Search Documents

By C. Richard Tinsley

Investment activity in the Pacific Rim of Fire has seen a phenomenal surge from epithermal gold exploration. Individual countries are attractive because of lower up-front minerals lease costs (United States, Canada), better geological prospects (Chile, Indonesia), or cheaper equities (Australia). Since the October 1987 stock market crash, large companies are shedding minority joint venture interests to focus on core businesses. Some vertical integration is evident in Japanese coal investments in the Pacific Rim. This article does not cover the aluminum industry oligopoly, which is multinational in character. Nor does it cover the many Canada to US minerals investments. It will be interesting to see if the new US-Canadian free trade treaty will reverse that investment flow. Cross-border investments The following examples should dispel any doubts about the significance of cross-border investment in the Pacific Rim. BHP, Australia's largest public company, has invested $US 4.5 billion in the JS for the following transactions 1984 $2 billion Utah Minerals 1984 $500 million Energy Resources 1985 $745 million Monsanto Oil 1987 $400 million 50.7% Hamilton Oil 1989 $378 million Pacific Resources Placer Dome, mainly through 76% owned Placer Pacific, has the following gold mine developments in hand including the date the project began, Placer Dome's ownership, project name, its location, and capital expenditures: • 1985, 53.1 %, Kidston, Queensland, $A 139 million; • 1989, 37.9%, Big Bell, Western Australia, $A135 million; • 1989, 60.6%, Misima, Papua New Guinea, $C252 million; • 1990,45.5%, Granny Smith, Western Australia, $A95 million; • 1991, 50%, La Coipa, Chile, $US276 million; and • 1991, 25.3%, Porgera, Papua New Guinea, $C1.1 billion. Australia's Western Mining Corp. (WMC), through a foray of off-market acquisitions in late 1987, acquired con¬trol of five Canadian gold companies for a $A488-million outlay ($C452 million) as follows:

Jan 1, 1990

By Steven A. Elmquist

INTRODUCTION R&D activities are needed, at a minimum, for a company's competitive survival followed in importance by the growth and diversification of the company. For most industrial companies, however, R&D is the business area that has been the most difficult relative to confident long-range financial commitments and effective control and relative to its value as a long-term investment. Investors look not only at the current profitability of the company but increasingly at the plans, actions, and quality of the personnel in position to improve the market position and profitability of an organization. "The strongest predictor of investment value is the degree of innovation of the 'company.' I believe this is true of both strategic planning and R&D activities." R&D is the lifeblood of a company's future. If this basic premise-R&D for survival and growth-is believed to be true, why is it necessary to "Sell R&D in your organization? My personal experience, in a number of organizations, is that R&D budget is perceived as a business element area that could be delayed or reduced to improve the bottom line during difficult business conditions. I believe the following quote speaks volumes about this subject-"There is only one thing I know for certain about research, and that is it costs money-lots of it." -Unnamed, Hard- headed Financial Executive. A business must make money and be profitable in order to maintain and create jobs, pay taxes, cover working capital and costs of goods sold, and most importantly, create value for its shareholders. The foremost element of selling R&D, therefore, is to consistently demonstrate the R&D group's contribution to the bottom line.

