by Kevin Hague
As many of you know, I live close to Greymouth and to the nearby Pike River coal mine. At the time of writing I am anxiously awaiting further news of the mine workers and contractors who are still underground following an explosion in the mine this afternoon.
Mining disasters cast a long shadow on the Coast. The memory or legacy of the Strongman mine disaster in 1967 comes immediately to mind when incidents like this are reported. We all know people who work in the mines, and there will be few West Coasters who don’t know someone in the mine today.
Regardless of our views about coal mining, our thoughts and hopes are tonight with those who are underground and with their families. We wish the Mines Rescue team the very best. I have chosen not to make my way to the mine itself. Mines Rescue and the emergency services personnel need the space to do their jobs as efficiently as possible, and I can’t see that a bunch of politicians will do anything but get in the way.
Will update this as I hear more.
Published in Economy, Work, & Welfare | Environment & Resource Management by Kevin Hague on Fri, November 19th, 2010
Tags: disaster, Kevin Hague, pike river coal mine
More posts by Kevin Hague | more about Kevin Hague
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
Loading...
I see Tony Kokshoorn and Gerry Brownlee have hastened to be at the scene of the disaster. I don’t condemn them for that – I guess everyone does what they feel is right in circumstances like this.
But there is nothing politicians can contribute practically in the immediate aftermath of a disaster like this.
Thanks for your good judgment in leaving the emergency services to get on with their job of trying to save lives.
There may be a time for politics on this later, but it is not now.
Like or Dislike:
9 
6 (+3)
Mines Rescue has not yet gone into the mine. They won’t until they are confident that they can do so safely. So the fact that they haven’t yet probably indicates that they consider there is risk of a further explosion.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Thank you Kevin. It is awful beyond words but you managed it nicely.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
We know of several very anxious families, I know other people that work down the mine but have no idea whether they are down there or not.
It would appear to be almost an entire shift that is unaccounted for.
Like or Dislike:
4 
0 (+4)
http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/8355272/rescuers-waiting-to-get-into-mine-after-explosion/
http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/8355476/rescue-effort-could-take-days/
http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/8355542/unknown-conditions-underground-concern-rescuers/
I hope to see better news soon.
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Well said Kevin
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
I thing that I find disappointing and frustrating is inaccurate news reports such as:
http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/8357091/rescuers-heading-into-pike-river-mine/
and
http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/8358180/no-rescue-until-tomorrow/
Given that the lower report was files some time after the upper report, one of them must be wrong! It just isn’t immediately obvious which one. Guessing from the other reports, the report saying that the rescuers are heading into the mine probably meant to say that the rescuers are heading to the mine – a small change with a big impact on the meaning.
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Of course any politician who has been party to any decisions about Pike River wants the people to confine their dialogue to “what a wonderful bunch of mining companies, and politicians” and not be in any way contentious, but I bet that is the last thing on the minds of the victims and their families. I don’t care one way or another which bunch of egocentric careerists is top dog in Wellington, but I still find it incredible that a 21st century coal mine could be approved for construction when it had absolutely no workable contingency plan for dealing with a firedamp leak and explosion.
Firedamp or methane gas leaks have been killing coal miners for hundreds of years, the NZ politicians who approved this mine could have insisted that technology and concomittant protocols for dealing with firedamp and the resultant post explosion carbon monoxide fumes be developed before the mine got the go ahead.
And don’t insult the intelligencve of the public by saying it can’t be dione because it can be but costs money.
Of course the fact that the miners were imported to save the expense of training New Zealanders to work there appears to indicate those in power figured making the Australian mine owners and Indian coal buyers pay to ensure the safety of migrant labour would be a waste of shareholder funds.
In Chile the government who approved the opening of the mine was the same government in power when the accident occurred, so they had nowhere to run and had to spend hundreds of millions to rescue their miners – they didn’t want to at first but everyone else was tearing them to shreds.
New Zealand’s two biggest political parties are both heavily implicated in this horror story, so doubtless they will agree to play the ‘lets not be partisan in a time of tragedy’ (cause much as I hate to write it, that is what this is shaping up to), meme which pols drag out to cover themselves whenever they can get away with it.
No wonder decent humans feel nothing but contempt for politicians of all stripes.
Have you ever considered how much better you would feel if just once you mob were honest to the victims and their families, and owned the fact you made a mistake in letting the mining company save money at the expense of miners lives?
I’ve worked on enough mines in Australia to know that those guys stop at nothing to put profit ahead of safety. For example Prof Hebblewhite who has been all over the NZ media tonite arguing that ‘doing nothing is the best option’ is a former mining company executive whose area of expertise is efficient Mine planning and mining methodology, far removed from OH&S issues, he was the bloke you had to argue to get basic safety regulations.
Here read his resume and see if you can find any mention of his research into mine rescue:
http://www.mining.unsw.edu.au/pdf/cv_Hebblewhite_Bruce_220108.pdf
I couldn’t find any but NZ’s weak & conservative media won’t worry about that.
Like or Dislike:
7 
10 (-3)
It seems every few weeks I’m seeing a news story about trapped coal miners. Really sad. At some point it will be deemed to hazordous and perhaps be more heavily regulated.
Like or Dislike:
1 
2 (-1)
These are not the sort of jobs we need more of in our country, IMO.
Like or Dislike:
3 
7 (-4)
I admit to finding their reasoning for not going in a bit contradictory. That may be poor media coverage. The most factual I have found on this is Al Jazeera..
The safest time to go in to a confined space after an explosion is normally right after wards before gas has time to build up again. Trained rescue workers can go in with airline when there are toxic gases. But there was an accident in Australia where a lot of rescue workers were killed going in immediately. Its seems to me with no communication from the air shelters that they may be weighing up the dangers to rescuers knowing that, to have survived, miners must be in an air shelter where they should be OK for a while.
I am sure rescuers will not stay out without very good reasons which we will hear about soon.
I keep hoping for the best for them.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I agree politicians shouldn’t use these situations as an excuse to bolster their profile or as point scoring exercises. Kia-ora
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
For your information ‘A Voter’ the nationalities of the men underground:
24 New Zealanders
2 Australians
2 British citizens
1 South African
It would appear that you are full of sh!t.
Like or Dislike:
13 
2 (+11)
Is everything A voter wrote sh!t Shunda? The media at first reported that many of the miners were South African… Perhaps you missed that bit. Addressing one point in a persons post and then disregarding the whole argument is not only short sighted; it is a pathetic debating style that you employ all too often.
I would have thought that the longer they wait to initiate a rescue the more dangerous combustible gasses are going to accumulate. Provided there are no structural integrity issues, a few people going in with suitable breathing equipment soon after the explosion would have seemed safe and practical and could have saved lives. I was also wondering if they are trying to flush the dangerous gasses out by utilizing existing ventilation and installing another airflow system. Perhaps this is wishful thinking.
I keep thinking there has been contact with the miners down there but that is just wishful thinking brought about by media spin. It would be good if everybody stayed realistic about things in these situations. I hate to say it but it appears to be another photo opportunity scenario for the right wing just like Christchurch’s Earthquake. Clearly that kind of callous behaviour is not beyond them. Whatever eventuates, I hope that the families and hopefully the miners will be left in peace and not prayed upon by politicians and their lap dogs, the media. Having a modicum of decency goes a long way.
One has to ask the question: why in this day and age has an accident like this occurred? Clearly there must have been a break down of safety protocols and/or safety mechanisms, which were not installed properly or at all. The endemic profits before people that pervades our business thinking in New Zealand really needs to be questioned.
Like or Dislike:
4 
10 (-6)
But you have no problem in an individual like ‘A voter’ neglecting to the necessary homework because you like his (ignorant) opinion.
‘A voter’ is the one taking advantage of a tragedy to promote ideology, yuck.
I would have thought that the longer they wait to initiate a rescue the more dangerous combustible gasses are going to accumulate. Provided there are no structural integrity issues, a few people going in with suitable breathing equipment soon after the explosion would have seemed safe and practical and could have saved lives.
Well you’re just ignorant of the reality of such an event, the most dangerous time to go in is immediately after a firedamp explosion.
I hate to say it but it appears to be another photo opportunity scenario for the right wing just like Christchurch’s Earthquake.
I don’t believe that, I think you are eager to say it, and what a thing to say. There is no evidence of this whatsoever, but there is evidence of left wing vultures circling, what creeps.
Like or Dislike:
9 
2 (+7)
I am at a loss as to why it is necessary to let the gas clear before a crew can go in. Surely with breathing apparatus and intrinsicly safe equipment and a suit the risks are low enough to allow access…?
The thing we are most short of at the moment is information, and until someone goes and have a butchers, we’ll remain short of information.
When the history is written, perhaps it won’t matter. Or perhaps it will.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
I suspect that there is no point to looking now. Too long and too deadly and too silent…
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
Shunda
I have no trouble with A Voters opinion because I agree with it, you are correct! Way to state the obvious. However you cannot expect somebody to investigate further when the media makes a statement of fact. Pointing out the facts Shunda, is hardly circling like vultures. As for promoting a “safety through employing experts” ideology, there really is nothing wrong with that.
I’m ignorant because I like to follow the laws of physics… what a crock! You’re guilty of what you accuse A Voter of Shunda. Have you actually researched the facts or is this just a “tow the line” moment again?
The fact is that pretty early on there was an announcement that the structure of the mine was intact; hence there is clear access to the miners. The fact that the initial explosion would have used up the oxygen and explosive gasses so that another explosion would be unlikely is a fact. Miners who could have been unconscious or injured needed rescuing quickly… that is a fact! Delaying a rescue in this particular accident was in my opinion the wrong thing to do.
The fact is there hasn’t been any further explosions between the initial one and now. This points to the worth of my opinion that undertaking a quick rescue of potentially injured miners would have been worthwhile. But no… we need to have all of those Politicians on for the majority of the news pretty much saying nothing. If that is not evidence of Politicking, I don’t know what is. Why are they there at all, they know nothing about rescue in these circumstances?
As for the recent statements that there is a fire underground… where exactly is the smoke from that fire? I could be wrong but I have been educated to believe that where there is a fire, there is smoke; particularly where coal is the combustible material. Is that not a law of physics Shunda? If that opinion doesn’t fit with your political viewpoint… Too bad!
