Articles
When a Queensland flood swallowed a dragline and left an underground portal 60 metres underwater, Wade Ludlow knew mine levee design had to change.
It’s not every day you hear about two massive shafts being sunk side by side in Australian coal country, each with its own design, equipment, and risks.
When Barry McKay walked into Ashton Coal and saw machines cutting stone instead of coal, he knew something had to change.
A failed park brake piston seal was all it took to reduce a Whitehaven EH5000 dump truck to ashes – and the lesson, as Greg Fenton told the Mechanical Engineering Safety Seminar (MESS 2025), is one that should alarm every mining professional running large electric-drive fleets.
In mining, some of the biggest risks don’t come from broken equipment or unstable ground - they come from the way our brains are wired.
Approvals in mining have long been described as a maze of red tape and delays, but at AMEC’s Nature Positive and Environmental Regulation Forum in Perth, regulators signalled that change is finally starting to cut through.
In open-pit mining, getting the right information at the right time can mean the difference between precise grade control and costly dilution - and one technology is giving operators a sharper, faster view of what lies beneath each bench.
Even with control plans, take-fives, and risk assessments stacked high, mining engineers admit incidents still happen because the real world never plays out as neatly as the documents.
When mining operators are faced with the challenge of dewatering a live tailings storage facility (TSF) under 30 metres of cover, conventional engineering approaches often buckle under pressure - literally and figuratively.
It’s a hard truth that mining professionals might not want to hear: much of what we call safety work - the forms, the checklists, the risk matrices, the “take fives”- doesn’t actually keep people safe.