Jan 1, 2004

By Chaitanya "Teny" Mittal

INTRODUCTION A team effort by the Owner, Engineer, and Contractor can help avoid serious problems on a construction project. It can save cost and time for both Owner and Contractor, as illustrated in the following case history of the West Zone and Siouf Keblia Collector System in Alexandria, Egypt (Contract 02-AID-83/84). Under the bilateral agreement made in 1980 between the United States of America and the Arab Republic of Egypt, the United States, through the Agency of International Development (USAID), gives approximately $1 billion per year as a grant to Egypt for various development projects. The Alexandria Wastewater Management System was selected in 1981 as one such project. The Egyptian Government Agency responsible for this work is the Alexandria General Organization for Sanitary Drainage (AGOSD). A joint venture of two U.S. consulting engineering firms, CH2M HILL, Inc., and Metcalf & Eddy, Inc., called Wastewater Consultants Group, along with two local subconsultants, Engineering Consulting Group and Warith Engineering Co., were selected by AGOSD to study the sewer system and develop a plan to serve the immediate and long-range sewage disposal needs of Alexandria. Wastewater Consultants Group is currently involved in Phase I of the Master Plan. This initial step in providing Alexandria with an operating sewerage system for the current and near-term population (year 2000) consists of the design and construction management of 140 kilometers of collector and force main pipelines (including 9 miles of pipe jacking and tunneling in very soft clay), five new pumping stations, extensive rehabilitation of two treatment plants (built in the 1960s but never operated successfully), and installation of a sludge handling system. Phase I is scheduled to be completed by the end of 1991 at a total cost of around $250 million (US) plus 250 million

Jan 1, 1989

By Frank F. Aplan

Introduction Gravity concentration may be defined as that process where particles of mixed sizes, shapes, and specific gravities are separated from each other by the force of gravity or by centrifugal force. The nature of the process is such that size and shape classification are an inherent part of the process in addition to separation on the basis of specific gravity from whence the process got its name. Mother nature has long practiced this form of mineral concentration by concentrating such heavy and relatively indestructible minerals as gold, platinum, cassiterite, ilmenite, zircon, and diamonds in placer or beach sand deposits. Once freed of their host granitic or other rock through natural weathering processes, these minerals are then subjected to stream or wave action producing a natural classification and concentration of the heavy minerals. Gravity concentration dates back to antiquity and was certainly the first ore concentration process used when selective mining and hand sorting would no longer suffice to produce the quality of concentrate desired. Forerunners of the present day sluice box and panning techniques were undoubtedly used by the ancient Egyptians on the upper Nile to separate gold from stream gravel. By the second century BC the extraction of gold from veins in quartz was well detailed by Agatharchides, but there is evidence that gold was brought into Egypt from the south as early as the XI1 Dynasty (~1900 BC).1 Most assuredly gravity concentration devices were used during the later Bronze Age to separate the heavier tin and copper minerals from their lighter gangue minerals. The Athenians used an elementary form of Rowing film concentration at their lead-silver mines at Laurium,2 and elementary jigging using wicker baskets was also probably developed at this time. Agricola's famous treatise De Re Metallica3 demonstrates that by the 16th century gravity concentration technology was well advanced and a large number of devices had been developed. Chinese

Jan 1, 1985

By S. M. Jarrett, W. B. Schmidt

Within the last year, the Nation has been shocked by two major tunneling disasters. Almost exactly a year ago 17 men died in the San Fernando Tunnel in an explosion attributed to gas. A few months later another 21 men died in an explosion laid to the same cause at Port Huron, Michigan. The analysis of the causes of these accidents is still continuing. While it appears that they differ substantially from each other in their specifics, they share the common trait that, like most industrial accidents, they might well have been prevented. Gas explosions in tunneling are neither new nor particularly unusual. Forty years ago, Assistant Director Jarrett was hired as a safety engineer on the Hetch Hetchy Aqueduct in California after an explosion that killed 12 men. Prior to 1946, in California alone, the Bureau of Mines had recorded 27 gas explosions incidental to hard rock mining and tunneling. The purpose of this paper is to review the status of the principal regulations affecting tunneling and to indicate some ways in which safer and more healthful conditions can be obtained. The Bureau of Mines was established by an Act of Congress of May 16, 1910. Since that time the Bureau has been making investigations and compiling and publishing health and safety data relating to mining and to tunneling. If any benefit is to come from an anaylsis of tunneling accidents, it must be the knowledge needed to prevent their repetition. The Bureau of Mines has also had informal discussions with the Department of Labor regarding the possibility of the Bureau's assuming that agency's responsibility for tunnel inspections.