The rescue operation seems to be run by people who don’t know what is going on… that is the problem with having profits before people, the money counters know jack about much else. Testing will simply show gasses accumulating again because there is no effective ventilation system being implemented; giving justification for not undertaking a rescue and further traction for political gain. Every further delay makes the likelihood of a safe rescue even more remote but more political gain relevant. That is a fact!
If the situation is as many perceive and Politicians have manipulated the situation to gain as much ground from the accident as they can, then I have to agree with you; it is simply yucky! That is the actions of creeps Shunda, despicable behaviour from the people who you’re vouching for.
The bit where the mining representative said they could not chopper in when we had seen video of thew damaged ventilation from a news chopper was telling. And that is but one inconsistency. There are many more.
Like or Dislike:
2 
4 (-2)
Todd you are even more ignorant than I first thought.
Like or Dislike:
5 
3 (+2)
I have a friend who for years has been negotiating with DoC to gain suitable access to a tenement on DoC land.
DoC controls access and the systems for management of any mining.
He has a statement in writing from DoC in which they say “We have no concern for human safety”
This was when DoC said he could not use a Ute for access to the tenement but only a quad bike,
This was when Govt was trying to get farmers to recognise that quad bikes were not suitable vehicles in many terrains.
Prior to this DoC has said that the digger had to be no more than a six tonne digger rather than the 20 tonne digger normally used. The suppliers of such machines refused to sell a six tonne digger for the project because it was too dangerous and unable to deal with the loads. I use 20 tonne diggers to shape my garden for goodness sake,
So do not be too confident that the problem is caused by greedy miners.
And remember the Cave Creek tragedy where 14 school children lost their lives. Was that the fault of greedy companies?
Like or Dislike:
8 
7 (+1)
Shunda, if you think that Todd is ignorant, then please enlighten both Todd and myself as to what Todd is ignorant of, so that we can both learn.
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
If they are reluctant to send in a rescue team because of the possibility of another explosion, then why not contact those people trained to deal with possibly explosive situations – the bomb squad. They have remote controlled vehicles which could be sent in with no risk to human life.
Seems like I am not the only one to have thought of this:
http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/8361209/frustration-at-rescue-delay-aired-on-websites/
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
2 (-2)
Seriously, rescuers can’t go into a situation like this “without risk”, both to themselves and to whoever’s stuck underground, certainly not without understanding as much as possible about the situation. And that includes robots. If there’s logic in charging in with an ill-informed rescue team without taking extreme care about understanding the situation, we may as well all start investing in buying lotto tickets and playing pokie machines.
For now I’d just trust the experts on the scene to assess the options and do their job. They’re in a better position and have better qualifications, more useful and immediate information to hand than anyone at home. Rescuers have friends and families too. I really feel for the people closely involved in this, and I hope there’ll still be a positive outcome.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
The cause of the problem is not even known yet.
But you have already come to a conclusion that you falsely claim as “facts” just so you can use the situation to push your own political agenda.
One word for you
Sicko.
Let’s hope for a positive outcome for the miners and their families.
And leave cheap political point scoring until a time, at the very least, when we actually know what went wrong.
We should have a little dignity for the miners, as per Kevin’s comments at the top of this page.
Their lives should not be used as mere political ammunition.
Like or Dislike:
5 
2 (+3)
The fact is that pretty early on there was an announcement that the structure of the mine was intact; hence there is clear access to the miners. The fact that the initial explosion would have used up the oxygen and explosive gasses so that another explosion would be unlikely is a fact.
No it isn’t. You now have an efficient ignition source (burning coal) for further explosions, the initial blast can also trigger coal dust ignition and a whole series of explosions can result, as it did in the Brunner mine disaster just down the road from Pike River. There is also the risk of more methane being released from the initial source.
Miners who could have been unconscious or injured needed rescuing quickly… that is a fact!
If they were unable to get their oxygen masks on immediately after a fire damp explosion they would be dead in minutes, remember, the guy on the loader 1500m into the tunnel was blown off the machine and knocked senseless, the effects for the miners 2.2km further up would likely be much more severe.
Any rescue requires time for situation assessment and equipment set up, and then a slow 2hr uphill tunnel walk into the mine pit, and then further time to search the working area. The miners personal oxygen supply lasts half to one hour. They would have to make it to one of the refuges to get out of the carbon monoxide for any chance of survival.
Delaying a rescue in this particular accident was in my opinion the wrong thing to do.
And why is your opinion even relevant? you have no idea what you are talking about.
If the situation is as many perceive and Politicians have manipulated the situation to gain as much ground from the accident as they can, then I have to agree with you; it is simply yucky! That is the actions of creeps Shunda, despicable behaviour from the people who you’re vouching for.
And how in the hell is a coal mine blowing up going to be good for the government, especially this government?
Do you have coal dust in your head?
Mines blowing up don’t look very good for a pro mining political party, or am I missing something here?
For crying out loud Todd, what the hell are they politicians supposed to do, ignore the event?
Like or Dislike:
3 
2 (+1)
I’d have thought – but don’t know – that the bomb squad robot is far from intrinsicly safe, and thus you wouldn’t place it where there could be explosive gasses.
Verging on irony, really.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
As I pointed out, a hose pumping inert gas in would have the effect of making the anything going in “intrinsically safe” (spark free). The length of the hose and feeding it would be a problem.
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Hopefully the bomb squad robots would be designed to be intrinsically safe, otherwise they would be useless if there was a bomb threat anywhere near explosive gases. All a potential bomber would have to do is open a gas tap…
Pumping in an inert gas is an interesting idea but not very helpful for any trapped miners. Perhaps the opposite is needed – sucking out the explosive and toxic gases so there is a draft of clean air from the tunnel entrance, but the leading vehicle carrying the head of the sucking tube would still need to be intrinsically safe.
I guess there are no simple solutions that are right.
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
It is blatantly obvious why people on the spot are not risking any more lives. I hope I am wrong, as they probably do also.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
It is a pity that the mine’s own vehicles aren’t tricked out for remote control. They are designed for the mine and the mine is designed for them, and they are intrinsically safe. They are also on-site, and people who are trained to use them are also on-site.
Can someone tell me why the rescue teams need to walk all the way up the mine instead of riding?
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
1 (-1)
You cannot let anything capable of causing a spark into that potentially explosive atmosphere.
HEnce they are not allowed to take cell phones into the mine.
A robotic vehicle can cause a spark. Most bombs are in outdoor situations and the risk is non existent.
Those experts know that they are doing.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
oh..really owen…
..two questions…
why wasn’t this drilling/testing/camera thing done on sat..?
and..won’t this drilling inevitably cause stones to fall..?
..thereby causing sparks/possible warned-about explosion..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
1 
2 (-1)
It is coming out. A professor of geology on Newstalk ZB is explaining that the reason the tunnel is two km long even though the coal is only 150 metres below ground, is because the mine is on a national park and the tunnel was imposed by DoC to reduce damage to the environment.
Going down a 150 km would be a lot easier than moving along a 2 km tunnel.
I believe we need to get our priorities in order if this kind of disaster is not going to happen again.
Like or Dislike:
2 
2 (0)
So Owen, you are talking about mountain top removal in a national park?
For crying out loud.
Perhaps the onus is on the company that wants the coal to build a mine that doesn’t blow up, as solid energy have done on the other side of the bloody hill!!.
Like or Dislike:
3 
1 (+2)
“And remember the Cave Creek tragedy where 14 school children lost their lives. Was that the fault of greedy companies?”
Nope – the fault of governments that keep DOC hugely underfunded while expecting it to supply the bulk of New Zealand’s tourist-specific infrastructure. What other government operation is expected to use volunteers to keep their day to day operations going?
“…because the mine is on a national park and the tunnel was imposed by DoC to reduce damage to the environment.”
Wondered how long it would be before people started trying to make political capital over this tragedy.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
I am not trying to make political capital.
Someone else raised the argument that the Greedy Company had not cared enough about the safety of the miners.
From personal experience I know that the companies (who are liable) are highly sensitive to safety issues but find themselves dealing with government departments and councils who not being financially liable are much more cavalier.
The priorities should be on the table. It may well be that if the consent should not have been granted in the first place. We have a strange system where one department can grant a mining tenement but DoC is then totally in control of access and its legislation does not allow for reasonable trade-offs.
My view is that the right of access should be part of the tenement and negotiated at the same time.
My advise too is that understandably DoC is not expert in mining technology (which is developing rapidly) and hence works within a limited range of options and often makes bad choices even in terms of its own objectives.
Like or Dislike:
2 
7 (-5)
Owen, just stop, you are talking nonsense.
Even coal mining West coasters would baulk at an open cast mine in that location.
Like or Dislike:
1 
2 (-1)
Shunda
Do you not read?
I said:
The priorities should be on the table. It may well be that if the consent should not have been granted in the first place.
Like or Dislike:
2 
7 (-5)
i’ve been noticing you doing it for quite some time now…
..but how long exactly…?
..and…more importantly…why..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
4 
1 (+3)
Photonz1
I’m well aware that the miners have not been rescued or recovered yet. For your information, I actually have no Political agenda… I merely don’t like seeing Politicians using such an accident to further their public presence when there is no need for them to be there. Such Politicking does not help those miners does it? In effect I agree with your statement photonz1, bar the sicko insult of course. “Let’s hope for a positive outcome for the miners and their families”.
I have great respect and sympathy for those affected. My statements are in no way disparaging of them. I merely think that some aspects of the rescue could have been better managed and that there must be responsibility taken for the fact that this accident occurred at all. Now is the best time to confront the issues and facts as they are presented. Turning my argument against me is not a very original debating style photonz1.
Shunda
I have kept well informed of this situation and have read various articles concerning it. I’m unsure why you think I’m ignorant of the facts. Perhaps dismissing my argument is easier than debating the specific questions I have raised.
Are you trying to say that an efficient and quick rescue was not advisable because the miners were most likely dead already. That is a truly unsubstantiated and disrespectful thing to imply Shunda.
Assessment of risk is one thing, but time to put on a suitable suit and breathing apparatus is another. That is the most likely way a rescue will be mounted. A two hour walk to the hazard zone. Not through drilling or using robots.
Methane being released that was not consumed in the initial blast would need time to accumulate. The risk of carbon monoxide poisoning for rescuers is non-existent with proper breathing apparatus. I believe that any coal dust that could ignite, would have by now. The two main reasons a firedamp explosion occurs is because of an open flame or a spark from electronics or machinery. Drilling another hole when there is adequate access, which could cause another explosion, is also not advisable.
