994
edits
Case study: The Battle for Jezeří Chateau: Difference between revisions
Case study: The Battle for Jezeří Chateau (view source)
Revision as of 10:47, 29 May 2012
, 10:47, 29 May 2012→Confirmation of earlier geological findings
| Line 97: | Line 97: | ||
Thanks to co-operation with VDUP Jáchymov, they succeeded in convincing the company’s diggers to perform at least part of the planned mining work under Jezeří after the digging was completed. Most importantly, they managed to do the principal work: the horizontal gallery dug from the mountain base into the crystalline complex right under the chateau, 430 m long. They were documenting the gallery throughout the digging process; again, mostly at night. Deep core holes were bored in front of the gallery portal; an underground hole was bored inside the gallery, and an inclined core hole was bored under the chateau foundations. They documented all the rock formations around the chateau. They measured all the fissures, analysed the geodynamic phenomena and other facts. They found and documented the remains of medieval chambers for iron ore extraction and processing in old “salamander furnaces” discovered around the chateau. Dr Marek published the findings in the professional journal “Rudy” (“Ores”), which later resulted in their inclusion among protected national technical heritage sites. | Thanks to co-operation with VDUP Jáchymov, they succeeded in convincing the company’s diggers to perform at least part of the planned mining work under Jezeří after the digging was completed. Most importantly, they managed to do the principal work: the horizontal gallery dug from the mountain base into the crystalline complex right under the chateau, 430 m long. They were documenting the gallery throughout the digging process; again, mostly at night. Deep core holes were bored in front of the gallery portal; an underground hole was bored inside the gallery, and an inclined core hole was bored under the chateau foundations. They documented all the rock formations around the chateau. They measured all the fissures, analysed the geodynamic phenomena and other facts. They found and documented the remains of medieval chambers for iron ore extraction and processing in old “salamander furnaces” discovered around the chateau. Dr Marek published the findings in the professional journal “Rudy” (“Ores”), which later resulted in their inclusion among protected national technical heritage sites. | ||
===Confirmation | ===Confirmation and praise for geological findings=== | ||
The research around Jezeří took more than 4 years and was completed in 1981. It fully confirmed the findings and conclusions of the previous engineering geological mapping, which the North Bohemian Mines management would not accept in 1976. It confirmed the existence of massive tectonic fault zones at the mountain base and inside the massif, various anomalies in the positioning of the basin sediments along the seam edge and the groundwater conditions, and most importantly, it confirmed the unstable position of the promontory on which the chateau rests. | The research around Jezeří took more than 4 years and was completed in 1981. It fully confirmed the findings and conclusions of the previous engineering geological mapping, which the North Bohemian Mines management would not accept in 1976. It confirmed the existence of massive tectonic fault zones at the mountain base and inside the massif, various anomalies in the positioning of the basin sediments along the seam edge and the groundwater conditions, and most importantly, it confirmed the unstable position of the promontory on which the chateau rests. | ||
| Line 104: | Line 104: | ||
When he was put more or less back together at IKEM, he defended his set of findings and generalised experience as his Candidate of Sciences dissertation thesis at the Charles University Faculty of Science. The thesis was reviewed by three top experts at three universities whose expertise it involved: the geotechnician Prof. Mencl of Brno Technical University, engineering geologist and hydrogeologist Prof. Homola of Ostrava Mining University, and geomorphologist Prof. Král of the Charles University Faculty of Science. They assessed it as the best in years and the most momentous in the Czechoslovak Federation, with a direct impact on the entire country’s economic situation. It seemed that the battle was over and there could be some resting on laurels at last. The reality soon proved otherwise, though. | When he was put more or less back together at IKEM, he defended his set of findings and generalised experience as his Candidate of Sciences dissertation thesis at the Charles University Faculty of Science. The thesis was reviewed by three top experts at three universities whose expertise it involved: the geotechnician Prof. Mencl of Brno Technical University, engineering geologist and hydrogeologist Prof. Homola of Ostrava Mining University, and geomorphologist Prof. Král of the Charles University Faculty of Science. They assessed it as the best in years and the most momentous in the Czechoslovak Federation, with a direct impact on the entire country’s economic situation. It seemed that the battle was over and there could be some resting on laurels at last. The reality soon proved otherwise, though. | ||
===Additional mathematical modelling reinforces potential danger of continued mining=== | |||