Jan 1, 1997

By Joseph F. Shirley

Introduction Inorganic depressants are chemicals added to the froth flotation process to maintain or produce hydrophylic surfaces on one or more minerals so they will remain in the pulp rather than attach to the air bubbles. Whether a depressant will be effective in depressing a given mineral depends on how it is used and the environment in which it is used. Some depressants must be added and conditioned into the pulp before the collector is added. Other depressants can be added in the presence of previously added collectors and effectively depress the desired minerals. Often the concentration of depressant relative to the collector concentration is critical to making an economic separation. It should be noted that some depressants will only work when specific collectors have been used. Some reagents such as sulfuric acid and hydrogen peroxide essentially act as depressants by altering the previously added collectors so that they are no longer effective. Some depressants such as sodium ferrocyanide are only effective in a very limited pH range and an essentially collector free environment. Major Depressants CaO Milk of Lime is by far the most used depressant both in tonnage and dollar value. Although it is most commonly listed as a pH modifier, it is also an important depressant for pyrite in copper and copper molybdenite flotation plants. Although a simple pH adjustment will often depress pyrite, there are times when grinding with fresh milk of lime is required to obtain optimum depression. Lime is also a molybdenite and gold depressant. NaSH Sodium hydrosulfide is by far the most commonly used reagent to depress copper and iron sulfide minerals in by-product molybdenite flotation plants. NaSH also depresses gold, silver sulfides and silver chloride. ZnSO4 Zinc sulfate is commonly used to depress sphalerite in lead-zinc and copper-lead- zinc flotation plants. It has also been used to effectively depress talc in by-product molybdenite circuits at a pH of 6.5.

Jan 1, 1986

By Tim Neil, O&apos

Copper price rebounds A worldwide scramble for diminishing supplies of copper has pushed the red metal's price to more than $2.20/kg ($1 per lb), the highest level since 1980. The first nine months of 1987, world copper production was down 1% from a year ago, while consumption rose 7%. Demand has been fueled by economic strength in several countries, particularly Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan. The price has also been helped by interest rate declines that have prompted manufacturers to build up inventories. In addition, China is expected to be a major buyer in 1988 as it stocks up for its five-year industrialization plan. There appears to be no sign of any significant increase in copper supplies until later 1988 or early 1989. This means supplies probably will remain tight for some time even if world economic activity slows. Strikes and other production problems slowed world output of copper in 1987. As a result, copper supplies are the lowest they have been in 14 years. World inventories currently total 625 kt (690,000 st). That is not much above the 585 kt (645,000 st) level reached in 1974 when the price of copper rose to a record $3.84/kg ($1.74 per lb). This makes all the more interesting what Chile, the world's largest copper producer, has been doing lately. Chile has been the world's largest copper producer since 1982, when it overtook the United States. Table 1 shows Chile's copper grades, reserves, and production at its mines. Chile contains roughly one-fifth of the world's copper reserves. At present production rates, these reserves would last for more than 100 years. In 1986, Chile produced 1.4 Mt (1.5 million st) of fine copper, up 3%. Chile accounted for 17% of the world's copper output.