My opinion holds as much merit as what people give it. I probably have more idea of what I’m talking about than you do Shunda!
You are correct in that this accident does not look good for the pro-mining league. I’m not sure if you noticed but they’ve been instigating various damage control aspects to media coverage. Just as the Earthquake in Christchurch should not have been good for the National Governments profile, it was in fact utilized for political gain. I’m sure that most people do not like to see such ghoulish behaviour.
Although we had a mine on our property where I grew up, I do not have coal dust in my head Shunda. Separating the event from the subsequent politicking that has occurred is advantageous. Politicians and the media are meant to give those affected the respect they deserve. If Politicians have nothing to add in helping the situation, then they should refrain from comment.
Owen
Pro open cast mining because of safety reasons… Capitalizing on the accident by pushing the pro-mining agenda is not realistic in the face of accumulated data. There is much more weight to not mining national parks at all. Protecting our workers and natural inheritance is of the utmost importance.
Like or Dislike:
0 
2 (-2)
I have worked at the site and am familiar with it.
I know many people affected.
I have family involved in mines rescue.
I have friends and family involved in other mines in the area and in Australia.
No Todd, I am calling you out brother.
You have no idea of what you are talking about.
I totally accept that there could be issues with Pike River over why this happened, but the rescue/recovery is not one of them.
Like or Dislike:
6 
1 (+5)
Even if that is the case Shunda, saying that I have no knowledge is rather insulting. In fact I have rather a substantial amount of knowledge and relevant ideas on the situation. There are always better ways to undertake the endeavour of search and rescue… that is the nature of the beast Shunda. Although my argument that a quick rescue was preferable is presently a mute point, highlighting aspects that I believe could be improved upon should not come under personalized attack… stick with the issues raised “Brother”!
Like or Dislike:
0 
2 (-2)
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
Sorry, the redundant “if” may have caused confusion. I meant to write:
“It may well be that the consent should not have been granted in the first place.”
And Phil U
I don’t know what business it is of yours whether I post similar statements on more than one blog. I would think I have done so far fewer times than you have.
They are not identical and are not posted at the same time. Sometimes I post on here and after a few replies put things together and then post them on other blogs – including DPF but also on US sites and others in NZ. Sometimes it is the other way round. I like to collect different opinions from different sources for my own Digests and Columns. It’s called “testing ideas”.
Are you suggesting there is some law against it?
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
y’know..mcshane…seeing a paid climatechange-denialist like yrslf attempting to get on a high horse..
..is both amusing and jaw-dropping at the same time…
and..so..you seriously self-spam…?
..did you learn yr method from doing yr climate-change misinformation exercises…?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
3 (-3)
At least I know the meaning of spam.
And I also keep on the topic.
You really are a bore.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
” the companies (who are liable) are highly sensitive to safety issues but find themselves dealing with government departments and councils who not being financially liable are much more cavalier.”
Sounds pretty political. As were you comments about the 2km tunnel being a DOC requirement.
Actually I was being slightly sarcastic – nothing personal, I just find at times like this the right takes every opportunity to attack leftists for ‘politicising issues’, while seeing nothing wrong with doing the same thing themselves. Discussions around this issue will inevitably be political, and there’s no reason why they should not be.
As you say, DOC isn’t upon mining technology – nor do they need to be. Their proper concern is the environment. If a company can’t operate within DOCs constraints they shouldn’t go ahead with projects.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
Todd says “I merely don’t like seeing Politicians using such an accident to further their public presence when there is no need for them to be there. Such Politicking does not help those miners does it? ”
Wrong. Our top polititians should ALWAYS front up at disasters. I know Chch people were pleased to be supported after the earthquake, and the community at the disaster at the glacier on the same day. It can be very comforting to know that your situation is being taken seriously, all the way to the top.
Apart from the moral and emmotitional support communities get when the countries leader shows up to give support, which is worthwhile in itself, they can also open up instant emergency funding and open channels at the highest levels to get help from other govt agencies or even other countries.
And all that applies regardless of what party is currently in power.
Are you saying they should stay away, like the way George Bush handled Hurricane Kartina?
Like or Dislike:
2 
1 (+1)
I support Todd in making his mute points (and wish he would).
Like or Dislike:
1 
4 (-3)
Shunda
I would have thought that those directly affected would welcome an independent investigation that includes some of the issues raised here to be undertaken with due diligence. Perhaps a discussion of this accident should wait until after the rescue/recovery is undertaken, but I know if my friends or family were involved, I would want answers without further delay. Although consideration of feelings must be contemplated in such an investigation and compassion shown, it should not subvert any search for the truth. Accountability for the accident where it is appropriate and an open process is paramount.
The problem is that the mining and the oil industries (to name but two) are often cavalier about their processes and have been known to skite about how low production costs are. Safety is sometimes placed second to initial investment and production quantity. As has been previously proven, this is often the primary cause for accidents such as this one. There is nothing wrong with such an opinion and it should not impinge on anybodies sensibilities.
Photonz1
I’m saying that politicians shouldn’t use accidents or disasters like political tools to further their goals and give reason for legislation that could inhibit our freedoms. There is a difference in this political scenario and that of the Christchurch earthquake compared to genuinely supporting those affected and being present to perform appropriate duties. If you cannot see that difference photonz1, there’s not much hope for you.
Thank God George Bush is halfway around the globe, clearly resources have not gone to help those people because of certain issues better left to a different blog.
Thanks robertguyton.
Like or Dislike:
0 
3 (-3)
Inert gas welding is the analog to what I suggest. The miners are either dead or in some safe pocket quite deep in the mine. The rescue effort is held up because it is too unsafe to even go look, or to place instrumentation in the damaged areas. As a means of exploring the problem zone, or running ventilation ducting, or of caching air bottles or of any number of other useful tasks on the way into the mine, this could be useful.
It is true that a spark-free (intrinsically safe) device would be still MORE useful, as it could be used all the way to wherever the miners or their bodies are, but such a device is not AFAIK, available, while a robot equipped with the needed gas supply could be jury rigged with some hose, some number 8 wire and some duct tape, to allow the rescuers to BEGIN to penetrate the shaft.
Without a specially made robot.
The likelihood that the shaft is blocked is high nough. Having some notion of how much is blocked and where it starts sooner is useful.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
It is a good idea BJ. Welders often employ a similar safety measure when working with items that have had combustible material in them. However in utilizing a machine, you would have to discount one of the main causes of firedamp explosions: ignition from mechanical equipment. A robot would create a certain amount of static charge and require some sort of engine. I’m unsure of a device that would not have some sort of engine spark in its configuration. Until that can be achieved, humans are still the best rescue option in this situation.
Like or Dislike:
0 
2 (-2)
“..And I also keep on the topic…”
gee owen..does that ‘goodness’ in you counter yr evil climate-change denial pimp ways..?
d’yareckon…?
because with you..that is the ‘topic’…
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
2 (-2)
Todd says “I merely don’t like seeing Politicians using such an accident to further their public presence when there is no need for them to be there.
Yeah, why the HELL is Phil Goff in town, he should get out of it!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Are you saying they should stay away, like the way George Bush handled Hurricane Kartina?”
Yes – stay away, manage the situation where necessary, send messages of support, organise emergency responses, commit funding or whatever. It’s not politicians’ job to be on site – just a hassle and a waste of resources.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
Thinking about pumping CO2 or N2 into the machine to keep explosive concentrations of gas from the sources of spark. I used to work on a Gasoline tanker back when Moby Dick was a Minnow. Think of the machine itself as the torch which we now surround with inert gas. This allows us to use a machine that is not typically safe in such an environment, as long as we can keep the ignition sources in an atmosphere concentration that is not explosive.
Basically, sealing the electric motors and dragging/unwinding its power cord behind it it goes first. With that scouting process done, the rescue team has an easier time to follow. As it gets deeper in the mine it can fix more of the ventilation system, remove more of the gas, and go still deeper by steps and stages.
However, I would suspect that long before we find anybody in the mine we will find some collapsed mine tunnel that wants clearing.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Can anyone tell me why it is the Police who are in charge of the rescue/recovery operation. I would have though there would be more leadership expertise with this type of situation in both the Department of Labour and Civil Defence and Emergency Management.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The police are nominally in charge of any SAR operation. It does not mean that they do not listen to the experts though. I’ve been co -opted on Marine SAR operations, for instance.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
I think it would be total dereliction of duty if he did not bother to go to what is may be NZs biggest disaster in decades.
bj – sometimes the situation is too dangerous for any rescue attempt of any sort, using any equipment. The first and third Moura Mine disasters in Australia were so volatile that the only thing they could do was seal the mine up and leave the men down there.
Lets hope for a far better outcome than that, but it does put into perspective how difficult the situation can be when experts like the Aussies can’t recover miners even with unlimited time.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
The difficulties of this are paramount. Any variance in wind speed or direction within the tunnel could be catastrophic. We’re talking about a huge expanse requiring large volumes of combustion inhibiting gas to limit concentrations of explosive gasses to below 4%. Sealing the engine relies on that seal remaining intact and external power sources not producing any static or fault spark. With due consideration and development, this can be achieved but the practicalities of doing so quickly are difficult and somewhat dangerous.
An initial statement made by mining representatives, was that the mine remained intact and access was not inhibited. Although how they could make such an unsubstantiated statement is beyond me. Perhaps airflow would have something to do with this analysis. However I would tend to agree with you BJ, access is likely to be inhibited. Provided obstacles are not extreme though, many devices can negotiate variances of terrain. Retrofitting such devices with the proposed safety measures would be interesting.
Far more interesting than the oppositions-argument against us having an open discussion anyway.
Like or Dislike:
0 
2 (-2)
Toad, possibly a cave-in would have been distinguishable from an explosion on “local” sesismic equipment? A cave-in might disturb the surface too.
Anyway, wouldn’t it be bad idea to pump inert gas in there, from the perspective of anybody that did happen to be still alive down there. You would asphixiate them. Gases are not the only explosion risk either. Any carbon based dust (like say coal) can explode if the conditions are right (air-borne, confined space, oxygen present, ignition source).
