Society of Civil Engineers, American Society of ELECTRICITY AND THE CONSERVATION OF BY LEWIS B. STILLWELL In any problem, accurate and, so far as practicable, concise statement is essential to proper consideration and correct solution. The economic problems which present themselves when the complex and far-reaching subject, Conservation of Natural Resources, is considered, can be approached best by first stating and defining them with reference solely to physical and economic facts and relations without reference to political boundaries or limitations. To approach the subject by first considering real or supposed difficulties imposed by the respective rights and duties of states and of the nation, is to discuss method of treatment before diagnosis. We should first consider the problem as if there were no such thing as states within the Union, assuming, for the time being, the existence of one central and absolute authority within the federal boundaries. The question what is economically desirable upon this assumption, is that which the engineering profession should first agree upon and, if possible, state in a manner which will be understood by the general public. Conservation as applied to our natural energy resources means utilization without unnecessary waste. In a broader sense it means also development along lines which will not only utilize but increase those resources; for example, as regards waterpowers it has relation to the maintenance and renewal of forests affecting variation in stream-flow, and the construction of storage reservoirs which, properly used, are capable of adding greatly to that part of the run-off which can be used for industrial purposes and navigation. Much has been uttered recently with reference to these relations which can not be expected to hold good in the light of that clearer knowledge which will result from further study and experience-much that is erroneous and misleading even when examined critically in the light of facts now ascertained and determined. General statements from sources commanding the attention and arousing the interest of the public are necessary first steps in turning a nation from reckless waste and almost unrestricted appropriation of natural resources by individuals, to a policy of wise conservation, having due regard to the common interest now and in the future. Those first steps have been taken, on the whole, in an admirable manner. Public attention has been arrested. Public interest has been aroused. Public and legislative opinions are forming. Obviously, it is of the utmost importance that our engineering societies should take an immediate and active part in working out the complex problems of conservation and, if possible, in directing the formation of public opinion along lines that will result in the enactment of just and wise laws. The economic utilization of our natural resources is the fundamental problem of all engineering. If the President of the United States were to summon a conference of governors at the White House for the purpose of considering and promoting reforms in current medical practice, the medical profession undoubtedly would be greatly interested, and would manifest its interest by assuming proper and unchallenged prominence in discussing the questions raised. If such a conference were to assemble for the avowed purpose of initiating reforms in the machinery and methods for the administration of justice, it is not to be doubted that the lawyers would manifest their vital interest not only by exposition and discussion, but also by actual leadership. The conference of governors in May, 1908, called by President Roosevelt to consider and advise regarding conservation of the natural resources of the United States, raised questions in respect of which the engineer occupies a position closely analogous to that which the medical doctor holds in respect of medical practice and the lawyer in respect of legal procedure and administration. The analogy is not perfect, nor does responsibility for final decision rest exclusively upon the engineer, but it is peculiarly the patriotic duty of the engineering profession to enlighten the public by unbiased consideration and accurate exposition of essential pertinent facts, physical and economic. I propose in this paper: 1. To illustrate the function of electricity in the conservation of natural resources. 2. To summarize statistically the present power requirements of the United States and present certain data (necessarily far from complete) relative to water power available. 3. To point out certain economic bearings of the plan which proposes the imposition of a tax on water powers, and the use of the proceeds for improvement and construction of inland waterways. THE FUNCTION OF ELECTRICITY IN CONSERVATION The part which electricity is destined to play in the conservation of our energy resources is demonstrated clearly by what it already has accomplished. Three typical illustrations will suffice: 1. The saving of coal by the utilization of water power, as illustrated by the plants of the Niagara Falls Power Company. 2. The saving of coal by the substitution of large and highly efficient steam plants for smaller and less efficient plants, as in the case of the Newcastle-upon-Tyne Electric Supply Company. 