The results of Dr Marek’s research were to be confirmed by a mathematical calculation of the stability of the slope. This was an extremely tall slope, however, its integrity had been disrupted by tectonic zones, and its base was meant to be lightened through coal mining. There was no one at hand who wanted to take on that task without sufficient previous experience and examples from foreign literature. Eventually, the calculation was taken up by the country’s most experienced experts, geotechnician Vojtěch Mencl and mathematician Ladislav Mejzlík, both emeritus professors at Brno Technical University. They used the finite element method, novel in the Czech Republic at that time, using computer equipment. In addition, a physical model was constructed at the BTU Construction Faculty Geotechnics Department made of equivalent materials (Jezeří Chateau being represented by two sugar cubes). | The results of Dr Marek’s research were to be confirmed by a mathematical calculation of the stability of the slope. This was an extremely tall slope, however, its integrity had been disrupted by tectonic zones, and its base was meant to be lightened through coal mining. There was no one at hand who wanted to take on that task without sufficient previous experience and examples from foreign literature. Eventually, the calculation was taken up by the country’s most experienced experts, geotechnician Vojtěch Mencl and mathematician Ladislav Mejzlík, both emeritus professors at Brno Technical University. They used the finite element method, novel in the Czech Republic at that time, using computer equipment. In addition, a physical model was constructed at the BTU Construction Faculty Geotechnics Department made of equivalent materials (Jezeří Chateau being represented by two sugar cubes). | ||
While the professors were doing their calculations, the lecturers and instructors in white coats were working with the physical model located inside transparent plexiglass walls. They used a toy spade to rake away fine sand, which stood for the basin sediments, imitating the mining activity in the opencast mine. The condition of the adjacent crystalline complex was monitored by means of a network of surveyed points; movement was expected, and Dr Marek was cautiously watching along with renowned experts from the Academy of Sciences. After all the sediments were removed, nothing shifted until late at night; the sugar cubes remained in place. The next morning, they found the massif collapsed complete with the sugar cubes. | While the professors were doing their calculations, the lecturers and instructors in white coats were working with the physical model located inside transparent plexiglass walls. They used a toy spade to rake away fine sand, which stood for the basin sediments, imitating the mining activity in the opencast mine. The condition of the adjacent crystalline complex was monitored by means of a network of surveyed points; movement was expected, and Dr Marek was cautiously watching along with renowned experts from the Academy of Sciences. After all the sediments were removed, nothing shifted until late at night; the sugar cubes remained in place. The next morning, they found the massif had collapsed complete with the sugar cubes. | ||
The mathematical calculation confirmed that removing the top two-thirds of the sediments at the base of the mountainside might not cause a stability collapse of the entire slope, but the bedrock directly under the chateau would suffer deformities of up to 10 cm. A total collapse in stability would occur if the basin fill extraction continued. (The coal seam is located in the bottom segment of the sedimentary strata series.) | The mathematical calculation confirmed that removing the top two-thirds of the sediments at the base of the mountainside might not cause a stability collapse of the entire slope, but the bedrock directly under the chateau would suffer deformities of up to 10 cm. A total collapse in stability would occur if the basin fill extraction continued. (The coal seam is located in the bottom segment of the sedimentary strata series.) | ||
====Jezeří becomes national research site to test further data on mathematical and physical modelling==== | |||
Moreover, the course of both the mathematical and physical modelling showed a deficit in some input data, the importance of which only became clear during the modelling, such as the role of discontinuous groundwater horizons, the size and orientation of the natural tension inside the crystalline complex at the mountainside base, the role of slow secular movements of the massif due to internal geological forces, etc. That was why the Jezeří area immediately became a test site in which various professional institutions and teams of specialists tried to test various empirical approaches to modelling, conduct parametric studies and regression analyses. Eventually, Stavební geologie Praha became the manager of an extensive national research task “Studying stability problems of opening opencast coal mines at the base of the Ore Mountains”. As part of this, Dr Marek dealt with the issue of “Studying the tectonic loosening of the crystalline complex”. Using inclined and horizontal core holes in the mountainsides around Jezeří, he examined the presence of tectonic faults and zones, verified their tectonic effects in the ground surface, and tested possible applications of various geotechnical equipment for monitoring changes in the tension and movement inside the massif. The research was completed in 1986. | Moreover, the course of both the