A WATERSHED HYDRAULICALLY ISOLATED FROM MINE DRAINAGE' Bogdan Staszewski2 Abstract: Surface and ground water resources are effectively preserved from depletion by underground mine drainage if impervious deposits of sufficient thickness and extent that underlie the aquifer avoid fracturing and undergo only plastic deformation resulted from the strata flexure. This does not mean, however, that these waters are not subjected to the effects of mining disturbance. Differential vertical settlement of the mine overburden and the ground surface can significantly affect flow pattern and water retention within a watershed area. This is evident, for example, in the areas of multi seam coal mining where the longwall method is used. The effects of this type of mining on water level were tested in a selected watershed where shallow water bearing deposits were entirely isolated from underground mine pumpage. Results of more than 7 years of field investigations were compared with data collected from other coal mining areas of various hydrogeological conditions. The study revealed a variety of water table responses on the postmining subsidence. Basically, changes of water table height in a given site above the point located at the top of aquifer base depend mainly on alteration of that point position against the local drainage base in the hierarchic structure of flow system. The relationship between the magnitude of ground subsidence and water level decline varies within the area of the subsidence trough, within the watershed, and among various watersheds of different hydrogeologic conditions. Except for the situation of hydrostatic flow conditions, lowering of water table elevation in response to the settlement of aquifer base was observed.
    [Show full text]
  • The Applicability of Underground Mining Methods in Limestone Quarries of Western Taurus
    Proceedings of the International Conference on Mining, Material and Metallurgical Engineering Prague, Czech Republic, August 11-12, 2014 Paper No. 61 The Applicability of Underground Mining Methods in Limestone Quarries of Western Taurus Mete Kun, Baran Tufan Department of Mining Engineering, Dokuz Eylül University Izmir, Turkey [email protected]; [email protected] Nejat Kun Department of Geological Engineering, Dokuz Eylül University Izmir, Turkey [email protected] Abstract -Turkey is one of the world leaders in the production and trading of natural stones for a decade, especially with rich calcium carbonate originated marble reserves. The marble quarrying in Turkey gathered around three main regions with production of more than 700 type of limestone, marble, travertine and other decorative stones with different colors and patterns. These regions can be listed as Aegean, Mediterranean and Central Anatolia. The Mediterranean Region stands out with light colored limestone which is in demand nowadays. The underground mining becomes a preferable alternative regarding the increasing production capacity, increasing transportation cost due to deepening open pits, necessity of selective production and occurrence of waste problems. The operating parameters are investigating regarding these difficulties in limestone quarries applying room and pillar method in Southern Turkey (Western Taurus). The internal parameters of the related rock sample is investigated and revealed by laboratory tests and experiments. The parameters are applied to a two dimensional model suitable for underground mining and applicable to related quarry to form the room and pillar geometry. The results gathered by modeling are compared to the underground quarry survey results and the safety factors for the underground openings (rooms) and pillars are evaluated in comparison.
    [Show full text]
  • Coal Mine Methane Recovery: a Primer
    Coal Mine Methane Recovery: A Primer U.S. Environmental Protection Agency July 2019 EPA-430-R-09-013 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This report was originally prepared under Task Orders No. 13 and 18 of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Contract EP-W-05-067 by Advanced Resources, Arlington, USA and updated under Contract EP-BPA-18-0010. This report is a technical document meant for information dissemination and is a compilation and update of five reports previously written for the USEPA. DISCLAIMER This report was prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). USEPA does not: (a) make any warranty or representation, expressed or implied, with respect to the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of the information contained in this report, or that the use of any apparatus, method, or process disclosed in this report may not infringe upon privately owned rights; (b) assume any liability with respect to the use of, or damages resulting from the use of, any information, apparatus, method, or process disclosed in this report; or (c) imply endorsement of any technology supplier, product, or process mentioned in this report. ABSTRACT This Coal Mine Methane (CMM) Recovery Primer is an update of the 2009 CMM Primer, which reviewed the major methods of CMM recovery from gassy mines. [USEPA 1999b, 2000, 2001a,b,c] The intended audiences for this Primer are potential investors in CMM projects and project developers seeking an overview of the basic technical details of CMM drainage methods and projects. The report reviews the main pre-mining and post-mining CMM drainage methods with associated costs, water disposal options and in-mine and surface gas collection systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Underground Mining Methods and Equipment - S