3. The saving of coal used for transportation purposes by the substitution of large and highly efficient engine units for comparatively small and inefficient locomotive units, as accomplished, for example, by the Interborough Rapid Transit Company of New York. In each case the economy is due primarily to the fact that we can now use for transmitting and distributing power, the electricity produced in dynamos, distributed by conductors, and utilized by motors-all of remarkably high efficiency. The Niagara Falls Power Company. During the year 1908, the plants of the Niagara Falls Power Company delivered an output of 560,000,000 kw-hr. Had this output been generated by large modern central stations using steam power, their consumption of coal would have approximated 2000 tons per day. Were the users of Niagara power dependent to-day upon their own individual steam plants, they would use in the aggregate not less than 3000 tons of coal per day; in other words, more than 1,000,000 tons per annum. If this power were replacing steam, as used under average conditions in our manufacturing cities, instead of being used for the most part in supplying power to a comparatively small number of customers using large blocks of power, it would replace and save nearly 2,000,000 tons of coal per annum. Important as is the saving of coal from the standpoint of conservation of our natural resources, perhaps the most striking feature of the Niagara power enterprise is the demonstration which it affords of the great industrial value of cheap power, the greater part of the output of the plants being utilized to-day by electrochemical industries of great value to the community, all of which have been stimulated and some. of which owe their very existence to their ability to secure power at very low cost. The North-East Coast Power System. The North-East Coast Power System, supplying electric power to the great industrial district in and about Newcastle-upon-Tyne, effects a very important economy in coal consumption. In a paper presented at the Middlesbrough meeting of the British Iron and Steel Institute in 1908, Charles H. Merz, the engineer under whose able direction this large enterprise has been carried out, shows that the economies resulting from centralization of power development and electric distribution have led to the construction of plants now in operation, aggregating 102,000 h.p. installed; that additional plant aggregating 34,600 h.p. is under construction; that during the last 4 years the demand has increased at a rate averaging 20,000 h.p. per annum; that to-day every shipyard on the north bank of the Tyne is purchasing practically all of its power supply in the form of electricity; that the system is now responsible for the supply of current to eighty (80) miles of electrified railway, four tramway systems, the lighting in towns having populations aggregating over 700,000, motive power to the extent of 85,000 horse power and electrochemical works of over 12,000 horse power. Not only has Mr. Merz established highly successful steamdriven power plants in a district where the cost of coal ranges from 7s. to 9s. per ton, but he has demonstrated that important economy of coal consumption results from the supply of electric power to the collieries for their mining operations. Referring to this very interesting feature of the development, Mr. Merz says: The output of coal from Northumberland and Durham in 1906 was over 52,000,000 tons and, according to the Report of the Royal Commission on Coal Supplies, between six and eight per cent of the total coal brought to bank is used by the collieries for the purpose of power generation. From the make of coke * it appears that about one-fifth of the coal mined on the northeast coast is converted into coke. Making a liberal allowance, therefore, for the power at present used from the surplus heat resulting from the coking process, the collieries of Northum * * berland and Durham must burn for their power requirements some 2,500,000 tons of coal per annum. As the almost invariable rule is to work non-condensing, as the steam piping is usually long, and as a large portion of the load is intermittent, it is certain, and is proved by experience in this district, that the same power can be provided electrically in a large central power station by the consumption of less than a quarter of this coal. Apart, therefore, from the efficient utilization of waste heat, apart from the saving of coal in ship-building and engineering works, and apart from the saving resulting from the electrification of railways, the application of electricity to coal-mines in this district, when as complete as that to the Tyne shipyards, will render available for outside sale over 1 millions of tons of coal, equivalent to, say, over half a million sterling per annum. The power plants of the Interborough Rapid Transit Company of New York. The output of the power houses of the Interborough Rapid Transit Company, New York, for the year 1908, was 409,000,000 kw-hr. The consumption of coal was 494,000 tons. In a paper presented at the 214th meeting of the American Institute of Electrical Engineers, by the writer and H. St. Clair Putnam,* comparison was made from the company's operating records of the fuel consumption upon the Manhattan elevated lines during the year ending June 30, 1901, when steam locomotives were employed, and during the year ending June 30, 1904, when electricity was used. I quote from this paper: Referring to the period first mentioned, one pound of coal produced 2.23 ton-miles, if the weight of the locomotive be included, and 1.5 tonmiles, if the weight of the cars only be considered. During the latter period (electric traction), one pound of coal burned at the power house produced 3.85 ton-miles; excluding weight of locomotives, therefore, the ratio of ton-mileage per pound of coal in favor of electric operation was 2.57 to 1. Including weight of locomotive it was 1.72 to 1. The average speed under electric operation was approximately 2 miles an hour greater than that attained by steam, and if correction be made for this difference, the ratio of ton-mileage per pound of coal, excluding weight of locomotives, is approximately 3 to 1, and, including locomotives, 2 to 1 in favor of electric traction. If, therefore, we can conceive the possibility of operating today, by locomotives, the entire service of the elevated and subway lines of the Interborough Company, it appears that the saving in coal consumption effected amounts to not less than 988,000 tons of coal per annum. In each of the three typical cases cited, it will be noted that *TRANSACTIONS A. I. E. E., 1907. Vol. xxvi, p. 31. |