When it comes to dealing with technological innovations, there are potential benefits and shortcomings or disadvantages associated with that specific innovation. Robotics is no different, regardless of the realised benefits – such as improved safety, productivity and reduced labour costs. Robotics has its own disadvantages.
Below are some of the disadvantages associated with robotics:
Initial costs
Just like any technology investments, there is always a high cost initially, a thorough analysis of the investment cost vs the return on investment (ROI) is advisable for robotics.
Training costs
For innovations to be adopted successfully, training needs to happen. Robotics is not different, for people to operate a robot more efficiently, a specialised training might be required and these trainings normally come at a high cost, most might think subcontracting is a much better option, but I think relying on contracting houses to operate robots escalates the costs since contractors normally bill more than in-house employees.
Functional and decision making limitation
Robotics operate way faster than human beings and they work tirelessly. However, they are limited to the embedded functionalities and decision trees. Unlike human beings, if a robot is underground and it encounters an ‘unknown’ it will not be able to do anything because it is beyond its embedded functionalities. With human beings on the other side, they can assess the situation and then execute a task.
Damage company image
The introduction of robotics in organisational image in the public, organisations normally should do a lot of damage control by responding to the media. Headlines such as – amongst others – “Robots to axe 3,000 jobs at Nedbank” and “Coal mining ‘robots’ cut costs and risks but threaten jobs” have an adverse effect on the company image.
Increase unemployment rate
Studies indicate that technologies introduce a demand for new skills. However, I think that with Robotics and automation a demand is there for people to build robots to automate repetitive tasks. Other than that, there will be a little bit of demand to operate the robots meaning that many people that does haulages, drilling, inspections, rock crushing and other tasks in the mining industries are at risk of getting replaced by a robot. Will the demand for jobs created from robotics be more or less than the jobs that will get replaced? Well, I am yet to see.
Considering the benefits of robotics and automation as discussed in the previous post, what do you think about Robotics in the mining industry?
Sources
http://www.miningsafety.co.za/dynamiccontent/155/advantages-and-disadvantages-of-robotics-in-welding
https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2016/11/aerion-and-boom-are-leading-supersonic.html
https://www.verdict.co.uk/retail-banker-international/uncategorized/robots-axe-3000-jobs-nedbank/
Automation in the mining industry 
This blog is very informative. It give an over view on what kind of impact robots have in our working environment, and also the challenges that a world would face of we let the robots do most of the work that is being done by now.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I concur with you, to see the negative impact you can check out the post titled ‘What are the benefits of Mining Robots?’, you will be more amazed by robotics benefits.
LikeLike
Touching on training costs being high, I feel the consideration of those who are the first to train people being at risk of losing their staff to other new entrance in robotics should be considered as well. Further more, an identification of the skill needed to do robotics. I.e, can we easily train any random person to operate the machines?
Also to add a disadvantage, these machines will need to be
Maintained. Now imagine a mine which operates robotics in a country without the skill to maintain the machines. This can be considered.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I totally agree with you, the risk of people leaving a mine to go to the next competitor is there in any industry, I think a succession plan should be there from a get go in order to minimise the impact should ‘trained’ employees leave. Most of these technologies are being driven by companies such as Catapillar, Sandvik and Bell, amongst others, which makes the likelihoods of having similar if not same robots operating the mine, with that in place, companies are likely to poach those that have already been ‘trained’.
With regards to the maintenance, like I mentioned above, there will be a high dependence on the companies manufacturing the robots in order to keep the robots up and running.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes machines need to be maintained but this only happens once in a while and locals can be taught how to fix the machines if anything goes wrong. Mind you machines can operate non stop increasing productivity and most important profit which is a main objective of a company
The main disadvantage to robotics is its contribution to unemployment and public image of the company
LikeLike
Thank you for such clarification, just like a car, it gets serviced in intervals (assuming robots will be maintained on intervals too) and normally after warranties people then tend to use other servicing centres that are mostly local and affordable. You also touched on the locality part which is also very important since in south Africa, keeping things local is becoming a trend in order to maintain and grow our economy.
LikeLike
Thank you for such clarification, just like a car, it gets serviced in intervals (assuming robots will be maintained on intervals too) and normally after warranties people then tend to use other servicing centres that are mostly local and affordable. You also touched on the locality part which is also very important since in south Africa, keeping things local is becoming a trend in order to maintain and grow our economy.
LikeLike
I think the biggest response or reaction to most people will be “what about our job’s ?”. In general l have noticed that the issue of job’s around robotics has not been answered to satisfaction, of which one of the factors l presume is the fact that majority of robotics are replacing hard labour tasks/activities which are coupled with routine activities. However, if we could consider educating/training the people of whom the robots will be replacing to be able to do other complex jobs or responsibilities that will not be replaced by robots , this might go a long way to a success of robots.
It is good to make life simpler but let it not be at an expense of the people of whom “l suppose the world values the most”. What’s your thought on funding initiatives that will improve the lifespan of people working in mines rather than robotics which threaten the job’s of mine workers ?
LikeLike
One of the articles I sourced also mentioned that mining Robots in china are cut threatening to cut jobs but increases the safety of the remaining employees. I think funding initiatives that improves the lifespan of people that work in mines is also a very good initiative, if I am not mistaken, some of the initial safety robot in the mines was for doing an inspection of places where there is danger, i.e. harmful gas, bad condition to mine, bad structure, etc. I believe these kinds of initiative are good for people’s lifespan. However, these safety bots opened an opportunity for robots that actually do the actual mining tasks in places where it is not humanly possible to mine without posing a life threat, different robotics opportunities are rising in the name of safety and productivity, there is Autonomous Haulages trucks, trains, drilling robots, rock crushing robots, etc.
I also agree with you that empowering the mine workers to do other work is also good for the future mines because they see where the mine is going and strategically they probably have areas where there will need human interference more, and those are the areas that the mining management should empower their staff on.
LikeLiked by 1 person
With regard to the functionality and decision making limitation, I think that these robots are built with most if not all the functionalities that are required to execute the task at hand. In case maybe that these robots are faced with an ”unknown” according to its embedded functionalities and programming, I think that they have a functionality which allows the operator to take over the control and assist in making the optimum decision. I think that the ‘ functionality and decision making limitation’ is not really their disadvantage since these robots are operated by humans and in some cases the robots is not really making a decision but a human.
LikeLike
I agree with you in a sense that when an unknown is encountered then an operator will be able to assume control and provide a decision. This is a short-coming because decision making in a case of an unknown will be slower than usual. We don’t want individuals to assume that robots are perfect and can perform everything perfectly, hence a short-coming of limited embedded functionality. Remember that when an unknown decision has been made by a human being operating a robot, a robot will then learn how to respond to such a situation the next time it encounters the issue. In that sense, it is a short-coming.
LikeLike
Really interesting. I love this post. Do give me a follow on my blogs. http://bit.do/keithnetwork
LikeLiked by 1 person
Interesting read, thanks for sharing!
LikeLiked by 1 person