    CIVIL ENGINEERING – Vol. II - Underground Mining Methods and Equipment - S. Okubo and J. Yamatomi UNDERGROUND MINING METHODS AND EQUIPMENT S. Okubo and J. Yamatomi University of Tokyo, Japan Keywords: Mining method, underground mining, room-and-pillar mining, sublevel stoping, cut-and-fill, longwall mining, sublevel caving, block caving, backfill, support, ventilation, mining machinery, excavation, cutting, drilling, loading, hauling Contents 1. Underground Mining Methods 1.1. Classification of Underground Mining Methods 1.2. Underground Operations in General 1.3. Room-and-pillar Mining 1.4. Sublevel Stoping 1.5. Cut-and-fill Stoping 1.6. Longwall Mining 1.7. Sublevel Caving 1.8. Block Caving 2. Underground Mining Machinery Glossary Bibliography Biographical Sketches Summary The first section gives an overview of underground mining methods and practices as used commonly in underground mines, including classification of underground mining methods and brief explanations of the techniques of room-and-pillar mining, sublevel stoping, cut-and-fill, longwall mining, sublevel caving, and block caving. The second section describes underground mining equipment, with particular focus on excavation machinery such as boomheaders, coal cutters, continuous miners and shearers. 1. UndergroundUNESCO Mining Methods – EOLSS 1.1. Classification of Underground Mining Methods Mineral productionSAMPLE in which all extracting operations CHAPTERS are conducted beneath the ground surface is termed underground mining. Underground mining methods are usually employed when the depth of the deposit and/or the waste to ore ratio (stripping ratio) are too great to commence a surface operation. Once the economic feasibility has been verified, the most appropriate mining methods must be selected according to the natural/geological conditions and spatial/geometric characteristics of mineral deposits.
    [Show full text]
  • Mines of El Dorado County
    by Doug Noble © 2002 Definitions Of Mining Terms:.........................................3 Burt Valley Mine............................................................13 Adams Gulch Mine........................................................4 Butler Pit........................................................................13 Agara Mine ...................................................................4 Calaveras Mine.............................................................13 Alabaster Cave Mine ....................................................4 Caledonia Mine..............................................................13 Alderson Mine...............................................................4 California-Bangor Slate Company Mine ........................13 Alhambra Mine..............................................................4 California Consolidated (Ibid, Tapioca) Mine.................13 Allen Dredge.................................................................5 California Jack Mine......................................................13 Alveoro Mine.................................................................5 California Slate Quarry .................................................14 Amelia Mine...................................................................5 Camelback (Voss) Mine................................................14 Argonaut Mine ..............................................................5 Carrie Hale Mine............................................................14 Badger Hill Mine
    [Show full text]
  • Mining Block Stability Analysis for Room-And-Pillar Mining with Continuous Miner in Estonian Oil Shale Mines*
    Oil Shale, 2003, Vol. 20, No. 4 ISSN 0208-189X pp. 515-528 © 2003 Estonian Academy Publishers MINING BLOCK STABILITY ANALYSIS FOR ROOM-AND-PILLAR MINING WITH CONTINUOUS MINER * IN ESTONIAN OIL SHALE MINES ** O. NIKITIN Tallinn Technical University, Department of Mining 82 Kopli St., 10412 Tallinn, Estonia web: http://staff.ttu.ee/~oleg Without progressive technology to make mining economically viable, this in- dustry, which provides a significant contribution to Estonia’s economy, can no longer exist. This paper presents a proposal for a comprehensive mining system. Determination of the pillar and roof optimum parameters for new mining technology with continuous miner was the main aim of the present work. The conventional calculation formulas and conditional thickness meth- ods were used to determine the room-and-pillar mining system parameters, which guarantee a long-term stability. The calculation methods used gave excellent results. Introduction The most important mineral resource in Estonia is a specific kind of oil shale. About 99% of electric and a large share of thermal energy are being generated from oil shale. The importance of oil shale production for the de- velopment of Estonian economy cannot be overestimated. It is estimated that about 80–90% of the oil shale total underground production is obtained by room-and-pillar (RAP) method with blasting. The method is cheap, highly productive and relatively simple to apply. However, some problems related are as follows: • Decreasing amount of oil shale production (about 50%) • Old technology and old-fashioned mining machinery (low extraction factor) • Mining block stability (collapse and surface subsidence) * Presented at Symposium on Oil Shale in Tallinn, Estonia, November 18–21, 2002.
    [Show full text]