Jan 1, 1988

The Mining Foundation of the Southwest will hold its 15th annual American Mining Hall of Fame Awards banquet on Saturday, Dec. 6,1997 in Tucson, AZ, preceeding the Arizona Conference of SME. The Mining Foundation's Hall of Fame, located in Tucson, recognizes outstanding contributions to the mining industry by individuals and industry partners. A permanent display of honoree vitae is located at the Arizona Historical Society at 949 E. Second St. in Tucson. Each year, one living award recipient and up to two honorees from mining history are chosen by the Hall of Fame committee and the board of governors of the Mining Foundation. In 1989, the Mining Foundation also initiated a Medal of Merit to recognize outstanding individual technical and professional contributions to the mineral industry. And in 1995, an award was instituted to recognize contributions made by companies and organizations in partnership with the mining industry. This year's inductee is James R. Moffett, chairman and chief executive officer of Freeport-McMoRan Copper and Gold Inc. He will be present as guest of honor and featured speaker. The Hall of Fame will induct John V. Dorr, metallurgist and chemical engineer. Also inducted will be Frederick L. Ransome, a geologist. Medals of Merit will be awarded to Hugo T. Dummett, senior vice president, Exploration BHP Minerals, and Spencer R. Titley, professor in the Department of Geosciences at the University of Arizona. An Industry Partnership Award will be presented to the Colorado School of Mines for its continued support to the mining industry through education and research. The banquet will be held at the The Westin LaPaloma in Tucson beginning with cocktails at 6:30 p.m. Tickets are available from Clare A. Roscoe, manager, Mining Foundation of the Southwest, telephone 520-577-7519, fax 520-577-7073.

Jan 1, 1997

By M. E. Poad

The Research and development review arrived too late to appear in the May issue. The competitiveness of the US mining industry in a world market depends on many factors. The introduction of new and innovative methods, though, can have a significant, long-term impact. As industry cuts back its own long- term research and development efforts, the federal government continues to provide the major support for mining and minerals research. The US Bureau of Mines works with the mining industry and the academic community to develop innovative concepts for the mining and processing of non-fuel minerals. The Bureau’s research focuses on exploration and mining technology, minerals and materials science, processing technology, health and safety and environmental technology. Mine design A conical caving system, being designed by the Bureau, would allow the development of low-grade ore bodies, early startup at lower initial capital costs and increased safety and versatility in development and production. This method is a form of mass caving that allows the ore to be drawn from a central loading point at the bottom of the cone- shaped caving zone (Fig. 1). A simulation laboratory model and computer analysis show initial promise for predicted performance. For tabular, flat-lying ore deposits, the Bureau is investigating a version of the Finnish slot-and-fill system. For this total extraction method, a pattern of rectangular panels is laid out. One panel is extracted in a series of parallel slots and is replaced by alternating-row pillars of backfill. After one panel is mined, equipment and operations are transferred to another panel. By transforming this rectangular layout to a curvilinear geometry, one continuous spiral can be mined without re positioning equipment. Instead of parallel slots and pillars aligned in a rectangle, the slots and pillars are arranged in a spiral.

Jan 1, 1992

By G. Johnston, P. K. Chatterjee, S. Holguin

M. Gershon The article is an excellent one, providing a basis for the conduct of the major tasks in underground mine planning and scheduling. I object to only one word. Since that word is featured in the title, it is a strong objection. The word used erroneously is optimization. There is no optimization performed in the article. By definition, an optimization is an approach that yields the best of all possible solutions. We can limit this definition to its narrowest sense, the optimization techniques of operations research such as linear programming, or broaden it to include less sophisticated search procedures that find the best mine plan or schedule. No such claim is made in the article. No optimization of any kind is performed. The major tool used is a simulation, which, in truth, is probably more appropriate for this problem than any optimization. But simulation does not optimize. It only allows for quick evaluation of many options, leading to the selection of the best plan "of those tried," not "of all possible plans." This article, of course, is not the first mining paper to make this error. It seems that the word optimization is used more to impress people than to refer to any act of optimizing. It is used in a way that implies "try to optimize"or "come close to optimize," but not to really do it. It is usually appropriate to quietly ignore this error. But when Dr. Chatterjee, who has done so much good work in true optimization projects and whose work I have come to admire, makes such an error, it is time to publicly dispute it. Having discussed this very point with him in the past, I am sure that he will agree. If he can support this position in his response, perhaps people will start to listen and we can reduce the number of false claims of optimization. This should be easy for him in this case since the approach he used, simulation, is the more appropriate one anyway.