As I understand it, the terrain (even if the mine has not suffered a cave-in) is such that a robot would be likley to bang into rocks and so forth en route. This is a possible source of ignition.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The big boss, Prime Minister should be there. No matter what party. Having power to get help and organize resources at the highest level can make a big difference in an emergency.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Why the hell is Jerry Brownlee present? Clearly media coverage is favouring the right wing. Phil has had one small statement while Brownlee and crew has had half the news coverage. I can understand that some opposition needs to be wherever National ghouls might congregate. I’m pleased to see the Greens objectiveness in this situation. The usual media ignoring Green statements is an advantage from a grandstanding viewpoint.
Trying to gain politically from such an accident is abhorrent. It’s all about the way politicians conduct themselves and the way the media portrays that conduct. If there is very little a large mass of politicians can achieve apart from their own grandstanding, then their is no reason for them to be there and they should piss off!
Here’s an article concerning policies that were implemented after the Christchurch Earthquake: http://thestandard.org.nz/the-first-diktats/
Like or Dislike:
0 
3 (-3)
Todd says “Clearly media coverage is favouring the right wing……some opposition needs to be wherever National ghouls might congregate.”
Then describes his own comments.
“Trying to gain politically from such an accident is abhorrent.”
It would be appalling if the PM and minister of mining did a no-show at a huge disaster.
Similarly union leader Andrew Little is there to give any support he can. As is labour list MP Damian O’Connor, who used to be the local MP – good on them.
And I haven’t heard a single one of them trying to score political points.
The only person I’ve heard trying to score political points, which you rightly describe as abhorent, is yourself.
Like or Dislike:
4 
2 (+2)
Todd, I am talking by and large, about the interior of the robot and motor casings and altering the local concentrations of gas in the very near vicinity of the robot. I reckon this is a possible thing, and that the robot can be equipped to detect and compensate for excessive airflow. The issue of what sort of treads it uses is pertinent as metal in that area would require an external flow against the floor and would be more difficult to maintain.
To do it right would require a robot built with explosion-proof motors, Bronze and Carbon-Fiber. Such a device would be expensive and would see very limited use.but nothing else would really be quite as good, including my inert-gas-shielding kludge.
AFAIK, there ain’t no such ‘bot anywhere.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
“The big boss, Prime Minister should be there. No matter what party. Having power to get help and organize resources at the highest level can make a big difference in an emergency.”
…which is probably better done from Wellington than Greymouth. It’s like sending the minister of education down to the local school to clean whiteboards.
Like or Dislike:
0 
1 (-1)
Must I say it again? Trying to gain politically from such an accident is abhorrent. No matter where such politicians are placed. Stating the specifics of an accident and saying that it is not the place of politicians is not being political. It is a viewpoint. Saying that Politician’s behaviour is abhorrent is not abhorrent photonz1, that is just a stupid debating style again and does not achieve anything. Are you saying that I am not allowed a viewpoint photonz1? I have no political game to play to require the scoring of points. But I would say that you have effectively lost the debate through personalization and negativity. Not much new there huh!
Have you been watching the news lately… What exactly is achieved by two bums Brownlee saying he does not know over and over again on the news every night? What a waste of space. Don’t forget the political leverage National extruded out of the Christchurch Earthquake. Mark my words; the right wing will try to utilize this disaster for their own benefit in much the same way. If that is a political observation, which offends your sensibilities; then too bad. Head in the sand again, using my argument again, straw man argument again… photonz1 again.
Like or Dislike:
0 
1 (-1)
BJ
To limit the risk of triggering an explosion, a specialist robot would need to be developed at great expense. It’s not out of the question though.
Sam Buchanan
I think that might be beyond her capabilities.
Like or Dislike:
0 
1 (-1)
There is some info re the mine rescue and situation here>
The Science Media Centre has put questions to two of its foremost experts about conditions in the mine.
Associate Professor David Cliff, from the Minerals Industry Safety and Health Centre at The University of Queensland, and Dr Gavin Mudd, Environmental Engineering, Monash University answer their questions below:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/pike-river-mine-explosion/4373504/Experts-explain-mine-conditions
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I agree with people who say that now is not the time to discuss issues related to how the accident has happened (why etc)and that after the rescue is completed, there is time for such discussions.
The miners union is calling for a full inquiry after the rescue:
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/pike-river-2010/62328/key-promises-inquiry
The union representing miners is calling for a public investigation into the explosion.
The Engineering, Printing and Manufacturing Union says right now the rescue effort must be the priority, but following that, a thorough inquiry will be required.
National secretary Andrew Little says the usual Department of Labour investigation will not be enough.
He would like to see a public hearing in front of a senior judge and top experts.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Todd says “I have no political game to play to require the scoring of points.”
But only takes a couple of lines to contradict himself again
“What exactly is achieved by two bums Brownlee saying he does not know over and over again on the news every night? ”
You provide more and more proof that you are trying to politicise a tragedy – which confirms my earlier summation -
sicko
Like or Dislike:
2 
3 (-1)
Photonz1, I provide more and more proof that I don’t like the tragedy being politicized. Your argument does not make sense and I am not a sicko for reiterating others legitimate concerns. Clearly you’re a Richard photonz1!
Like or Dislike:
1 
3 (-2)
You provide more and more proof that you are trying to politicise a tragedy – which confirms my earlier summation -
sicko
I agree photonz, this guy is a real piece of work.
Like or Dislike:
2 
3 (-1)
For the record, locals are glad that the Prime minister is here, he is taking this heartbreaking tragedy seriously and providing the citizens of the West Coast the necessary support.
We are especially greatfull that there has been no politicking, I would imagine Helen Clark would have done the same and it too would have been appreciated.
Like or Dislike:
3 
3 (0)
If John Key’s excuses for the mining company and the accident on tonight’s news is anything to judge by, your statements are rather moot guys. But arguing further against your shortsightedness is not going to help the situation is it.
PS I mean no disrespect to any Richards out there buy the statement above about photonz1.
Like or Dislike:
2 
3 (-1)
John Key has promised a full enquiry Todd, WTF are you talking about?
How about linking to one of these abundant politicking statements Todd, if you can find one that is.
Like or Dislike:
3 
2 (+1)
Well since you asked so nicely Shunda: http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/one-news-extra-pike-river-mine-update-q-and-video-3907488
Spare stocks of food water and compressed air not being present like Australian mines sparks a request for a review of NZ mines with a Royal Commission inquiry. John Key does not believe that the reporter’s iteration that different standards might be true and defends NZ mining in general saying that inquiries will be undertaken.
@ 4:55 Key states: “We have operated at the highest safety standards”. A spokesperson for the mining company is he?
@ 12:00 Question: Would Key consider closing down mining because it is dangerous and because of the high death rate of miners in that area. Key states that this is hypothetical and mining is safe, they would not send in miners if it were not safe…
Reporters are cut short because the bean counters don’t like the tone of questioning.
Like or Dislike:
1 
2 (-1)
“sicko Todd” – your top priority is obviously to use the tragedy to sling mud.
The head of Pike River stated in the press conference that the claims about Australia were factually incorrect, and cirticism of not having oxygen stored in the mine showed ignorance.
He said it was not safe to take oxygen into the mine, let alone store it down there.
Like or Dislike:
2 
2 (0)
For Gods sack photonz1, you asked me to link to the information. Now that I have you say I’m a sicko for undertaking your request. Dork!
Like or Dislike:
1 
2 (-1)
Correction: For Gods sack photonz1, shunda asked me to link to the information. Now that I have you say I’m a sicko for undertaking that request. Dork!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The most interesting observation about the politicians visiting the Pike River site is that not only has our Head of State, (ie the Governor General) not turned up, but no one has even asked “Why not?” President Bush was pilloried for failing to observe this basic duty.
Our Governor General is the Head of State and that is their function – to present the image of National Unity at times of distress just as the King and Queen of England did when they refused to leave London at the height of the Blitz.
So two questions come to mind.
Where is our Head of State? But also, if he did arrive how would he be received?
This should focus our attention on an important constitutional issue.
Like or Dislike:
3 
1 (+2)
If the Pike mine is not of the highest standard, some blame would/should go with Chris Carter for allowing the mine to happen on Conservation land, and also it would perhaps be an idea for there to be a safety review of underground(coal)mines in New Zealand.
Again, I think any issues are secondary or not to be focused on until after the rescue is completed. The rescue operation needs the full attention of the mining company and Government etc.
Like or Dislike:
0 
2 (-2)
Reporters are cut short because the bean counters don’t like the tone of questioning.
Is Todd hearing voices in his head?
Like or Dislike:
1 
3 (-2)
Hey, guys! And, interestingly it is all guys on this thread lately!
Time for a rain check. The time will come to find out who is to blame, and for them to face appropriate action.
But that time is not now.
Until we know what happened, and what is the fate of those trapped in the mine, the one thing to celebrate the heroism of Daniel Rockhouse, whose brother is still trapped and possibly has died in the mine, but who risked his own life to save his mate Russell Smith.
Like or Dislike:
3 
1 (+2)
anyone in Christchurch can help out by donating at this:
Fundraiser for the Pike River Mine families: December 1st
November 22, 2010
by beyondresistance
Fundraiser for the Pike River Mine families
The methane explosion at the Pike River Mine has left many people effected — both the workers still underground, and their families anxiously waiting in despair. Beyond Resistance invites you to a film screening of ‘Harlan County USA’, where we hope to raise some funds and show our support for the families of the 29 missing miners.
WHEN: Wednesday December 1st, 7PM
WHERE: Workers Educational Association (WEA). 59 Gloucester Street, Christchurch (opposite the City Art Gallery).
ENTRY: recommended $5 donation (all funds raised will go to the effected families).
Harlan County USA is a classic piece of documentary making: passionate, intense, gripping and absorbing. Barbara Kopple’s documentary unflinchingly documents a gruelling yet inspiring coal miners’ strike in a small Kentucky town in the 1970s. She lived in the mining community, and tells their story in their own words.
The bitter 13 month strike occurred between a very deprived community fighting to survive and a ruthless and powerful coal mining company determined to preserve its profits. It shows how the company attempted to break the strike through using local police, and hiring slimy armed thugs and scabs. It shows how the strikers kept the strike going, how they attempted to blockade scab labour from entering the mine, how women played an absolutely crucial role in supporting the strike, and how they sought support from other communities and workers.
Viewers will get a sense of what coal mining is like, the conditions in which miners have to face every day, and why the issues of health and safety are paramount.
