|
|
Post by scotsgit on Jul 31, 2011 5:26:11 GMT -5
Short version: Because mining is fucking dangerous. Longer answer: Mining is fucking dangerous for a number of reasons. You're dealing with explosives (no need to elaborate on how that presents danger), you're often underground, which means cave-ins are always a possibility, regardless of what you do to reduce how likely they are to occur. A ton of mining happens in places with relatively lax regulations or poorly enforced regulations, which means that a lot of the time the people running the show just go "Eh, fuck it. This is too expensive." Individual employees will lack the ability to properly appreciate the safety regulations and why they exist. There's lots of heavy machinery. It's massively common. There's always a risk of hitting pockets of gases that are either toxic or displace oxygen. Accidents, due to many of the above, have a higher fatality rate than most jobs, and ultimately, there's just a lot of factors beyond human control. Wot he said. Another thing is that many mines use equipment that is proven to be next to useless such as roofbolts, instead of tried and tested measures. A roofbolt is basically a bolt put into the the roof of the mine (sometimes the side as well) to stop it pulling apart or collapsing. The best way to do it is to do prop and shore and then put in gauges to measure how much pressure is being exerted on the props, these in turn should be connected to warning devices to tell when too much pressure is being exerted. There should also be one of various machines to check for gas and again, warning systems in place, as well as each miner carrying emergency safety gear and more emergency safety gear places at locations throughout the mine. But all this costs money and so the companies involved like to get away with doing the bare minimum, so you end up with miners trying to use hand-held respirators in an emergency (to get a feel for what that's like, walk around with your eyes closed and your hands over your mouth) or roofbolts being used where there's a danger of a cave-in. |
|
|
|
Post by driewerf on Jul 31, 2011 7:11:53 GMT -5
As some know, a mining accident in the Ukraine has claimed 27 lives so far. I have been noticing that this isn't the first one in the last few years. So, as the topic states, why so many mining accidents that are claiming dozens of lives? Is it that hard to learn from the mistakes of previous accidents? Mining I have been told is one of the most dangerous if not the absolutely most dangerous job in the world today. Shouldn't we be past this? Twenty-seven Ukrainians or hell, twenty-seven miners of any nationality should not lose their lives in the mines. I know the answer is probably greed. But can anyone tell me why it seems like mining safety has not advanced in the past few centuries (Millennia?) since we first figured out we could find shiny things underground? Indeed, greed. The will to maximize profit. Don't forget that those who make the decissions and cash the profit are the capitalists who do not go down in the mine. As most third world countrie sare known for their corruption, building a stron trade union is impossible or very difficult (and dangerous). Many third world countries have very strong anti trade union laws. And even if they have the legal protection for workers, it takes even a bigger efoort to enforce the legal protections. The technonolgy is available. World wide. But the workers don't have the tools to enforce safety measures. And the capitalists put profit before human lives. |
|
|
|
Post by Amaranth on Jul 31, 2011 8:01:52 GMT -5
Short version: Because mining is fucking dangerous. WIN. |
|
|
|
Post by driewerf on Jul 31, 2011 8:35:55 GMT -5
Short version: Because mining is fucking dangerous. WIN. fail. It doesn't explain why it is more dangerous in China or Ukraine than in Canada. |
|
|
|
Post by Amaranth on Jul 31, 2011 9:17:53 GMT -5
fail. It doesn't explain why it is more dangerous in China or Ukraine than in Canada. Nor did it attempt to address that. But I'm pretty sure you already knew that. So...Ummm...Pedantry for the win? |
|
|
|
Post by driewerf on Jul 31, 2011 11:47:02 GMT -5
fail. It doesn't explain why it is more dangerous in China or Ukraine than in Canada. Nor did it attempt to address that. But I'm pretty sure you already knew that. So...Ummm...Pedantry for the win? China has half of the mining deaths world wide, while it produces only 35% of the coal. Why? Because the Chinese "trade union" is completely embedded in the Communist Party (in Name Only!). This makes it for te wokers impossible to fight for improvement of their working conditions. I agree that mining is a dangerous activity. But if the safety of the Canadese mines could be the safety level world wide things would improve very much. And why isn't this the case? Because in many third world countries the authorities are very eager to crush trade unions. |
|
|
|
Post by Mlle Antéchrist on Jul 31, 2011 12:00:42 GMT -5
Canadese?
