21 



' The NA8 report observed that "later analyses vary above and below 

 these figures somewhat and we note the analyses change significantly 

 from time to time." This was the earUest of "nearly a dozen" aiialyses 

 encountered by the Academy committee. ^^ 



According to Dr. Allen V. Astin, Director of NBS, the additive 

 AD-X2 was neither mj^sterious nor unchanging in composition. He 

 said : 



The Bureau's tests have shown that the material is primarily a simple mixture 

 of sodium and magnesium sulfates and that there is no evidence of a compoiuid or 

 alum structure. The analj'sis also showed a number of trace elements but for the 

 most part these are the same trace elements usually found in varying amovuits in 

 commercial grades of sodium sulfate and magnesium sulfate or in the normal 

 battery electrolyte. It is also pertinent to note in connection with the claim of the 

 uniqueness of the composition of AD-X2 that our analyses have shown variations 

 between samples as high as 19 percent in the ratio of sodium sulfate in AD-X2 to 

 the magnesium sulfate. The ratio of the ciuantities of trace elements also vary 

 a})preciabh-.'* 



In response to questioning by Senator Smathers, the Director said : 

 "We know everything that is in it in concentrations in excess of five 

 parts per million." ^^ He testified that the cost of the sulfate salts in the 

 preparation, in a $36 package wotdd cost about 5 cents at wholesale 

 rates. 1^ 



An article favorable to the additive, that appeared in Newsweek 

 magazine, December 11, 1950, said that Ritchie had revealed that 

 "the trick is in the way the sulfates are treated during preparation, 

 which takes 4 days and nights." ^^ 



An element of uncertainty as to the identity of the additive was 

 contributed by the Randalf letter to Vinal of April 23, 194S, which 

 ascribed the "invention" of AD-X2 to a Donald E. Keifer, and stated 

 that: 



Reductions of 85, 90, and in one instance, 95 percent in annual battery expense 

 during the past year has [sic] been reported by large firms, some of which have 

 always had an intelligent battery service program.'** 



Since the material in question had been in existence only 6 months, 

 according to Ritchie, and the material superseded had been described 

 by Ritchie as unsatisfactory, and an earlier composition positively 

 injurious, the claim of a tenfold to twentyfold im{)rovement in battery 

 cost/effectiveness on an annual basis, in a communication to a fellow 

 scientist is difficult to understand. The material Randall was discussing 

 he described as "a powder mixture of anhydrous sodium sulfate and a 

 slightly basic, nearly anhydrous, magnesium sidfate." ^^ 



The conclusion of the Academy committee was that the composition 

 of the battery additive was of no consequence. It said: 



The matter of the composition of AD-X2 is somewhat irrelevant to our dis- 

 cussion since we liave found no unusual effects which could not be explained by 

 the assumption that it consists of a simple mixture of sodium and magnesium 

 sulfates.^" 



13 National Academy of Sciences— N'ational Research Council. Committee on Battery Additives. Report 

 of tlie Committee on Battery Additives. (Washington, National Academy of Sciences, Oct. 20, 1953), p. 30. 

 I* Hearings. Op. cit., pp. 219-220. 

 "Ibid., p. 260. 

 i«Ibid., p. 263-264. 



1" "New Life for Batteries." Newsweek (Dec. 11, 1950), p. 62. 

 IS Hearings. Op. cit., p. 45. 



19 Idem. 



20 Report of the Committee on Battery Additives. Op. cit., p. 30. 



