Mine Disaster in West Virginia 1-2-2006

[Dis]

CO doesn't kill that fast. I would think the rescuers brought down oxygen tanks for them to breath.

[Richelieu]

Originally posted by Chemical Ollie
I don't know what really happened, but if you read between the lines you can imagine the rescuers found the miners alive behind the CO barrier they had built. Then they took town the barrier to get them out, and the CO sipped in and killed them.

[JohnT]

****, people. Mining is dangerous work, always have been, always will. Of course there are "safety violations" - it's an unsafe job!

What we had here is simple: a person heard what they wanted to hear and immediately spread their mis-information to people whom also wanted so desperately to hear the same good news. It happens all the time, but in this instance was in regards to tragic circumstances.

Nobody needs to be ****ing investigated for not "controlling" a goddamn rumor mill.

And, of course, there are multiple stories as to what happened, but I'm quite positive that many of them will be slowly shaped into a telling of who ****ed up where, why, and how much they should be sued for.

"Oh, no! The CEO himself said that he was going to go down and bring them back! He didn't! He lied!"

Yeah. That was it. Assuming it actually occurred, it was probably more like an exhausted, worried, possibly depressed man muttering something affirmative, as much to bolster his spirits as much as anybody elses. But he's a lawsuit target with deep pockets, possibly our ticket out of Hootin' Holler, so better not give him the benefit of the doubt.

The cravenness of some people makes me sick. Some of those folk remind me of Hilary S****s relatives in Million Dollar Baby - the author (and director) nailed them cold.

[Arrian]

I agree mining is by its very nature a dangerous job. However, violations of regulations designed to make it less dangerous are not just something one ignores. The thing is, those violations could have been dealt with prior to this accident. Getting a violation in 2000 for X does not mean that you are still violating X in 2006. If that *is* the case, that's bad (and it also speaks to poor regulation by the gummint).

The rest of it - the misinformation issue - is bull****. It's unfortunate, but surely an honest mistake by someone who meant well.

But if the accident was caused by a violation of a safety regulation, there is a legitimate gripe here. I don't know if that's the case or not... time will tell.

-Arrian

[Winston]

I'm every bit as distraught about this news as the rest of you. It was a terrible thing to happen, and very heartbreaking the way the families were.. 'informed'.

...

But aside from that, the somewhat cynical side of me starts to wonder about the amount of attention and sympathy this latest tragedy has received from around the world. It's been widely reported on in the media here, and I would suppose it has been much the same in most 'Western' countries (outside the USA, obviously).

Now compare with the 2½ line reports (at best) on mining disasters in China, much more frequent, on a much larger scale - and consequently affecting many more people directly, both emotionally and economically. And our indifference here in the West toward these accidents, when we actually happen to register that they've occured.

How many Chinese miners' lives is a West Virginian miner's life worth in terms of our empathy and concern? A thousand? Fifty thousand?



Sorry if it would seem insensitive to some of you to bring this up; this is not my intention.

[Arrian]

Winston,

Look at how much attention was paid to the "story" of one missing American girl in the Carribean. Maybe your media didn't go nuts on it, but ours sure did.

Our news media has been like that so long as I can remember thinking about it (which, admittedly, only stretches back into the 1980s).

-Arrian

[JohnT]

Originally posted by Arrian
I agree mining is by its very nature a dangerous job. However, violations of regulations designed to make it less dangerous are not just something one ignores. The thing is, those violations could have been dealt with prior to this accident. Getting a violation in 2000 for X does not mean that you are still violating X in 2006. If that *is* the case, that's bad (and it also speaks to poor regulation by the gummint).

However, there have been few reports of violations - most reports I have read mentioned static electricty in the air, possibly remnants of three lightning-strikes that occurred in the area within 30 minutes prior to the explosion.

Secondly, given the at-times contentious nature of the relationship of all parties involved (regulators, company, workers, union, etc) the truly shocking revelation would be that no violations were ever reported.

[Winston]

Arrian,

No, I'm specifically not thinking of the American media in this instance. It is obvious to me that it is an important story domestically, in the USA as it would be in the Czech Republic if it happened there.

It's how things like this affects us all on some level, compared to how we just shrug at Chinese disasters on a much greater scale. (Half the time; the other half we don't even notice). We know it's going on very frequently in China, but we just can't seem to be bothered to raise an eyebrow. That's what's bugging me.

And your parallel to the missing girl in the Carribean is off. It hardly got any mention here over the course of the many months when it was big news in the USA. Couple of tabloids might have covered it a little, but it wasn't prominent news to us like it was to you.

[Arrian]

Perhaps because people kinda expect lotsa Chinese miners to die? The U.S., otoh, is a developed country where things are supposedly safer/better.

-Arrian

[JohnT]

And they are. But "safer" doesn't equal "perfectly safe".

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Winston
It's how things like this affects us all on some level, compared to how we just shrug at Chinese disasters on a much greater scale. (Half the time; the other half we don't even notice). We know it's going on very frequently in China, but we just can't seem to be bothered to raise an eyebrow. That's what's bugging me.

a) We (as in the First World) are richer than the Chinese, and can thus afford to operate more safely, even if that costs us a bit in the way of efficiency

b) Our governments are better than the Chinese government. They are democratic, and are thus more directly connected to the wishes and feelings of the general public.

The Chinese government has problems that go far beyond that of their atrocious mining safety record (though they are actually reacting to that; note the headline news coming out of Beijing today). Maybe we can start to worry about 5000 annual deaths in the mining industry in China once they stop brutal oppression of political dissent, freedom of expression, freedom of religion etc. etc.

[Arrian]

Originally posted by JohnT
And they are. But "safer" doesn't equal "perfectly safe".

Totally agree. I'm talking perception, not reality.

