Search Documents

Jan 1, 1956

Jan 1, 1951

Jan 1, 2008

Jan 1, 2005

President Ziolkowski called the meeting to order at 9:30 a.m. He called on the Auditing Committee to give its report. Jack Leech read the report and asked that it be approved. A motion was made, seconded and approved. The Resolution Committee was asked to give its report. The following was submitted: (1) RESOLVED, WHEREAS, in the year since the last convention of The Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute, the Institute and the Coal Mining Industry have suffered the loss through death of the services of the following: James A. Flint John L. Paynich Joseph E. Ward NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that there be spread upon the minutes of The Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute recognition of the passing of these members, who have so greatly contributed to the advancement of the industry, both nationally and in the Rocky Mountain area, and that a copy of this resolution be sent to the next of kin as evidence of the sincere regard and sympathy of the members of the Institute.

Jan 1, 1981

Jan 1, 1948

The Fourth Session of the Forty-Sixth Meeting of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute convened at the Hotel Colorado, Glenwood Springs, Colorado, June 21, 1950, at 9:30 a. m., G., E. Sorenson, President, presiding. PRESIDENT SORENSON: The meeting will conic to order, please. Gentlemen, we have quite a program this morning, so we had better push this thing along. Be fore we start this morning, I would like to ask Mr. Davis if he wouldn't come up and say a word or two for us. He is the editor of Coal Age. Mr. Davis. MR. DAVIS: This is quite an unexpected honor. I didn't know that I would be called on to speak to you. It will be brief, but very sincere. I have enjoyed every minute of my stay here with you people in the west. It is my first visit out this way, and I have enjoyed every minute of it. I have two more weeks to go out here, and I will probably see a lot of you in your own back yards.

Jan 1, 1950

The Wednesday morning session was called to order by President Lewis at 9:00 am, He called on Bob Wilson to conduct the business meeting. In the absence of any of the Auditing Committee, the treasurer's report, which had previously been examined by them was read. He asked for a motion of approval. It was made, granted and approved. The Resolution Committee was called on to make its report. Mr. Shirl McArthur read the following report: (1) "WHEREAS, the Pneumoconiosis or Black Lung provisions of the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act which have been construed and administered largely as a welfare program rather than as just compensation for occupational disease has resulted in enormous expenditures and commitments from the Federal Treasury, WHEREAS, the imposition of the full cost of future welfare oriented black lung awards on coal operators without regard to workmen's compensation standards and without due process in granting benefits is grossly unfair and discriminatory to the coal operator and places an undue burden on the present cost of coal,

Jan 1, 1973

[ ]

Jan 1, 1991

Kenneth M. Payne RMCMI PRESIDENT 1994-1995 on behalf of the RMCMI Board of Directors and Officers of The Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute cordially invites you and your family to attend the 91st Regular Meeting and Convention to be held June 25 thru 27, 1995 Crested Butte, Colorado

Jan 1, 1994

Jan 1, 1961

By J. J. Wilson

To explain in detail the manufacture of seamless pipe and tubes is something I venture to say that has never been done to a point entirely satisfactory. The manufacture of seamless tubes dates back to 1885, when Mannesmann Brothers invented the roll-piercing mill. Ten years later R. C. Stiefel invented the disc-piercer, which first came into general use in this country. At the present time the Mannesmann roll and the Stiefel disc-piercers are used, the Mannesmann rolls particularly for the larger size billets. Sizes produced at first were relatively small and the product was cold drawn to provide a smooth surface. The early uses of seamless material were chiefly for mechanical purposes, such as boiler tubes and bicycle tubing, and the latter for some years taking the heaviest tonnage. Improvements in the hot process were gradually made; the early Pilger type rolls were largely superseded by the two-high rolling mill for rolling out the tube after being pierced, the reeling machine for diagonal rolling, the sizing mill for giving exact outside diameter, and finally the sinking mill for reducing larger diameter tubes to smaller diameters.