Jan 8, 1988

By John M. Ackerman

In the spring of 1988, Freeport-McMoRan Resource Partners Ltd. Partnership, IMC Fertilizer Inc. and Homestake Mining Co., as joint venturers, were awarded the sulphur lease for Main Pass Block 299, lease number OCS-G 91372. This was one of 11 leases awarded to the joint venturers. Following the initial discovery wells in December 1988, delineation drilling confirmed proven sulphur reserves of 68 Mt (67 million long tons). Proven, recoverable oil and gas reserves are 6.2 Mm3 (39.4 million bbl) and 1114 Mm3 (7.2 billion cu ft), respectively. Development of the sulphur mine was given approval as a fast-track project in 1989. The oil and gas reserves were acquired from the original hydrocarbon lessee in 1990 and were also given fast-track status. Fast-track for these projects meant design and engineering would not be complete before construction began. Joint venture The Main Pass Joint Venture is one of 13 joint ventures formed between Freeport and three other companies - IMC Fertilizer, Inc., Felmont Oil Corp., a wholly owned subsidiary of Homestake Mining Co., and Texasgulf Minerals and Metals Co. Felmont has since changed its name to Homestake Sulphur Co. Texasgulf assigned its interests to its parent company. Texasgulf did not participate in the Main Pass 299 joint venture. Joint venture negotiations, anticipating a lease sale in mid-1988, began in December of 1987. This joint venture, the first of its kind, was created to acquire offshore leases, explore, develop and mine sulphur. The Interior Department's Minerals Management Service (MMS) announced a lease sale date of Feb. 24, 1988 on the first business day of 1988. This greatly accelerated the joint venture negotiations. Of the 13 leases the joint ventures bid on, 11 were awarded. Freeport holds its interest in all the leases through its ownership interest in Freeport-McMoRan Resource Partners, Ltd. Partnership. Resource Partners is the operator on all of the leases.

Jan 1, 1992

By Peter A. Gillett, Ian S. Clelland, J. G. S. Hynd

Today mine shaft and slope contracts include a greater amount of ancillary work such as level and pump stations, loading pockets, rotary and side dumps and connecting raises. This ancillary work requires the application of a number of construction methods often for short periods and often at short notice if the contractor is to maintain a profitable operation. In the next decade, the number of shafts that will be sunk by a boring method will outnumber those sunk by traditional methods. This will be particularly true of the deeper shafts where water problems are minimal. The increase of bored shaft work will not decrease the work completed by the shaft sinking contractor but it will change it. A greater emphasis will be placed on the speed of construction of station and other ancillary work. To meet this challenge the contractor requires full information on the ancillary work as well as the shaft work at an early date, preferably pre-bid. The two examples discussed in this paper illustrate the importance of early information. The two main factors of shaft ancillary work construction are sequence and ground support. This paper describes two examples completed recently by The Cementation Company of America Incorporated in Arizona. The first described is a Rotary Dump-Ore Pocket-Ore Pass complex and the second described is the excavation of the Main Station Level in a 2 Station-Loading Pocket-Ore Pass complex. CONSTRUCTION OF ROTARY DUMP, ORE POCKET AND PASS Introductory

Jan 1, 1976

By H. Lyn Bourne

The is the 14th consecutive year for this column and the 13th in which the royalty data have been tabulated. Some holes still exist in the list of royalties that readers hopefully will fill. Construction aggregates - either sand and gravel or crushed stone - are the most common mineral commodity. In spite of their pervasive use nationwide, royalty information for these commodities has been difficult to acquire from some states. Readers can help. Share information about these missing states and next year there will be fewer states without information. Dennis Bryan sent a copy of a report, "Regional Appraisal of Mineral Materials: Carson City District, BLM." The report was authored by real-estate appraisers. It contains more than 50 references to leases of various construction materials in Nevada and nearby states. It gives a thumbnail sketch of each lease and is a good reference. However, the authors erroneously imply that the royalty rate and the in-place value are the same. Several of this year's new entries come from the report. However, the royalties for landscaping materials vary from state to state and by rock type. Some boulders used for landscaping in Nevada have a royalty reported at $1.10/t ($1/st). At the other extreme is lava from Idaho. Used for the same purpose, it has a royalty range of $11 to $18.70/t ($10 to $17/st). Chuanming Tian of Beijing, China has shared some information about the changing mineral royalty policies in China. China first implemented an oil and gas royalty in 1984. In 1992, the government expanded that to include iron ore. In 1994, the royalty policy was extended to all mineral commodities. At the same time, the royalty rate for iron ore increased tenfold.