This is an open event, and children are welcome. Tea and nibbles will be provided.
Show your support in this dark time.
BEYOND RESISTANCE
http://beyondresistance.wordpress.com/2010/11/22/fundraiser-for-the-pike-river-mine-families-december-1st/
Like or Dislike:
1 
2 (-1)
Todd – modern brushless motors with electronic control systems have no electrical sparks. Essentially they are permanent magnet synchronous AC motors. You still have potential issues with build-up of static charges but I am sure any such issues are solvable.
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Rigging an EXISTING robot which almost certainly does have some electrical discharges, to operate without igniting the flammable gas mix is a matter of gas flow, air-flow, containment and detection. It could be done, I swear, with some plastic sheeting, some duct tape, some number 8 wire and hose through which to pump gas.
I don’t care if the motor makes sparks if there is a way to keep the explosive atmosphere away from the motor, and THAT is something we can do.
That gets people in a ways, they can build way-stations which let them them get in further, reaching into the mine in stages. Using the robot to go first… could have been started within a couple of hours of the robot’s arrival. No, it hasn’t ever been done before, but it IS cheaper than a special build robot.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The army’s robot is ready:
http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/8366801/napier-siege-robot-on-standby-at-pike-river/
and:
http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/8363732/robot-could-be-sent-down-mine/
I thought I read a comment in the media saying that this robot didn’t generate sparks (which is what I would expect if it is designed for bomb disposal). Even if this were true, there is still a possibility that it could cause a spark because of its movements rather than its internal operation.
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Thanks for that Trevor29, you learn something new everyday.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Guys, the Robot will not be deployed in an explosive atmosphere.
The Mine apparently has fresh air to at least the first ventilation shaft (and possibly the second), I think they are going to use it to determine the structural integrity of the mine only.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Someone will be able to tell my why just one (single) person in suitable gear couldn’t walk in for a look at what’s happened.
Like or Dislike:
2 
3 (-1)
Possibly because there’s evidence of a smouldering fire combined with what’s still a potentially explosive atmosphere, at least until it’s confirmed that there isn’t. There’s already been a massive explosion for a reason that’s still not been determined, and that was when everyone thought it was safe. But I’m not on the rescue team and neither is anyone here. I’m sure they have their reasons which hold up much better than idle speculation, and we’ll doubtless learn more and be able to criticise at a later time. Rescuers are useless when they’re dead, and create further problems when they put themselves in badly understood danger.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
then there are the clothing-questions…
1)..does that guy have a wardrobe of just blue shirts…
…or does he ‘wash his smalls’ each night…?
2)..was there any reason..beyond complete bullshit…
…for key to put on a parker-earthquake-jacket for his appearance before the media..?
..(esp as he was the only one wearing one..)
..just back from the mineface…was he..?
..is this setting a new benchmark in auto-eroticsm…?
..and is he a total lod..?..or what..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
3 (-3)
Someone will be able to tell my why just one (single) person in suitable gear couldn’t walk in for a look at what’s happened.
Did you read Daniel Rockhouse’s escape account? I think he is pretty clear on what happened.
I think you will find that ‘rescue’ is being used interchangeably with ‘recovery’. No miners we have talked to believe they will be found alive.
Many of the rescue crew have families of their own, they are also miners and have a good grasp of what they are facing and what they are likely to find.
Still, until we all know otherwise, everyone is hoping for some sort of miracle.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
they sent in the robot…didn’t waterproof it..
..and water fell from the tunnel-roof…
..and the robot has now broken-down..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
2 (-2)
and nobody has told the idiots on tv3..
they are still pontificating on what the robot will do..
..and no…there is no back-up robot…
..an epic news-fail going down from tv3..live..!
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
2 (-2)
Wow, Tony kokshorn just shot his mouth off about the lack of a rescue, not sure if that is (another) one of his opinions or if he is expressing the frustration of the families.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Somehow the notion of an Army Robot that won’t work in the rain is somewhat shy of sensible. Broken down I understand. Not attached to anything that can haul it back out… nope, not understood. Actually sort of bizarre.
Now if someone will go in to haul out the robot ??
I have to believe there are things I don’t know here that explain this stuff. But a robot that can’t get wet?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Thanks Shunda and Mike – those seem likely reasons. Idle speculation btw, is what blogs are for and I struggle to see why people shouldn’t do just that on such forums. There is great opposition to anyone expressing criticism or asking awkward questions ‘until the men are brought to the surface’. Why?
As to Key’s demeanor/timing/performance/relevance/clothing choice – same thing. Only the brave dare speculate on His role. Why?
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
why was seismic/listening gear not dropped down any/all venilation shafts..
…on saturday..
..and why has that still not been done..?
..it seems like they had one-plan…
…and how long will they wait…?
…for the indefinable future…?
(oh…the robot got 500 metres in..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
My question is actually quite simple, and certainly isn’t clear from the briefings.
The issue preventing rescuers entering the mine is that the environment is “unstable”, and probably “gassy”. So, just what activities are taking place to enable a mission to be mounted? Or is the answer “nothing”, and we’re just waiting for the mine to sort itself out.
It’s all quite interesting that they’re fooling with tin men, and installing listening devices, and drilling holes, but none of that will change anything, just provide more information.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Not waterproofed let alone inert gas equipped. I hate to say it but using a device not developed for the purpose shows a lack of planning for such search and rescue requirements.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
“fooling with tin men”
poetry!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Todd… I don’t know about “lack of planning” so much as a “lack of thinking” – which is apparently still going on. They will probably get the robot out… but they are going to have to wait quite a while to do so, if only because of the PR disaster it would be if it were immediately retrieved.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I have a lot of respect for the Search and Rescue personnel and the structure of the system. They’re not idiots, and their focus has to be on doing whatever’s deemed most likely to work based on scant information, without putting either those known to be safe in danger, or potential survivors in more danger. I’d rather they got on and did their job rather than pander to an impatient media, family, friends or politicians, not least because they’re the same people who might rescue me one day if I get into trouble, even though it’s unlikely to be a mining accident. We can find stuff out and possibly learn things at a later date when there’s more time to analyse.
The robot was almost certainly never designed to go into a mine full of debris (as I understand things it’s just one that happened to be handy), and it’s not too surprising it failed, but great they were able to try. But really, what’s the point of mocking the rescue effort now that a robot has broken down as it quite possibly would have anyway? Should the army be given millions of dollars, or more, to buy and develop robots specialised for mine rescues just in case this happens again and they’re asked to lend a hand with some stuff they have lying around at home base?
Like or Dislike:
4 
0 (+4)
Yeah – should’ve given the Robot a Raincoat really.
Hard to plan around so many unknown factors i would guess.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Mike – my brother-in-law is partof the security contingent there and describes the ‘media’, particularly the Australian branch as ******s!!
As to criticising this and that on a blog – why ever not! It serves as a harmless forum for frustrations and discussion surely?
The assumption that the mining company has done everything correctly and that the rescue attempts are the best possible involves some suspension of a natural disbelief on the part of everyone and is something that doesn’t come naturally to blog commentors.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
“Should the army be given millions of dollars, or more, to buy and develop robots specialised for mine rescues just in case this happens again and they’re asked to lend a hand with some stuff they have lying around at home base?”
It might be too early to answer this question, but in my lifetime I’d say far more people have died in mines or tunnels in New Zealand than from the bombs I understand this robot is designed to deal with (3 deaths I can remember, one a suicide and none that a robot like this could have prevented). If we are ging to apportion dollars based on need I’d say a rescue robot might be needed far more than a bomb-disposal one. Maybe we sould fund search and rescue for this sort of thing, instead of the army.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
robert says “As to Key’s demeanor/timing/performance/relevance/clothing choice – same thing. Only the brave dare speculate on His role. Why?”
Because there’s a whole lot of miners in a mine, possibly dead, and the top priority for some sickos is slinging mud to score political points over wardrobe choice.
If you can’t see anything inherently pathetic about that Robert, then it’s a good insight to your own priorities.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Hi Robert. Yeah I’m not too surprised about the Australians, coming from a country with a huge mining industry and (probably) media experience to match.
I’m not meaning to suggest everythings being done right, just that it’s a bit pointless arguing about it or complaining things should be done differently when there’s no info. People should speculate all they like if it helps them feel better. I’m choosing to speculate that there’s not much that can be done better in the immediate circumstances than what’s already happening.
You can bet stuff will be learned from in hindsight, about rescue techniques and safety precautions as much as anything else. Possibly if this ever happens again, the rescue effort will be handled differently. But I’d be surpised if anyone on the rescue end of the tragedy is pulled up for making bad decisions given what’s being worked with and the experience available.
Joe B — good points. Or possibly it should be the mining industry investing in such devices, imho, if it’s feasible that it’d make a difference in future.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
gee..!..i really thought parker had flogged that politician-as-action-man look…to a howling-cliche …. for the forseeable future…
..but no..up pops key…(orange-costume and all..)
..and if that ‘look’ was as contrived/messaged as it looked..?
..well..that would say heaps…
and breaking news…!
judith collins willl be flying in for a/her photo-op this aft..
(whew..!…that’s a relief..!..eh..?..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
Not a matter of millions for specialized robots, but a matter of WTF? This is NZ, it rains, when you build stuff to be painted Army green you build it to stand up to ordinary weather. The delicate nature of the ‘bot in THAT respect, is a surprise.
Moreover, it begs the question of risk-assessment being done. Going to send robot into hostile environment… OK… first you define what you know CAN be in that environment… then you check what CAN happen to the ‘bot… then you do things like
1. Wrap sensitive bits in plastic sheeting and duct tape.
2. Grab some moisture sensors so you can detect where it is wet before you drive into it.
3. Hook a tow cable on the thing so as to be able to haul it back
4. Go in stages, and follow it so you have the opportunity to haul it back.
Looks to me that they didn’t define the risks in the first place. Or is water from the roof of the mine something that no miner has ever seen before?
I don’t mind that it didn’t work perfect, I mind that it failed for an easily foreseen reason. .
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
BJ, has it been confirmed that water immobilised it? I think that was just an assumption.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
phil – there’s 29 miners down a mine, possibly dead, and you priority is scoring points about clothing.
