Following the amazing rescue in Chile, attention has now shifted towards the lessons that should be taken from San Jose. Questions have been asked as to the mine’s safety record, and the economic and financial motives that saw it re-open, after being shut down by the previous government due to its safety concerns.
The ‘miracle’ rescue of all 33 trapped miners in San Jose gripped the world and united a nation: “They have experienced a new life, a rebirth, and so has Chile: Today Chile is a country much more unified, stronger and much more respected and loved in the entire world.” These were the words of Chile’s President Pinera. Pinera is now himself riding a wave of popularity after being widely credited for his determination to pull off what seemed an unlikely rescue from the outset.
Like many developing industrial nations, Chile by its own admission currently lacks the kind of stringent safety framework present in more developed producers such as Australia and the USA.
Despite legislation outlining the mandatory provision of refuge chambers in underground mines, compliance and enforcement of the legislation has to date been an issue. Fortunately at San Jose they were in place – as has been widely reported. MineArc belives it is “highly unlikely all 33 men would have survived without the vital shelter and supplies the chamber provided during those crucial first 19 days before contact with the surface was made.”
Chile now seems determined to see a rapid overhaul of its mine safety legislation however, “Never again in our country will we allow work in conditions to be this unsafe” Pinera has stated. And the rescue seems to have spurred action not just in Chile but around the world.
In Peru, new legislation is already in play and effective from January 1, 2011: “In all underground mines there is to be constructed a refuge where, in the event of disaster, personnel can isolate themselves provisioned with air, potable water…communication systems…for a minimum duration of 72 hours”, reads Article 233 of Peru’s Preparation & Emergency Response Act.
Meanwhile, comments from leading industrial and political figures in China and Africa reflect a similar determination to seize the momentum and introduce widespread industrial safety reforms at home.
China’s own safety fears were again exposed and in immediate fashion following San Jose; the day after the world celebrated the successful rescue in Chile, an outburst of poisonous gas in a coal mine in the central Chinese province of Henan left 37 miners dead.
Speaking in a news conference following the incident, Head of the State Administration of Workplace Safety (SAWS), Luo Lin, said “when the entire world was watching and discussing the Chilean mine disaster, some people wonder why China has no refuge chambers.” He later announced Beijing’s plans to accelerate China’s mine safety reforms; “China will speed up the provision of underground emergency shelters and refuge chambers, systems for locating and communicating with underground workers, and monitoring and control systems.”
The current SAWS directive requires that all mines have “underground escape capsules and other emergency facilities by 2015”. This date now looks set to be brought forward however, with 2013 thought to be the revised target.
Meanwhile in Africa, Secretary General Hassan Ameir of the Mines, Energy, Construction and Allied Workers Union (TAMICO) in Tanzania highlighted the issue of disparity in regards to mine safety that is typical across many parts of Africa, “It is not possible for people to survive for such a long time and be rescued alive if such an accident occurred in Tanzania. This is simply due to lack of preparedness to deal with such occurrences.”
On it’s part TAMICO would “continue to urge the government to put in place measures that would ensure miners’ safety across the board”, going on to add that “only some foreign-owned mining firms [operating in Tanzania] have strict rules that compel workers to observe safety regulations and procedures in their daily operations.”