Jan 1, 1995

By Eugene A. Lang, William R. Archibald

Early in 1972, Rocky Mountain Energy Company approached MARCONAFLO with a unique request for assistance. They controlled a series of scattered ore deposits in a remote section of Wyoming which had become increasingly valuable despite their relatively small size, great depth and low grade. At the time, MARCONAFLO was in the process of developing a tailings reclaim system which was based on the use of submersible capsules. It appeared that this basic concept might be adapted to slurry uranium ores and pump them to the surface through a bored hole. This presentation will review for you the development of this unique and potentially very important application of MARCONAFLO technology. This first slide (SLIDE 1) depicts the total mining concept envisioned by MARCONAFLO and Rocky Mountain Energy Company. A series of six self-contained mining units would be positioned through boreholes into the ore strata. An oscillating MARCONAJET would direct a high pressure jet stream into the orebody and put it into a slurry which would flow back to a slurry pump. The slurry would then be pumped to the surface and to a collection tank from which it would be transferred to processing. Both the MARCONAJET and the slurry pump would be actuated and controlled by means of a hydraulic power console mounted on the trailer behind the service tower. By means of a high pressure water pump also mounted on the trailer, return water from processing would be delivered to the MARCONAJET to slurry the ore. Tailings would be returned to a backfill unit for redepositing in the mined-out cavities. A drill rig would precede the mining, and it was estimated that this configuration would represent an optimum system for most effective equipment utilization.

Jan 1, 1976

By E. Turner

This is the 3rd Paper in a series by this author, the first two being published at the two previous International Conferences. Since the Aachen Conference, Rio Tinto has carried out an extensive benchmarking exercise to see how we are positioned with respect to other leading companies (in our sector and other sectors of major economic importance). We need to be sure that Rio Tinto is at the forefront of best practises in Sustainable Development (SD) and is using the most effective tools and methods. This paper will present key findings from this work. Rio Tinto Minerals, working as representatives of IMA-Europe was a leading contributor to the European Commission DG Enterprise Voluntary Reporting Scheme for SD Indicators in the Non-Energy Extractive Industry. In Rio Tinto Minerals we have been using these SDIs in the management of our business and the paper will report on how they contribute to the management of our business and the paper will report on how they contribute to business value in: deepening customer relationships, eco-efficiency of operations, land use planning and permitting for new and expanding facilities, community relations, policy engagement with government authorities and strengthening the bond between the company and employees. We continue to support the Voluntary SDI Reporting Scheme, considering it to be important in the expanding EU and as a model for other regions globally. For example we have ore suppliers in developing countries and we use these SDIs in assisting them to better their performance, for we have an obligation to use our influence for continuous improvement. The paper will describe this work. Over the last 12 months our company has created a new Industrial Minerals unit called Rio Tinto Minerals which brings together all the borates, talc and salt operations, R&D, marketing, sales and customer care worldwide. The paper will present also the new Sustainability Policy of Rio Tinto Minerals.

