首页> 外文会议>International Conference on Energy, Environment and Development >Comparative Analysis of Ecological Rucksack Between Open-pit and Underground Coal Mine
【24h】

Comparative Analysis of Ecological Rucksack Between Open-pit and Underground Coal Mine

机译:露天坑地下煤矿生态背包的比较分析

获取原文

摘要

Coal is the major energy in China, which always account for more than 70% in the structure of consumer demand for primary energy, on the one hand, coal mining provides us with the main energy , on the other hand, it gives a tremendous pressure on ecology in the mining process. Comparative analysis of ecological pressure between open-pit and underground coal mine with using the method of ecological burden. The result shows, the total ecological burden and the coefficient of ecological burden of open-pit are 4.31 to 11.36 times and 2.77 to 7.74 times of underground coal mine's respectively. Meanwhile, It is the main method by adopt measures such as pay attention to the mining section and improving technology to reduce the amount of stripping and tunneling, and lower the electricity consumption and improve the water cycling utilization ratio, as well as adopt the clean energy and biological energy to reduce the ecological pressure of coal mine. Underground coal mining is recommended if the two mining methods are allowed.
机译:煤炭是中国的主要能源,总是占消费者对初级能源需求结构的70%以上,一方面,煤矿为我们提供了主要能量,另一方面,它给出了巨大的压力论矿业过程中的生态学。利用生态负担方法露天坑地下煤矿生态压力的比较分析。结果表明,露天坑的总生态负担和生态负担系数分别为4.31至11.36倍,分别为地下煤矿的2.77至7.74倍。同时,采用措施采取措施,提高采矿部分和改进技术,以减少剥离和隧道量,降低电力消耗,提高水循环利用率,采用措施,采用措施,采用水循环利用率,采用措施,采用清洁能源和生物能量降低煤矿生态压力。如果允许两种采矿方法,建议使用地下煤开采。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号