mathematical and physical modelling showed a deficit in some input data, the importance of which only became clear during the modelling, such as the role of discontinuous groundwater horizons, the size and orientation of the natural tension inside the crystalline complex at the mountainside base, the role of slow secular movements of the massif due to internal geological forces, etc. That was why the Jezeří area immediately became a test site in which various professional institutions and teams of specialists tried to test various empirical approaches to modelling, conduct parametric studies and regression analyses. Eventually, Stavební geologie Praha became the manager of an extensive national research task “Studying stability problems of opening opencast coal mines at the base of the Ore Mountains”. As part of this, Dr Marek dealt with the issue of “Studying the tectonic loosening of the crystalline complex”. Using inclined and horizontal core holes in the mountainsides around Jezeří, he examined the presence of tectonic faults and zones, verified their tectonic effects in the ground surface, and tested possible applications of various geotechnical equipment for monitoring changes in the tension and movement inside the massif. The research was completed in 1986. | ||
After Dr Marek submitted the results of the detailed survey at Jezeří, the mine management commissioned detailed engineering-geological surveys of similarly critical sites below Jezerka, at Černice and Horní Jiřetín, again using | After Dr Marek submitted the results of the detailed survey at Jezeří, the mine management commissioned detailed engineering-geological surveys of similarly critical sites below Jezerka, at Černice and Horní Jiřetín, again using elaborate mining work. The mining work was taken up by the tried and tested VDUP Jáchymov, which was then able to dig vertical shafts in addition to horizontal galleries. At the same time, comprehensive surveying started on the adjacent site in the forefield of the disused Obránců míru opencast mine, between Jezeří and Janov, covering another approx. 20 km2. Its chief focus was on the stability of the mountainsides and the end slopes of the planned opencast mine. Dr Marek continued the detailed engineering-geological mapping of that section and kept track of all the other survey and research works. | ||
===Detailed survey results championed by incipient environmental movement=== | |||
Immediately after the conclusion of his detailed survey at Jezeří in 1981, Dr Marek held a seminar for the staff of the Regional Office of State Cultural Heritage and Nature Conservation in Ústí nad Labem about its results and predictions for the future progress of the coal mines. The seminar was also attended by the heads of the then newly formed youth conservationist movement “Brontosaurus” from Most and Litvínov, Miroslav Brožík and Petr Pakosta. Dr Marek invited them to make use of the assistance of young environmental activists to help in saving and rehabilitating the devastated chateau, its gardens and the former parks around it. The Brontosaurs pulled their weight effectively with the consent of the Regional Conservation Office, but to the displeasure of the District Committee of the Communist Party in Most. The latter regarded their action as a violation of Party guidelines, which were unequivocally in favour of the coal mining. They saw no gratitude either when they cleared out the devastated historical Franciscan hospital in Most, scheduled for demolition, and prepared it for renovation. | Immediately after the conclusion of his detailed survey at Jezeří in 1981, Dr Marek held a seminar for the staff of the Regional Office of State Cultural Heritage and Nature Conservation in Ústí nad Labem about its results and predictions for the future progress of the coal mines. The seminar was also attended by the heads of the then newly formed youth conservationist movement “Brontosaurus” from Most and Litvínov, Miroslav Brožík and Petr Pakosta. Dr Marek invited them to make use of the assistance of young environmental activists to help in saving and rehabilitating the devastated chateau, its gardens and the former parks around it. The Brontosaurs pulled their weight effectively with the consent of the Regional Conservation Office, but to the displeasure of the District Committee of the Communist Party in Most. The latter regarded their action as a violation of Party guidelines, which were unequivocally in favour of the coal mining. They saw no gratitude either when they cleared out the devastated historical Franciscan hospital in Most, scheduled for demolition, and prepared it for renovation. | ||
The youth group ran the “Quite Small Theatre” in Litvínov, where they invited well-known people in environment-related professions for discussions with locals. In 1982, they invited Dr Marek to lecture on “Shall we prop up the Ore Mountains?” The feedback was considerable. The public of Litvínov, Most and the surrounding villages revived their interest in conserving not only Jezeří but also the surrounding landscape and the remaining settlements. Discussion evenings followed, involving presentations by Dr. Skřivánek of the State Conservation Office headquarters, Dr. Vaněk and Ing. Stoklasa, both renowned experts of the Academy of Sciences Institute of Landscape Ecology, and others. They all endorsed the continued existence of the chateau. | The youth group ran the “Quite Small Theatre” in Litvínov, where they invited well-known people in environment-related professions for discussions with locals. In 1982, they invited Dr Marek to lecture on “Shall we prop up the Ore Mountains?” The feedback was considerable. The public of Litvínov, Most and the surrounding villages revived their interest in conserving not only Jezeří but also the surrounding landscape and the remaining settlements. Discussion evenings followed, involving presentations by Dr. Skřivánek of the State Conservation Office headquarters, Dr. Vaněk and Ing. Stoklasa, both renowned experts of the Academy of Sciences Institute of Landscape Ecology, and others. They all endorsed the continued existence of the chateau. | ||