You calous sick f…
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
The relative cost of robots has decreased considerably since the army’s bomb disposal robot was developed. An effective caterpillar robot with cameras but without bulky cables could be purchased for around 10 K, even with the proposed engine change, inert gas equipment and water proofing, it’s a pretty cost effective option. Hell you could even develop one so it went underwater. It would not be out of the questing to have air sampling equipment installed as well. Boosting the control signal for underground use is not out of the question. You could effectively utilize two such robots for all of New Zealand although a robot on site at every industrial mine would be more effective. But not so cost effective for the mining companies.
http://www.robotshop.com/world/superdroid-hd2-wifi-pan-tilt.html
http://www.robotshop.com/world/superdroids-lt-complete-surveillance-robot-pelican-remote.html
http://www.robotshop.com/world/dr-robot-jaguar-lite-tracked-mobile-platform.html
photonz1… give the abuse a rest huh!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Shunda asks “BJ, has it been confirmed that water immobilised it? I think that was just an assumption.”
It came out via the families breifing, and the head of Pike River mentioned water, but he was vague about it.
No one has actually been able to get to it to check why it stopped, And by water, do they mean a drip, a torrent, or a pond?
BJ – I doubt the robot could tow 2-3km of tow cable in. Even 500m would probably weight several times the weight of the robot.
A US mining expert this morning said nowhere in the world has a robot ever successfully rescued any miners. He also thought that closer to the explosion it was highly likely there would be too much debris for a robot to get through.
If there is spark risk from petrol or electic engines, how about a robot / vehicle driven by compressed air?
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
sheesh photonz….what can i say…?
..i notice that sorta stuff..
..and how does pointing out a politicians blatant/cynical ‘messaging’..
..impinge on any idea of proprietry you may have….?
..mmm!!!…?
..(all blusterr/splutter to one side…eh..?..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
1 (-1)
The layout of the mine may indicate there is some small hope for at least some of the miners.
It appears that they were in two loose groups in different parts of the mine.
One group in an area adjacent to pit bottom and closer to where Daniel Rockhouse was, and one group further into the mine to the north west.
Depending on where the explosion occurred, it may have been survivable for one of the groups.
If the explosion happened at pit bottom, the group to the north west may have had some protection, but they may not be able to get past the point of ignition. It would be essential though, that they have fresh air to survive this long after the explosion. The hole they are drilling is going into the north west part of the mine, perhaps this is where they expect to find any survivors.
The ventilation shaft that is in the pictures probably gives an indication on which part of the mine the explosion happened, it was extensively damaged, so the explosion was probably close.
But I can not figure out which ventilation shaft it is, does anyone know if it is the one adjacent to pit bottom?
Everything counts on there being at least some fresh air past pit bottom, near the miners, there is no other source after this much time has past.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
but seeing as you are talking about ‘top-priorities’…
..i wd hafta say mine is a gear-grinding impatience at why it took four days
for these experts to think of seismic/listening-devices…
..and yes..hindsight..and all that..
..but really…you’d think that seeing if they were ‘tapping’/alive…
…wd have to be on anyones’ list of top five things to do…
..not four days later…
..that’s my current ‘top priority’ there photonz..
..seeing as you are asking…
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
1 (-1)
I agree Phil, It seems to me that there was a bit too much head scratching on how to proceed. Though to be honest, the talk around town is now beginning to focus on Pike’s operational process and why this happened in the first place.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Photinz1 states: “BJ – I doubt the robot could tow 2-3km of tow cable in. Even 500m would probably weight several times the weight of the robot.”
Actually these types of robots are very strong and can carry considerable amounts of weight. Doubting that they cannot is rather presumptious.
Photonz1 says: “A US mining expert this morning said nowhere in the world has a robot ever successfully rescued any miners. He also thought that closer to the explosion it was highly likely there would be too much debris for a robot to get through.”
We’re not talking about a robot that can carry people. Although that is not out of the question. Surveying and testing to see if the area is safe is the requirement. Whether such robots can negotiate obstacles more effectively than humans is slightly irrelevant. At least the rescuers would know where those obstacles were. Design the mechanism for what is required and keep it as simple as possible.
Photonz1 says: “If there is spark risk from petrol or electic engines, how about a robot / vehicle driven by compressed air?”
Pneumatic motors have not overcome their efficiency deficiencies yet. You would also have the issue of what to compress so that it does not react with any existing gasses. The intrinsic rotary mechanical motion and reaction with compressed “air” engines and the closeness of that reaction to the outside atmosphere is also not a good idea.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The relevant upgrades would be advantageous for this water tight robot @ $15287.40 NZ:
http://www.robotshop.com/world/superdroids-hd2-s-remote-surveillance-robot.html
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Todd – the robots may be strong, but 2.5km of 14mm cable weighs over 3000kg.
And that’s not a rolling mass, comparable to say two or three cars. There’s a huge amount of friction, that has to be pulled by a small robot on tiny tracks. So it’s more like trying to pull two or three cars with no wheels.
Even if it had the power, it’s not likely to have the traction or weight to pull that sort of tow rope, (in addition to all the other cabling required to control it, receive pictures etc).
Todd says “Whether such robots can negotiate obstacles more effectively than humans is slightly irrelevant.”
I think it’s highly relevant if the robot can’t get past obsticles (like water).
However the robot is worth a go. But like the expert says – it’s a bit of a long shot that it will be of much use. But worth a try.
As for compressed air engines – there are prototype cars with these engines that have a 200km range, so efficiency should not be a major issue if we only need less than 10% of that.
And I don’t think it would be a problem finding an inert gas that could do this. They use them in oil tankers to make a non-explosive atmosphere in dnager areas below deck and around loading and unloading.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
phil – so you 2nd priority (after what John Key is wearing) would be a listening device.
And if we hear a noise, we’d plan the rescue assuming they are alive.
And if we heard NO noise, we’d plan the rescue assuming they are alive.
In both cases, it is exactly what they have been doing from day one.
So doing something that would make no difference to the rescue plans would be your top priority (besides giving Key fashion advice)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
oh..ok photonz…
so…no seismic/listening devices..eh..?
you just … carry on..!
eh…?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
1 (-1)
phils says “so…no seismic/listening devices..eh..?”
Have them, but things that can actually help get the miners out (i.e. clearing gases) should come before what you say is your “top priority”.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Shunda – I get all the news I need from the weather report. I have no inside information on the events, just a lot of experience with milspec equipment, and this clearly isn’t an example of milspec equipment as I know it.
Photonz
There is no reason that the robot needs to pull that sort of weight. It needs to have the reel attached to the robot. Did I have to SAY that? Follow me here.
1. Robot goes in the length of the reel it has. Say 100 Meters. Everything checks OK.
2. An inflatable igloo is set up to stage humans that far in. This is is a tent which has access to air and venting so it doesn’t cause explosion hazard.
3. Air bottles and “stuff” is brought in that far. Rescue team will pass through the staged “safe” bubbles.
4. Robot goes in further.. Safe? set up the next tent.
At some stage the robot will encounter a hazard that prevents a tent. It will however, have gathered information far better (apparently) than it did. It also will not be lost underground.
Don’t teach your Grandpa to suck an egg.
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
to be honest photonz…
you introduced this whole concept of rating priorities..eh..?
..i have quickly tired of it..
so…i don’t think i am really buying into it..eh..?
..so .. it looks like you are just playing with yrslf there…eh..?
as i said..’carry on!’..
..eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
1 (-1)
BJ – the problem with your idea is that the whole tunnel is like gun barrel. It there is another explosion (caused by the robot, or build up of gases because ventilation is damaged etc ) – then it is highly likely to come down the tunnel.
Methane explosions are 1200-1500 degrees. So I think the 100 m at a time is very risky to rescue crews.
Perhaps using your idea but instead of going in 100m burts, go as far as shelters off the side of the main tunnel, if they have them in suitable places.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
bj says: “Looks to me that they didn’t define the risks in the first place.”
Context aside, good assessment.
Photonz1 – I’m horrified that you are speculating about robots at a time like this!!
For God’s sake man – there are human beings down there!
leave your talk of toys for a more appropriate time!
(To borrow your phrase “you calous(sic) f…”)
Like or Dislike:
1 
2 (-1)
Photonz
The humans can come all the way back out of the tunnel after servicing and prepping the bot for the next 100 meters. The bot is at risk for an explosion, people not.
Can do the same thing with human rescuers. Only one at risk at a time. Likelihood is good that they’d survive that way. Carefully instrumenting the mineshaft. Worth the risk perhaps, in the period just after the blast. Less reasonable now as hope is fading.
It is not that hard to manage risks if someone is actually managing risks. I have the feeling that sub-optimal decisions are being made because of the pressure.
It is very easy for me sitting at my computer with nothing on the line, to second-guess the guy on the scene who has people screaming and crying and begging to “do something”. I would not want to have that situation… I don’t do well in them myself and I know it.
However, if water incapacitated the robot then it is not a suitable design for much except clearing bombs indoors… and now all the bad guys know that all they need is a couple of buckets of water to disable the thing. Somehow I don’t reckon that’s all to the good.
Possibly they don’t have the instruments at mine entrance. Probably not enough cameras that can be used in that environment (though any camera capable of underwater work would serve, and those are available retail) and not enough remote air monitoring boxes.
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
A more appropriate question for this blog might be the policy issue around safety. Everyone knows that we don’t think that the coal mine should exist in the first place.
However, if a mine IS permitted, even in a national park, we should allow and REQUIRE the creation of escape and ventilation connections to the surface. 150 meters vertically, 3 km in, the geometry says there should already be a shaft there. Why is there not?
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Please do not quote me as the source of gospel but I have some well informed insider information that DoC would not allow such escape and ventilation connections.
They insisted on the long tunnel so there was no sign of the operation any where near the ridge line.
But given the present legislation the DoC staff have little choice and my argument for some years has been that the general law and the process of separating the mining permit from the granting of access has always generated these risks.
Go to: http://www.rmastudies.org.nz/issues/60-conservation-doc
Note my colleague on the West Coast who has been required to limit access to his tenement to a quad bike and machinery to a six tonne digger. Both are so unsafe as to invite prosecution from OSH. So he won’t proceed. And indeed the machinery suppliers refused to supply.
Like or Dislike:
2 
4 (-2)
robert guyton – wow – a joke about toys – on top of phils ranting fashion criticism – so appropriate for the circumstances.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Photonz1 says: “So doing something that would make no difference to the rescue plans would be your top priority (besides giving Key fashion advice)”.
