Mining options
S.A. Mansoor, Metallurgical Engineer, On e-mail
Sarwat Chowdhury's prompt response (Aug.9) to your two-part report on open pit mining in Germany, does not appear very convincing or objective. For Bangladesh rerouting of underground water to enhance water table levels as practiced in Germany should be the top option; and revitalising canals and water bodies could be secondary. It all will depend on the surrounding area's ecology. The long one sentence paragraph ends with the words ""environmental impact of open-pit coal mining on our limited arable land, water bodies, and underground water tables will be far-reaching both in terms of area and time"Regarding cost subsidy for mining, is the writer aware that all our liquid fuel "petroleum products" is subsidised in foreign exchange? Natural gas prices too are subsidised and do not reflect the true local equivalent of foreign exchange costs involved in exploration, gas well development, gas transmission and distribution. So why this sudden biased objection to coal prices only? This statement is neither impartial nor based on ground realities. Doesn't the writer know that even the simple work of gas compression to maintain distribution head pressure is also a total foreign exchange affair? Does anyone look into this? Handling of underground water is necessary both in open-pit and underground shaft mine. For Bangladesh re-routing of this water back to sustain underground water table as stated earlier is the preferred option. The critical and costliest issue in underground mining is below surface accidents. This happened in Barapukuria, and a few days back, in the USA. The US mine is still closed, and despite all their resources; the miners trapped! Such accidents caused by unpredictable soil subsidy, happens in technically advanced and rich country like the USA, and is a fact of life in underground mining. The cost that will be needed for immediate rescue efforts and to restart the US mine will be beyond our comprehension! Can Bangladesh afford the resources, mostly foreign exchange, to deploy such funds for these events: a reality in underground mining; but totally absent in open-pit mining? If we pragmatically list out the plus and minus points, without any subjectivity; for both mining methods, then open-pit mining will clearly be evident as more manageable and risk and accident free. The huge resources and the time required for revitalising underground mine after soil collapse or water breakthrough alone will eliminate this option. This has been the fact in Barapukiria, and the reality is there for all to see. Unfortunately for us we are not the people to be "once bitten twice shy" in our misadventures! I hope the "experts" of the "Energy Panel" have properly done their homework before penning their views in public! Broad opinions about coal policy and management may be all right for generalists, but ignoring technical realities is taking things too lightly! We cannot afford such misadventures when critical technical issues are being considered.
|
|