-Arrian

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by JohnT
And they are. But "safer" doesn't equal "perfectly safe".

No. But I think that after every disaster of this scale that we should see a full investigation of the circumstances that led up to the accident, as well as the rescue attempt and the leaking of partial information. It shouldn't have taken them hours to confirm the living/dead status of at least most of the miners and release that information to the families.

I'm not looking for a witch hunt; mining is certainly a dangerous business, and some accidents are not avoidable even with perfect adherence to safety standards. On the other hand, some accidents are. It's the latter I'm concerned with eliminating.

[Winston]

Originally posted by Arrian
Perhaps because people kinda expect lotsa Chinese miners to die? The U.S., otoh, is a developed country where things are supposedly safer/better.

Could be, but that explanation only deals with the 'rational' side of it, not the 'emotional' one, I think.

Another example of this is airline disasters. A major South American, Chinese, West African etc. disaster claiming hundreds of lives is not very newsworthy across the globe.

But when an airliner makes an emergency landing in, say, Toronto, or skids off the runway in, say, Milan, everybody's up in roars about it for days. And those are the (hypothetical) incidents that don't take a single human life away.

I don't know, it just seems strange the way we prioritize our news of some occurances - and their subsequent emotional impact we allow on ourselves.

But this is getting off topic, it hasn't got much to do with the WV accident. Just something I noticed in my own reaction, and possibly in that of others too.

[Arrian]

Here's a pretty good article on the safety violations issue (CS Monitor):

Nearly half of the 208 safety citations levied in 2005 against the Sago coal mine where 12 men died this week were "serious and substantial."

Federal inspectors found 20 dangerous roof-falls, 14 power wire insulation problems, and three cases of inadequate ventilation plans, among the 96 major violations.

Sago's "S&S" violations, which rose fourfold in 2005 over 2004, form a pattern that worries safety experts, who say it raises serious questions about mine management - and the efficacy of government inspections.

Despite major safety strides in recent decades, mining remains one of the nation's most dangerous jobs. And it's not unusual for mines to be cited for violations of the 1977 Mine Safety Act. But Sago's record, some say, should have raised red flags.

"If you have a widespread practice of S&S violations over an extended period of time like we have here, it suggests that you've got much more serious problems than just paperwork violations," says J. Davitt McAteer, a former official in the Mine Safety and Health Administration.

During the last quarter of 2005, for instance, federal inspectors at Sago cited or ordered the company to fix 50 safety violations - 19 of them serious and substantial. As a result, the company was fined $24,374 last year. It also recorded 39 accidents in 2005, 16 with injuries requiring days away from work.

Inspectors also noted lesser violations such as electrical equipment maintenance, accumulations of coal dust, inadequate fresh air ventilation of the coal-face, and too few methane monitors. (It is still not known what caused the explosion that trapped and killed the miners.)

Taken separately, the number of violations and the variety of issues involved are not particularly troubling, says Mr. Mc-Ateer. Indeed, accumulations of coal dust and electrical and ventilation problems are not unusual in coal mines. But taken "as a package," three issues stick out about the violations, McAteer says:

• The number is on the high side for a coal mine of that size.

• A high proportion are substantial.

• The 2005 total was more than triple the 68 tallied in 2004.

Despite this record, the entire mine was never ordered closed for a safety overhaul.

"I've seen other mines with as many or nearly as many violations," McAteer says. "But these are substantial ventilation, roof control, and emergency escape violations. If you look at the direction [Sago is] going, you see both federal and state numbers increasing."

International Coal Group, a private company based in Ashland, Ky., bought the Sago mine from Anker West Virginia Mining Company last year. An ICG spokesperson reserved comment for company officials who were unavailable at press time. But on Monday - before news came that the miners had died - an ICG vice president told reporters that the company had recorded an 80 percent improvement in safety from earlier in the year. "We think we're operating a safe mine."

Although federal inspectors have the legal right to close a mine for safety reasons - and often do close sections - it can be difficult to close a mine outright. Courts have been reluctant to support such actions by the government, even when there are a large number of violations, McAteer says.

Calls Wednesday to MSHA's Washington headquarters seeking comment on the significance of the Sago mine violations went unreturned. On Wednesday, government officials began an investigation.

"The purpose of MSHA's investigation is to determine what caused the explosion and whether any safety and health standards were violated," said David Dye, MSHA's acting assistant secretary. "Then we can take effective action to prevent such tragedies in the future."

But it will take a lot of investigating to satisfy residents and miners in the area. Several said there had been doubts about the mine's safety long before the explosion.

Joe McGowan, a longtime Buckhannon, W.Va., resident who's worked coal mines, oil and gas fields, and timber jobs in the past, says he spoke with his friend Junior Hamner, who died in the explosion, just two weeks ago about the dangers. "He said it's nothing but a walking time bomb," says Mr. McGowan, in a measured drawl. "He told me, 'They're going to kill us all.' "

McGowan, like many former miners in these parts, is skeptical of the safety record of "scab," or nonunion mines, where employees have less recourse to complain about oversights. The Sago Mine, he says, was notorious for its large buildups of methane, one reason the mine had changed hands frequently in the past and a previous mine at the site had been abandoned.

The high incidence of injuries and the large number of safety violations worried him too. "The companies don't want to spend the money on safety."

Working in the mines, one of the few ways to make a good living in West Virginia, is inherently dangerous, McGowan notes. "But there's something about coal miners, they have no fear. These people have four or five generations of mining. They know the business and then they go back in."

It doesn't exactly settle anything. Lotsa violations, with quite a few "serious and substantial" but it's also noted that the number isn't hugely out of the norm (which raises some questions in my mind about how serious the government is in enforcing the rules. $25k in fines for all those violations?? That's a pittance!).

-Arrian