The implementation of battery electric vehicles (BEVs) in underground mining is relatively recent. BEVs offer several advantages over diesel machines, including enhanced working conditions through reduced noise and heat and the lack of toxic exhaust gases or diesel particulate matter. In addition to reducing greenhouse gases, they have the potential to reduce ventilation and air conditioning costs. Nevertheless, there are certain concerns about BEVs, in areas of productivity, fire safety, economic viability, user-friendliness, and potential electrical-related issues. To address these, two surveys were conducted, one among underground mine management and the other among mine personnel to ascertain their opinions and experiences of BEVs. The results indicated the primary motivators for mines to adopt BEVs were to create a healthier working environment and reduce carbon emissions. The factors hindering the implementation were high costs and the lack of proven reliability. Mine personnel appreciated BEVs for their quietness and reduced fluids and components; however, they had concerns about fire safety and limited battery duration. This study presents the extent of BEV use in underground mining and associated fire incidents and a summary of the survey results.

Diesel-powered load haul dump machines have been the backbone of underground mining loading and hauling operations for over six decades. However, as mines get deeper, and regulations become more rigorous, the adoption of battery electric vehicles (BEVs) has the potential to enhance energy efficiency and provide a healthier environment for miners. Electric engines have a significantly higher energy efficiency and produce no exhaust gases or diesel particulate matter. The use of BEVs in underground operations introduces additional factors to consider, such as battery swapping and the required number of batteries, swapping, and charging stations. This study conducted a discrete event simulation using Arena simulation software with a focus on queueing and its relationship to different numbers of machines, batteries, and swapping times in an underground block cave mine. The results suggest that when there are six, eight, or 12 LHDs and four swapping and charging stations with an unlimited number of batteries, the queueing time to swap the batteries remains minimal. In scenarios with eight LHDs and a limited number of batteries, depending on the battery swapping time, 2–2.5 batteries per machine are required to achieve maximum production with minimal queueing. However, when there are too few batteries, queueing becomes significant. Moreover, when the number of working groups (machines going for a battery swap around the same time) is less than the ratio between the battery operational time and the swapping time, the queueing remains low.