Jan 1, 2007

By Jonathan M. Pachter

Introduction The Bailey mining complex is located in Greene County, PA, in the Talley Run valley. It includes two Pittsburgh No. 8 seam deep mines (Bailey and Bailey No. 2), a coal preparation plant, and two refuse areas. Clean coal is shipped from the complex by way of a 24-km (15-mile) rail spur. It con¬nects to the Monongahela Railroad in Waynesburg, PA. In early 1981, Consolidation Coal Co. (Consol) began a permitting effort aimed at building the mine. Construction began in Dec. 1981, less than six months after the first application submittal. Clean coal was produced by the Bailey preparation plant in Sept. 1984. Several factors allowed quick permitting at Bailey. Effective project planning, including early formulation of a project planning team, and identification of red flag issues helped. So did innovative responses to environmental questions, and development of environmentally sound project designs. Forming a project planning team Consol management decided that Bailey mine construction had to begin in late 1981. A project permitting team was immediately formed to see that this goal was achieved. Team members included a project manager and personnel from Consol's engineering, environmental, and operating departments. Communications among all team members was crucial in obtaining the various state and Federal environmental permits. All project permitting team members participated in weekly meetings during application preparation. Discussions at these meetings ranged from recent public contacts, to application content, to environmental design considerations. Establishing a project manager was critical to the team's success. The project manager was responsible for seeing that permit acquisition, facility construction, and operation of the mining complex proceeded on schedule. The project manager had the final word, mediated disagreements, and frequently served as project spokesman to the public. Identifying red flag issues Red flag issues are those environmental factors with the most potential for delaying the schedule or stopping the project. The first red flag issue identified was organized local opposition. This opposition had completely derailed a US Soil Conservation Service proposal to build a multipurpose dam on Enlow Fork, a short distance

Jan 9, 1985

By Sol Ribakoff

With the utilization of most of the "high dam" sites for hydro-electric power and the completion of most railroad routes, many tunnel contractors were extremely doubtful that tunnel driving would continue to be an important element of heavy contracting. Experience has proved otherwise. The ever-increasing need for rapid transit and for pollution control have generated, and will continue for the indefinite future to generate, a very high level of tunneling activity. At the same time, the costs of construction have traveled an upward curve in the tunnel industry, as in all other types of construction. As a result, Owners, Engineers and Contractors have sought ways and means of constructing more economically through the development and use of labor-saving devices and techniques. The development of mining machines and lasers has contributed tremendously to such economy. Before giving you a contractor's viewpoint on Owner-Engineer-Contractor relationships in tunneling, it may be well to provide some background as to matters which give rise to that viewpoint. Construction contractors in general, and tunnel contractors in particular, have always had to contend with the physical environment in which the work has to be accomplished. However, when a building contractor has constructed his foundation, and certainly after he has "closed in", he deals thereafter with known physical conditions, or at least with conditions which he could reasonably have estimated would occur. Except, perhaps, for the hazard as to earthquakes, he has cleared Nature's threats. A tunnel contractor, however, must give thought to what the physical environment may do to his job, each and every day that he is driving a tunnel. The general consensus among tunnel men is that Mother Nature is much more likely to be murderous than motherly. Without attempting to make too much of

Jan 1, 1997

By V. E. Suter

Anyone with geothermal experience can readily attest that geothermal operations are a natural extension of oil and gas operations. A geothermal company and an oil company need the same type of people to do the same kind of work. In the geothermal industry, geologists and geophysicists define prospects through surface geology, analysis of surface seeps, magnetics, gravity, and resistivity surveys - techniques similar to those used in the petroleum industry. In addition, shallow (250-ft) temperature gradient holes often are used in geothermal operations. Landmen take geothermal leases that are patterned after oil and gas leases. Exploratory drilling is done with the same drilling contractors and same drilling rigs, with minor modification. Drilling foremen and drilling engineers share the same objective of making the most hole, in the shortest time, at the least cost, with a proper completion. Petroleum engineers test the wells, design the completions, determine the reserves, make economic calculations, work with the tax assessor, and manage the reservoirs. Production engineers build roads, locations and pipelines, install gas/liquid separators and meters, and operate production and injection facilities. A contract to sell steam to a public utility is required. Various governmental regulations, permits, environmental concerns, and public affairs pose similar problems in both industries. Also required of both are top management people who are acquainted with geologic risk, prepared to accept million dollar dry holes, willing to bid competitively at lease sales, and able to invest large sums based on a technology not yet fully proven. Successful geothermal development requires in-depth financial ability similar to that required for petroleum development. A high capital investment is required early for leases, geological and geophysical work, and exploratory and confirmation drilling. After