Jan 1, 1932

Jan 1, 1934

Jan 1, 1923

The Wednesday morning session was called to order by President Geiger at 9:30 a.m. He asked Stan Shubart to conduct the meeting. Stan thanked Loren Linville and Bill Grant for the excellent job they did in their assignments. He called on John Schmidt, Chairman of the Auditing Committee, to report on the financial statement of the treasurer. Mr. Schmidt read the data and asked for its approval. A motion was made, seconded and approved. Stan called on Joseph Berta, Chairman of the Resolutions Committee, who submitted the following resolutions: (1) RESOLVED: Whereas, in the year since the last convention of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute, the Institute and the coal mining industry generally have suffered the loss through death of the services of: Clement Audin, Jr. C. Herbert Clendenin Donald Haske William H. Hays M. J. Keenan Fred W. Koelling James Mecca Neil Robinson C. M. Shott

Jan 1, 1974

Jan 1, 1958

Jan 1, 1960

By Margaret N. Maxey

Man's capacity far fretting is endless, and no matter what difficulties we surmount, how many ideals we realize, there is a stealthy pleasure in rejecting mankind or the universe as unworthy of our approval. - Will Durant Until recently, reasons for favoring one or another energy alternative were advanced on the basis of technical considerations and economic realities. However, it is an indication of the cultural climate of our society and growing realization of why energy is our master resource that many citizens have begun to express concern about the social and ethical implications of our energy deci¬sion-making. A vivid indication of this shift toward ethical concerns is reflected in the attention being focused on conservation - even to the point of regarding it as a virtual panacea equivalent to a "free energy resource." Among others, the authors of a publication by Resources for the Future cautions us about the difficulties of defining conservation. They also point out that unrealistic expectations for achieving the high levels of conservation claimed by true believers may boomerang if, at the same time, we are morally required to maintain economic growth and robust productivity for the basic well-being of more people. In its economic meaning, conservation signifies the most economic or cost-effective applications of energy, together with other resources, in a given process or activity. To achieve conservation that is cost-effective, saving energy alone is not sufficient; the cost involved in saving the energy must be no greater than the cost of the energy that is saved. Using its thermodynamic meaning, conservation and efficiency are viewed as constrained by physical laws and measured against ideal limits set by these laws and processes. Since achieving higher levels of technical performance is not without costs, the economic meaning of conservation must be factored into technical possibilities. It is the ethical, equity and environmental meaning of conservation that concerns us here. In its third meaning, conservation consists in moderation as a value which appears inherently worthwhile both in itself and in relation to social choices dedicated to achieving distributive justice. The value of moderation seems predicated on the assumption that natural resources and the environment have fixed, finite, exhaustible capacities for satisfying human needs. Hence norms for moderating human behavior appear to require prescriptions by some authority. Such norms presuppose some agreement on "essential" uses of energy. However, the difficulties of setting behavioral norms loom large, because "... it is as difficult to determine essential energy consumption as to determine what is essential in any other phase of consumption, whether it involves food, clothing, shelter, or recreation." The ethical meaning of conversation is further complicated by a centuries-old argument over the proper exercise of stewardship - i.e., how best to develop natural resources. On the one hand, the preservationist position insists on an inviolate, "hands-off" policy and stands opposed to ongoing development of wilderness areas and mineral resources. On the other hand, the "scientific conservationist" who preaches the "gospel of efficiency" insists on development of resources based on principles of sustained-yield, multiple use and - in the case of competing claims - reserving resources or land for their "higher use." Current confusion reigns among opinion leaders in the environmental movement because they appear to have lost the genius of the original Conservation ethic, developed in the 19th century. They seem to think that conservation is preservation. The question I wish to explore is whether a single-minded, exclusive pursuit of "conservation" in its economic, thermodynamic and preservationist meanings may actually do more harm than good in serving the ethical goals of conservation. There

Jan 1, 1986

Jan 1, 1988

Jan 1, 1935