===Authorities continue to support mining, but in modified form=== | |||
With minor variations, the detailed surveys below Jezerka, at Černice and Horní Jiřetín produced findings similar to those from the Jezeří survey. The mountainsides and their bases were modified by tectonic fault zones up to several dozen metres thick. Within them, the crystalline rocks were crushed or even disintegrated into a sandy-clay earth. The basin strata series at the edge of the basin were also disrupted by various fault and non-fault deformities. | With minor variations, the detailed surveys below Jezerka, at Černice and Horní Jiřetín produced findings similar to those from the Jezeří survey. The mountainsides and their bases were modified by tectonic fault zones up to several dozen metres thick. Within them, the crystalline rocks were crushed or even disintegrated into a sandy-clay earth. The basin strata series at the edge of the basin were also disrupted by various fault and non-fault deformities. | ||
Now the problem was how the mine planners and operators would cope with that because they still insisted on their original plan to fully deplete the seam up to the edge using the large-scale opencast method, albeit at the cost of disproportionate expenses and special precautions, the technical and energy intensity of which would clearly | Now the problem was how the mine planners and operators would cope with that because they still insisted on their original plan to fully deplete the seam up to the edge using the large-scale opencast method, albeit at the cost of disproportionate expenses and special precautions, the technical and energy intensity of which would clearly outstrip any profit from the coal mined. | ||
====Jezeří threatened with demolition by new mining design==== | |||
Design ideas verging on fantasies were developed, including stabilization of the Ore Mountain massif using a series of pretensioned anchors up to 80 m long, bored from slope sections cut into terraces. Another was to remove the entire exposed section of the crystalline complex so that the end slope of the opencast coal mine would face mountain slopes dressed at a stable incline of approx. 35°. Obviously, that would have required the complete removal of the forest, the groundcover, the protruding rock formations, and naturally, Jezeří Chateau. The latter version was even elaborated into an implementation design, undersigned by Ing. Kubricht, former chief architect of Most and a designer at Báňské projekty at that time. To that end, the mine management, the Brown Coal Research Institute in Most and Báňské projekty in Teplice filed a joint application with the Ministry of Culture in 1982 calling for cancellation of the heritage conservation status of Jezeří Chateau and the adjacent Ore Mountains hillsides. | Design ideas verging on fantasies were developed, including stabilization of the Ore Mountain massif using a series of pretensioned anchors up to 80 m long, bored from slope sections cut into terraces. Another was to remove the entire exposed section of the crystalline complex so that the end slope of the opencast coal mine would face mountain slopes dressed at a stable incline of approx. 35°. Obviously, that would have required the complete removal of the forest, the groundcover, the protruding rock formations, and naturally, Jezeří Chateau. The latter version was even elaborated into an implementation design, undersigned by Ing. Kubricht, former chief architect of Most and a designer at Báňské projekty at that time. To that end, the mine management, the Brown Coal Research Institute in Most and Báňské projekty in Teplice filed a joint application with the Ministry of Culture in 1982 calling for cancellation of the heritage conservation status of Jezeří Chateau and the adjacent Ore Mountains hillsides. | ||
| Line 128: | Line 138: | ||
However, the meeting had a tragic aftermath: Ing. Kašpárek, director of the Regional Office of State Cultural Heritage and Nature Conservation in Ústí nad Labem, had a heart attack and died the next day. | However, the meeting had a tragic aftermath: Ing. Kašpárek, director of the Regional Office of State Cultural Heritage and Nature Conservation in Ústí nad Labem, had a heart attack and died the next day. | ||
====Proposal to demolish Jezeří ignites widespread debate==== | |||
The miners’ plan to destroy Jezeří Chateau and the adjacent mountainsides provoked a long-lasting and frequently passionate polemic in the daily press and other media as well as at various professional conferences over the period 1981-1987. | The miners’ plan to destroy Jezeří Chateau and the adjacent mountainsides provoked a long-lasting and frequently passionate polemic in the daily press and other media as well as at various professional conferences over the period 1981-1987. | ||