Jan 9, 1980

By S. S. Churchill

Introduction Amidst the apparent chaos of the final push to complete a major construction project, a small group of specialists works with great intensity. Armed with yellow "in test" and green "turned over to operations" tags, these startup engineers follow detailed preoperational test procedures to confirm that a plant is ready to operate. They follow a test schedule designed to complete individual process system in the order they will be needed by operations. After extensive preliminary testing, the startup engineers begin the truly exciting part of their work - initial operations. The thrill of engaging the clutch for the first time on a 10,000 horsepower grinding mill makes all the long hours worthwhile. Preoperational testing and startup are of critical importance to the success of a project. No other aspect of a construction project allows such opportunities for success or failure, and no other aspect is so critically influenced by careful planning. At Bechtel, the tasks of preoperational testing and startup are among the responsibilities of the Mine and Plant Operations group. The Preoperational Testing Process Preoperational testing is the transition phase between constructon and startup on a new plant. It includes the preparation of detailed test schedules and procedures. The schedules are used to coordinate construction completion activities, so that systems are available for startup and operations in a rational sequence. The procedures form the basis for performing the testing and documenting its completion. Tests include instrument calibration, wire insulation tests, wire termination verification, mechanical alignments and inspections, and system cleaning and flushing. Where possible, the systems are then operated on water and their performance recorded. Normally, either the construction contractor or a team of specialists has the responsibility to perform preoperational testing. Witnesses to the testing may be owner operations and maintenance personnel, engineers from the design firm, or specialists assigned to the project who provide assistance and guidance to the contractor in addition to witnesing the work.

Jan 1, 1986

By Ronald J. Vance

One of the key elements of change in the mining industry has been the ever-increasing integration and coordination of previously highly segregated business disciplines, the extent to which the marketing and finance functions have evolved and merged within the mining industry. If one listens to the language of mine product marketers today, one hears terms like contango, backwardation, forwards, options, min/max, synthetics, swaptions, caps, collars, FRA's, spot deferreds, double bottom, head and shoulders. The list is endless and a glossary may be out-of-date even before the ink is dry. No longer can a marketer of mine products get through the day and, more importantly, keep his or her job merely by reciting statistics on supply, demand, prices and the jargon of quotational periods, delivery and payment terms. Walk into the office of any marketing department today, and computer terminals spewing on-line market prices and instantaneous news retrieval command the attention of all who enter. Traditionally, mining companies, particularly those in North America, took a passive view toward marketing their products and an even more passive view toward management of price risk. The typical, albeit simplified, gold producer of the 1970s and early 1980s spent all of its energy exploring, delineating, developing and producing a product that was placed by the mine gate. Like magic, anonymous buyers took it away and left piles of dollars in its place. No fuss, no muss and nothing to get in the way of more exploring, delineating, producing etc. The typical copper producer, meanwhile, was slightly more creative. Copper producers still spent most of their energy exploring, producing etc., but they at least acknowledged the identity of their customers. Many even went so far as to fabricate finished mine products into shapes and sizes that their ultimate customer needed. Wire, cable, sheet and extrusions were all in forms ready to be purchased by power companies, motor manufacturers and telephone companies. But, while production and costs steadily increased, research and development into new expanding markets was funded by little more than lip service. Competitors and competitive products steadily eroded market share and realized prices. The now-famous Business Week magazine cover that proclaimed "The Death of Mining" was an imminent reality.

Jan 1, 1993