|
|
|
|
Post by driewerf on Jul 31, 2011 12:37:50 GMT -5
Some Flemish that slipped in. Canadian. |
|
|
|
Post by Amaranth on Jul 31, 2011 13:46:32 GMT -5
Nor did it attempt to address that. But I'm pretty sure you already knew that. So...Ummm...Pedantry for the win? China has half of the mining deaths world wide, while it produces only 35% of the coal. Why? Because the Chinese "trade union" is completely embedded in the Communist Party (in Name Only!). This makes it for te wokers impossible to fight for improvement of their working conditions. I agree that mining is a dangerous activity. But if the safety of the Canadese mines could be the safety level world wide things would improve very much. And why isn't this the case? Because in many third world countries the authorities are very eager to crush trade unions. Given I don't disagree with anything you said and wasn't trying to argue, I can't help but think you're being intentionally anal to pick a fight. If you have a serious bone to pick with me on any grounds, feel free. Otherwise, I think I'm just going to ignore you since you're ranting at me for a lighthearted statement of appreciation for what was already admitted to be a glib interpretation of the scenario. If your goal was to solely be pedantic, bravo. |
|
|
|
Post by booley on Jul 31, 2011 14:29:53 GMT -5
My educated guess..
Mining is an inherently dangerous profession.
There are a lot of mines in the world. Many countries depend on mining for what little economy they have. More mines means more chances for mining accidents
And last, the cost of a miner's life is often seen as less then the savings created by cutting corners and gaming the system. So unless there is some other factor stopping it, there is an inevitable creep to put profits over safety.
The most egregious known example is Massey energy, which simply bought judges and politicians.
|
|
|
|
Post by driewerf on Jul 31, 2011 14:46:56 GMT -5
China has half of the mining deaths world wide, while it produces only 35% of the coal. Why? Because the Chinese "trade union" is completely embedded in the Communist Party (in Name Only!). This makes it for te wokers impossible to fight for improvement of their working conditions. I agree that mining is a dangerous activity. But if the safety of the Canadese mines could be the safety level world wide things would improve very much. And why isn't this the case? Because in many third world countries the authorities are very eager to crush trade unions. Given I don't disagree with anything you said and wasn't trying to argue, I can't help but think you're being intentionally anal to pick a fight. If you have a serious bone to pick with me on any grounds, feel free. Otherwise, I think I'm just going to ignore you since you're ranting at me for a lighthearted statement of appreciation for what was already admitted to be a glib interpretation of the scenario. If your goal was to solely be pedantic, bravo.  Okay 1) No I don't have a bone to pick with you. 2) If you feel that way, and if I broke any etiquette on this board I apologise. 3) May be I am pedantic. But I think that portraying mining accidents as "just a fact of life", is missing some crucial points. The working conditions - including things like safety meaures - are a direct result balance of forces between the working class and the capitalist class. Since this is the "Politics and Government" board, I saw no restriction to hammer that nail - repeatedly. People - and I am not aiming at you, dear Amaranth, I speaking broadly - accept to much as just a fact of life, without thinking that changes for the good are possible. I think that people are too passive. They have lost the will to fight for their right. While we see many attacks on social achievements, like women's acces to abortion, health care etc, these are gradually and constantly under attack. Read what I wrote here: fstdt.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=rp&thread=9046&page=2#303953And read the following comments. I think it is very urgent that the working class awakens - world wide. And if being a pain the ass isthe only price we have to pay for that, then I am very ready to pay it. |
|
|
|
Post by Mlle Antéchrist on Jul 31, 2011 14:59:03 GMT -5
Some Flemish that slipped in. Canadian. "Canadese" definitely sounds cooler than "Canadian"  I don't think anyone disagrees that mining accidents could be reduced if people were less complacent, and companies stopped cutting corners. However, the fact that mining is already extremely dangerous generally means that you're going to see more mine-related accidents -- whether due to human error, lack of safety precautions, or factors outside of our control -- than you will in other industries. It's meant as an explanation, rather than an excuse. It should go without saying that we can't simply shrug our shoulders and give up when it comes to preventing disasters. After all, being unable prevent something entirely isn't a very good reason not to attempt to reduce its frequency. I don't see anyone here saying otherwise, though. |
|
|
|
Post by Napoleon the Clown on Jul 31, 2011 17:39:29 GMT -5
fail. It doesn't explain why it is more dangerous in China or Ukraine than in Canada. It is the short answer, I went on to explain in more detail, and that included the "people cut corners that shouldn't be cut." |
|
|
|
Post by Shane for Wax on Aug 1, 2011 1:17:22 GMT -5
Less it's gonna be a fact of life and more we can do things to decrease the frequency.
|
|
|
|
Post by lighthorseman on Aug 4, 2011 5:37:04 GMT -5
Because effective OH&S training and procedure is expensive?
|
|