Photonx1, you’re forgetting a few important issues… Having a response from the miners would give hope to the families, it would have been advantageous to know if the miners are conscious and perhaps could effectively leave the mine on their own with limited assistance from above. Having devices that would have been on hand deployed as an afterthought is not helpful.
Why is the cable option even being discussed? I do realise that the outdated robot they tried to use had a cable, but it is not required. Please refer to my last link: The upgraded model has a continual operational time of 3 hours. This could easily be doubled again. @ 1.3 Metres per second, that’s around 28 KM of distance available.
A booster to allow further distance of signal generation is also achievable with today’s technology. A control cable could be employed as a safety mechanism but could be problematic if terrain is uneven. That particular robot has a towing capability that allows for the cable to be released if it jams. Modern cables required for this kind of application, are not always heavy photonz1. 3 tonnes is overestimating things ever so slightly.
Maintenance and development costs would be far greater for a pneumatic motor. There is no reason an electrical system, which is more efficient in terms of size, weight, performance, distance achieved and safety should not be implemented as a required search and resque measure sometime in the future. Especially in light of the relative low cost, which does not equate to “millions of dollars”.
Photonz1 says: “I think it’s highly relevant if the robot can’t get past obsticles (like water).”
Must I reiterate: the robot can be made watertight. The manufacturers state: The treads and four powerful motors allow this robot to ascend/descend stairs and go over most terrain.
Photonz1 states: “However the robot is worth a go. But like the expert says – it’s a bit of a long shot that it will be of much use. But worth a try.”
Spending ages dangerously drilling holes to use testing equipment that could take a few hours to drive in with a suitable robot is a long shot? I think it is common sense… There is far more danger in drilling into a space that could contain the same gasses that caused the initial blast.
Robots are pretty low on the list of priorities if you ask me as well robertguyton. But there is no harm in trying to find suitable safety methods. As much as I hate defending photonz1, something that can save lives is not a toy.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“However, if a mine IS permitted, even in a national park, we should allow and REQUIRE the creation of escape and ventilation connections to the surface. 150 meters vertically, 3 km in, the geometry says there should already be a shaft there. Why is there not?”
Perhaps someone familiar with the approval process for erecting drilling rigs in national parks could answer that. My understanding is that it requires ministerial level approval so Nick Smith’s office should have the details.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
Well so much for my intended updates, but I guess you have been following the news. For those who are interested, here is the speech I gave in the House this afternoon:
Really trying to remain hopeful.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
another epic 3 news fail…
they cut away from conference…
..to their talking heads burbling on the street..
f.f.s..!
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
1 (-1)
Truth is that I think that there should be no objection to the small shafts and above ground arrangements that would be required to help keep people safer or aid in rescue when the worst happens. I doubt that it would have a devastating impact on the national park to do that.
I oppose the mining for other reasons, but I would not have it be unsafely done if it is allowed to be done in the first place.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
Confirmation that a waterfall caused robot to fail! I tend to rely on what phil u reports as well BJ.
One has to ask the question why have Australian experts with superior equipment been flown in… Why doesn’t New Zealand have experts with the right equipment? As much as we should appreciate outside help, we really shouldn’t have to need it.
Some good questions being asked about mine safety on One news tonight. Apparently a report requesting better mining inspection has been ignored. Usual duck and cover from National… The “Hon” Kate Wilkinson (no small mines, what an idiot!) used the same excuses many here on Frogblog have employed in trying to deflect pertinent questioning and insight into the accident.
In my opinion, using the family’s feelings as an excuse for not answering relevant questions is in my opinion despicable; I’m sure that the families affected would like answers to those questions as well.
I also oppose mining for other reasons, especially coal mines. Although I hate to see such accidents, I really hope that there is something good that comes from this and safety changes are implemented, if not a rethink on our whole mining industry.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
Stewart was listed with a last name I didn’t recognise, I know him and his parents quite well through work.
I can only imagine what it must be like to have a son down there, it must be so difficult.
It really takes on a whole different tone when you suddenly realise people you know are hurting so much.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
Ok, so people want to be kept up to date with progress – that’s fair enough. But this generating of news by talking heads prodding relatives is just pathetically sickening. Leave them the BLEEP alone, and just report any new developments.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Todd asks “One has to ask the question why have Australian experts with superior equipment been flown in…”
Scale – NZ has just five underground coal mines and produces 4-5m tonnes of coal each year – less than 1% of what Australia produces.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
In fiscal year 2008/09, Australia mined 487 million tonnes of coal compared to New Zealands 4.6 million tonnes. So your figures are pretty much right photonz1.
We’re rated 22nd in the world for mineral wealth (not bad for such a small country) with vast deposits worth enough to make every Kiwi considerably wealthy if shared. If the Government want to continue to develop the mining industry in New Zealand, they need to ensure proper safety procedures and the relevant equipment to carry them out are available for any accident that might eventuate. Delays through outsourcing are not recommended.
The mining industry employs approximately 4,000 people directly and another 8,000 indirectly in New Zealand. You would think that some of those 12,000 people would have the necessary search and rescue training required. If they have not, then there needs to be some training in that specific area.
However it’s more the equipment side of things that I think is an issue. The robot failure would point to that fact. Saying that mining is intrinsically safe is not an excuse that I like to hear for not having comprehensive back up equipment. What is that old saying again? It’s better to have something you don’t need than to need something you don’t have.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Todd says “You would think that some of those 12,000 people would have the necessary search and rescue training required.”
I’m not sure that training is an issue.
All the expertise in Australia hasn’t led to rescue in some mine disasters there – sealing the mine without recovery has happened more than once.
A robot specifically designed for this would be useful. Does radio control work ok in a maze of underground tunnels?
There is an Australian company that makes flame proof and explosion proof vehicles, though by “explosion proof”, I think this is the term used for vehicles that don’t set off explosions, rather than being protected against explosions.
Better monitoring and ventilation systems with fail-safe backups would be even more useful.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Confirmation that the robot was hit by a waterfall:
http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/8376538/situation-bleak-for-trapped-miners-police/
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
photonz1 – radio control has a much more limited range in a tunnel. There is also a danger that the radio energy might be picked up by a piece of wire and cause a spark, which could set off another explosion. I suspect very low power transmitters would be OK, such as low power bluetooth, but I wouldn’t want to see cell-phone or hand-held radio power levels. Repeaters with their own batteries could be planted at regular intervals, with or without a communications cable back to the entrance.
One technique which has been used in tunnels is the “leaky feeder” approach where a long cable is run down the tunnel and acts as an aerial over its entire length, but this doesn’t work significantly beyond the end of the cable, so it wouldn’t work if the cable has been cut by the explosion.
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
How come that CCTV footage of the entrance to the mine has just appeared?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I presume out of concern for the families.
It looks like the signature of a death warrant. I presume that they hoped to have other evidence by now.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Ultrasonic signals do well in caves. Bandwidth sucks but if one is going slowly it can be adequate. One can use repeaters/transducers dragged or pushed ever further into the tunnel.
Given that they got the ‘bot restarted, I would have to surmise that it was the sensor suite on it that suffered, not its motors and drives, and that it was driven through that water and after drying out some on the other side of it the electronics recovered enough to function, as they sometimes do.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
first we were told there was only one cctv camera…
..then we were told there was only one other…over the conveyor belt…
then now we are told there are multiple cctv’s..thru-out the mine…
..all of which fed to the control-room/surface..
and no…they haven’t yet bothered to look at that other explosion footage…
..um..!…why not..?
..f.f.s..!
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Given the nature of communications internally there may not be any at all Phil.
Not necessarily none, but there is certainly a strong likelihood that there is none… If such images (even singular) existed, the locations of the cameras known and the timing synchronized the locus of the explosion source could likely be determined. I suspect that this is simply not available as the sort of system that could actually monitor such things in real-time is expensive and generally not necessary.
One might have to retrieve the cameras to get the images. If they survived.
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
no..he said the footage was available…
..but that he had not yet looked at it…
as he didn’t think it wd tell him any more than the tunnel one..(!)
..um..!
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Just in case you haven’t seen the news, there’s been a second larger explosion at Pike River mine and announcement that all 29 lives have been lost.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Shit. Didn’t think there was much hope anyway after the first one, but not good to have that confirmed.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
It seems just as relevant now:
“While the widows and orphans were watching with heartbroken anxiety at the pit mouth for the result of the rescue work, all New Zealand seemed to stand by and share the grief of the bereaved ones”
New Zealand Tablet, 3 April 1896
I put a picture of it on my blog: http://shundamumble.blogspot.com/
Rip Stu, Richard and all your buddies.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
You should use it in your next speech Kevin, I thought your last one was excellent.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Phil – If they have any sort of decent time chops on those images they can almost certainly get the locus of the initial blast. Could have had it in the first day I don’t doubt – It probably would not have helped a lot though.
I hate the fact that men have to die for stuff like this.
We always have, and it always feels real wrong.
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
People can make donations to a support fund set up. The EPMU also has a fund going
TO DONATE: People can make a donation to the fund at any ANZ branch or branch of The National Bank. The account number: 01 1841 0052483 00
http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/donate-miners-fund-3912513
Grey District Mayor Tony Kokshoorn says a mayoral relief fund will also be set up to help the families of the miners killed in the Pike River mine.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I remember when Richard and I were having a conversation about spirituality (among other things), when he told me about a group of Mormons that used to have a ‘house group’ with him and a few of his friends.
Richard and his other mates decided that the best way to make said house group more interesting was to provide cake to the Mormons with a certain ‘herb’ in it.
I am sure that the study would have been very colourful! Mormons have some interesting ideas when they aren’t wasted!
Richard also rebuilt his entire house at Blackball, from the inside out! He literally peeled the old one off when he was finished, I don’t think the building inspector knew quite how to approach it!
He was a master craftsman and made some beautiful furniture, and he was a real West Coast character, a really likeable guy.
I hadn’t seen him for quite a while, but he is one of those characters you don’t forget, I am sure a lot of people will miss him, not the least his wife of (I think) one year.
Hope to see you again one day dude.
RIP Richard.
Like or Dislike:
5 
0 (+5)
Do not think of them in the dark.
Remember them in the light.
For these were New Zealand boys,
Born to sunlight and the Tasman’s thunder.
Do not think of the ancient trees
Pressed black in the earth’s embrace,
Whose richness these miners carved
Out of the mountain’s chest.
