A brief article in today's Times is emphasising the 'high'accident rate this mine has.
Apparently, miners have to take a fair time off work to recover, and this is having a detrimental effect on production.
Which the new CEO states is just about enough to break even.
He apparently is looking at ways of lowering costs!
Does not sound good, and what about the knock on effect on the possible new Potash mine over there?

Considering they completely replaced the headgear last year, I doubt they will be in any immediate hurry to shut up shop.

Or the CEO could be trying to limit the amount of 'rest and recuperation' he has to pay for.

Chris.

I always understood about to have an excellent safety record?

---

Apparently 12 breaches of HSE since 2012.

I imagine that most of them are down to personal choice, rather than the company neglecting health and safety.

---

I imagine that most of them are down to personal choice, rather than the company neglecting health and safety.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boulby_Mine 
http://www.hse.gov.uk/notices/notices/Notice_details.asp?SV=305162705 
http://www.hse.gov.uk/notices/notices/Notice_details.asp?SV=305836071 

You tell me.

At the end of the day, we are ultimately responsible for our own safety. A company can only put in place so many things to prevent accident. You also cannot prevent things that you know nothing about, people should report anything that seems slightly off. You can lead a horse to water etc.

Thankfully we have laws that say we can refuse to work if we do not feel safe. I have just always felt companies are not always 100% at fault in these things.

---

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boulby_Mine 
http://www.hse.gov.uk/notices/notices/Notice_details.asp?SV=305162705 
http://www.hse.gov.uk/notices/notices/Notice_details.asp?SV=305836071 

You tell me.

A dozen notices, 10 breaches, no prosecutions.

Checking my own employer.
17 prosecutions and well over a million quid in fines......

I could`nt find the Times article John mentioned,but found the above links in my search,and wondered if these were applyable to the Times article.

Mining is a high risk activity, Boulby especially so. In their first 20 years of operation they were up to an average of nearly 2 people dying a year. It has improved a lot since then.

Many of the risks are inherent with limited ability to manage out: -

1. Heat and Dehydration
2. Large amount of plant and vehicles operating
3. Dust
4. Air Lock doors
5. Heavy lifting
6. Rockburts

And the list goes on. Ultimately its one of the reasons why it is so well paid.

If those 2 death a year correspond to an average employment of 1000, then that rate is pretty much the same as 19th century mining. The nature of modern mining of this sort probably produces much more inherent risk which it would appear has cancelled out the effect of improvements in h&s practices.

I would assume the record has improved since 1999 (When I was there), one of teh biggest problems Boulby had was face explosions caused by gas pockets in some of the "Dirty Ore" areas, if a teleminer hit one of these it could be thrown back 30m plus. Which is dangerous in itself without the sudden release of methane. This has been managed out by the use of radio controlled continuous miners and the requirement for miners in the Potash wear oxygen self rescuers as well as the MSA self rescuers - contrary to popular belief the MSA self rescuers DO NOT create Oxygen - the convert Carbon Monoxide (Harmful) to Carbon Dioxide (Harmless).

What else is notable from seeing recent pictures is there is a requirement to wear Orange High Vis clothing - this was not the case in 1999 where the issued clothing was dark Green!

The biggest risk factor though was the heat and exhaustion, it is hard to see how this can be sensibly managed at Boulby, particularly in the North, under the North Sea - you can 't put in additional vent shafts. Basically the air travels down the downcast shaft - it can be around 25 degrees c at the pit bottom (Purely what the vent air has picked up from friction and heat transfer from the shaft sides), it then travels around 9Km to the furthest point of the mine, picking up heat all the way from the rock and equipment, before returning 9kM picking up even more heat!

Mining is a high risk activity, Boulby especially so. In their first 20 years of operation they were up to an average of nearly 2 people dying a year....

40 deaths in 20 years? I don't believe you.

That was the figure I was quoted in 1999 when I was there from the then training manager. At that point they hadnt had a death in the preceding two years. The last death at that point was a guy dying of heat exhaustion. From what I could figure the majority of fatal accidents had been in the 1970's and early 80's. Which would tie up with general inexperience of the rock type, the depth and conditions. Ultimately the learning curve was learning from experience.

As said on one of the coal mining forums.

"The training manual was written in blood"

Its very true that. I would imagine one of Boulby's biggest problems in one respect in its early days is they were following the NCB book so to speak. The mine was set up on very much the same setup as a Coal mine, using NCB trained staff and NCB rules. The two definitely have similarities, however Boulby definitely has peculiarities that are unique in this country.

Are they doing long wall and collapse or pillar style?

They put roadways in the salt, then open up panels (like a room) in the potash above. They empty a panel, then permit it to collapse. So a bit like pillar and stall, but where the stalls collapse very quickly after being mined out.

If I recall correctly.

Chris.

Do they support the whole room up with hydraulics, or just assume the room is self supporting for the duration? I suppose I could google this, but I think some people have had a look around.

Cheers, Robin