Remember them, instead, among green hills
Under a fleeting sun.
Rummaging in the fern with dog and gun
For the wild pig and the running deer.
Do not think of the tears.
The rictus of disbelief.
Of ragged breaths indrawn
Over jagged reefs of pain.
Remember, though the heart cracks,
Their laughter and fierce joy
At discovering along this smoky coast
First kisses, proud promises, wedding days.
Do not think this is the end.
That Death and Darkness
In the deep confer and grimly
Draw a line beneath our Twenty-Nine.
Though it took their lives,
Think of the coal they hewed
Burning white hot
In the world’s furnaces.
Think of the bright steel
Their labour forged.
Lift your faces to the sun
And know the quality of our loss.
Chris Trotter http://bowalleyroad.blogspot.com/2010/11/pike-river-241110.html
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Like or Dislike:
3 
0 (+3)
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10690215
Perhaps, Owen, you shouldn’t be blaming DOC afterall.
Thanks for the link whoar.co.nz
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
For several years I worked with Gordon Vette and others on Aircraft safety. Vette uncovered the cause of the Erebus disaster.
His major mantra was that aircraft has many safety systems with heaps of “redundancy” and this meant that when at aircraft crashed there was never a single cause but a cascade of events.
Each event is highly unlikely and the cascade is even more unlikely but sometimes one event triggers another.
I never said the DoC would be the single cause but I believe the DoC legislation will prove to be one of the links in the cascade. The separation of granting of mining rights from granting of access to the tenement has always been a systemic weakness. And indeed the Minister was finally thinking about bringing that into a single consent process.
Like or Dislike:
0 
4 (-4)
Indeed “aircraft [have] many safety systems with heaps of “redundancy””.
The relevant question is, how many safety systems did the mine have, and why were they “redundant”.
You seem interested in the cascade of events that have lead to this tragedy yet make no comment on the apparent lack of methane monitoring.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
fin
Because I do not know.
Amd I suspect you are not aware of the technical meaning of redudant in such systems.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
I hope it’s not too early to say and apologise if this offends anybody…
The problems posed by this thread of the various electronics in the robots deployed or further drilling causing ignition of explosive gasses, could well be the cause of the second and third explosions. However that is mere speculation. It annoyed me though to see representatives from Pike River Coal announce the second explosion with statements to the effect of “we didn’t do it”. Clearly there is liability for this accident, but undertaking statements of innocence or that the mine still has commercial value in such a time is not acceptable.
What I don’t understand is John Key saying that there was gas testing undertaken straight after the first explosion, high gas levels the apparent reason given for not mounting a quick rescue. The old time miners and experts agree that undertaking a rescue directly after an explosion is the safest time to do so in such circumstances.
It would appear that there are questions to be asked about the design, safety and management of Pike River mine. I would not count on the Government or Pike River Coal being very truthful throughout the investigation process, which I hope is robust and in depth.
Installed equipment to test for dangerous gas build up could well have prevented this disaster. The readiness of Pike River Coal to quickly defend the situation and their conduct when families and the nation were still in mourning and then turn the discussion to one of finances is in my opinion abhorrent.
In light of the contradictory and well-managed coverage, it is difficult to determine whether Pike River Coal’s contrition is in fact truthful. However that is not something we should be too concerned about. It is the complete failure and mismanagement of the mine that has resulted in 29 workers dying that is of grievous concern. It is the lack of infrastructure and policy, which allowed the mine to be developed and run in such a way that it would completely fail disastrously, which is of grave concern as well. Until we have answers to these questions; further coal mining in New Zealand should be halted.
Lets hope that an environmental catastrophe is not unfolding before our eyes.
Like or Dislike:
0 
1 (-1)
Todd – There may be other reasons to want a stop to open cast coal mining, but an accident in an underground mine due to a build-up of explosive gases is not one of them. The conditions are completely different and the risks are also completely different.
With cameras on the robots and elsewhere giving a reasonable idea of where the second and third explosions originated and knowing where they were working, it is reasonable for Pike River to state that they did not trigger these explosions themselves, as it implies that there could be further explosions even if all precautions are taken, until the mine is rendered inert.
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Owen, do you not read?
“Methane levels have to reach five to 15 per cent of the atmosphere to cause a blast”
“Mr Watson said power went off in UK mines when methane reached 1.25 per cent and they were evacuated when it reached two per cent.
“So, either the warning system was inadequate, or it was not sufficiently monitored.”"
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10690215
My apparent misuse of the word ‘redundant’ was an attempted play on the word. But you’re welcome to assume I’m ignorant.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The problems posed by this thread of the various electronics in the robots deployed or further drilling causing ignition of explosive gasses, could well be the cause of the second and third explosions.
That is unlikely Todd, the methane levels at the new bore hole were far too high for ignition, from my understanding gas also vented up the bore.
I believe the Robots were only deployed in fresh air and only as far as the loader, so this is unlikely to have caused any problems.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Our explosimeters sound an alarm at 2% LEL. I assume mine ones alarm at similar levels.
There are many reasons why monitoring may not have worked including the fact that every type of gas level monitor has limitations. It is possible to have an explosive concentration un-detected close to, but not at the sampling tube. Layers and pockets of gas can exist. Too fast a buildup can remain undetected. One of the more common types relies on gas and oxygen burning on a filament. Obviously if the gas is over the UEL it will not burn.
Can’t really make assumptions about monitoring until we have all the details, but I would be very surprised if they did not have an extensive monitoring system.
One thing that does surprise me was the lack of someone in continuous contact with the miners from a safe area. That is standard practice for most industries where people enter potentially dangerous areas.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The point is that you can say the Erebus disaster was caused by pilot error because he flew the plane into the mountain which was right in front of him.
But eventually Vette established a chain of events that began well before the plane left the ground.
Indeed when the plan took off it was fair to say everyone was doomed.
I suspect that with all these systems in place in mine, some of which failed to perform, we will find there is a cascade which began some time prior to the failure.
Sorry if I sounded a bit rude about “redundancy” but I was in a hurry and had to cut the message short.
Redundant in common language means “needless” or “unnecessary”.
But an aircraft has high redundancy in its systems as a means of promoting safety. For example, three of the engines are redundant because the plane can keep flying and can land on one engine.
But these redundant engines are not needless or unnecessary. It took me a while to get used to this jargon meaning.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0 (+1)
Erebus was a systemic failure which still has not been fully remedied.
Routes are still set by navigators on the ground instead of being set by the pilots and then checked by the Navigators.
A basic precaution of reviewing the route just before takeoff in relation to a picture of the route failed to happen.
Routes being changed without the direct overview of the drivers have also caused problems at sea.
Pike River like most accidents will probably turn out to be a systemic failure also. It is rarely just one thing that causes an accident.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Kerry
Pike River mine did not have an extensive monitoring system. The workers had hand held devices which they carried around with them. I would expect that additional pressure was placed on them to meet quota so they did not have time to test in the normal fashion.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
That’s all we have. They usually work fine, but as I said above. The spaces we go into are much smaller than a mine also.
Really a continuous system should be required as the hand helds only monitor at one point. Maybe a positive improvement after the inquiries.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
If the gas levels built up to an explosive level because the ventilation system failed, it should not have been necessary for the miners to have detected the build up. The miners should have been alerted the moment the ventilation failed and put down their tools and started walking out a.s.a.p. before the gas had a chance to build up.
For all I know, they did this but the mine exploded before they could make it out.
Trevor.
PS: Above UEL (Upper Explosive Level) doesn’t mean the gas won’t burn or combust – it means the gas mixture won’t support an explosion. Mixtures above the UEL should still register on the hot filament detectors although the readings may be lower than expected.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The Standard brings up some very interesting comments from and about Jim Anderton in relation to Pike River.
You could go straight there or through this portal
http://robertguyton.blogspot.com/2010/11/anderton-on-coal.html
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
@Todd
Things were different when the old timers mined. It is common practice nowadays to have pipes inside the coal seam to remove the gas and prevent outbursts. Pike River had such a system and the pipes were ruptured by the first explosion. Thus releasing, so it was said, 800 litres per second of methane into the main part of the mine.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Hi @Todd. I’m no expert on this myself, but I wouldn’t say everyone agrees. A Canterbury University mining geologist pointed out a few days back (via Stuff) that although it’s a saying amongst mining people, many have still died in the past whilst trying to do exactly this. The ops manager of the Mines Rescue Safety Training Service in the UK also provided a good write-up for the BBC about the realistic logistics of mounting such a rescue, and why it couldn’t practically be done. (Scroll to the section titled ‘Rescue Decision’.)
Statistically it probably is “safer” than the extremely mind numbingly dangerous situation of entering after waiting even longer, but there must still be substantial risks when there’s no clear information about exactly what’s happening in such a complex system. I doubt that any possible extra safety in immediacy counts for much when there’s no evidence that people are still alive and plenty of reason to believe that they probably aren’t, and also when there’s little hope of locating and getting them out if they are.
A decision like this would have needed to be made very quickly by people at or nearby the site. With a lack of clear information about what was happening inside, and I can see why a decision to avoid entering was likely made. It’s a case for mines to have an established plan of what to do immediately after such an horrific accident, but I suspect such plans might still be to do nothing in some circumstances, unless there’s a very clear likeliness that it will save lives without losing more. The best way to protect people is to avoid having accidents in the first place.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
It occurs to me that in a place as inherently dangerous as this mine, deep enough underground to be inaccessible and with occasional releases of methane almost inevitable, the correct way to mine it is to seal it, to inert the atmosphere in it, and to put the miners in hostile environment kit with full breathing apparatus. There is expense involved, but the ability of the mine to explode is then reduced massively and with a buddy system the miners should be able to stay safe.
Just a thought.
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Mixtures above the UEL should still register on the hot filament detectors although the readings may be lower than expected”.
Only if there is sufficient partial pressure of oxygen left to ignite the mixture. That,s why they are called explosimeters.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Kerry – yes, I agree with that. That is why a combination of sensors and having redundancy is needed.
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BJ – I had the same thoughts, but I suspect that the full breathing gear might make working in the mine a bit difficult and unpleasant. In addition, I would expect that the flammable gases would need to be extracted and the inert gases recycled to reduce the risks to the miners should they breath in any of the gases – particularly if there is carbon monoxide in the mix.
Of course the high-tech dream is to operate all the mining mchinery by remote control
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)