358 IOWA DEPARTMENT OP AGRICULTURE 



while he was carrying about 50 pounds of steam. He was in the 

 boiler room and was just fishing out pieces of a melted grate, mean- 

 while offering a flowery tribute to the "poorest coal he ever shov- 

 eled" with an occasional reference to the manager. I looked at the 

 coal and found it a good grade of block variety, and then I looked 

 into his ash pit. It didn't take long to point out to him that the 

 trouble was not poor coal but in poor firing. He complained of 

 burning out grates every few weeks and of the coal melting over 

 them, causing clinkers and stopping the draught. It was because he 

 didn't keep the ashes from filling up against the under side of the 

 grates. His method of firing was exactly like the foundry man fires 

 a cupola — a layer of fire, a layer of iron and another layer of fire. 

 In fact this is the only way they can melt even raw pig iron. No 

 matter how good your coal, cupola firing will burn out your grates, 

 cause clinkers and melt your coal instead of burning it. Do not let 

 the ashes fill up from below and come in contact with the grates. 



While a great deal of fuel can be saved by careful handling of 

 boiler and engine, I contend that a creamery running two or three 

 separators and the regular line of machinery does not require a 15, 

 20 or 30 horse steam power plant, and particularly is this reckless 

 extravagance in gathered cream factories. 



I sent out inquiries to several creameries in the dairy states ask- 

 ing about the cost of their power, and the information I received bears 

 out my contention of extravagance. I found the average cost of 

 reporting creameries operating separators to be $42.70 per month, 

 and for gathered cream plants, $41.15. In other words, the cream- 

 eries operating no separators are paying nearly as much for power 

 as those running separators, which is convincing evidence that no 

 attention has been given the subject of economical power. These re- 

 ports show, too, that variation in cost of power is due more to cost 

 of fuel rather than the amount of power required — another evidence 

 of thoughtless habit. It is plain, however, that big boilers and en- 

 gines are being used simply because the creameries several years ago 

 started out that way, and until now no one has tried to break the 

 habit. 



Now the remedy I propose is not applicable without exception, for 

 there are plants where the utmost economy is practiced. I believe, 

 however, that 50 per cent of our creameries can reduce their power 

 cost 50 per cent, and if this 50 per cent is worth saving to you, give it 

 serious thought and consideration. I do not propose to recommend 

 the running of creameries without steam, as that would be as impos- 

 sible as trying to run them without milk or cream. I merely propose 

 to show you how I, at least, have a sufficient amount of steam and 

 power at a materially less cost. It is not economy to run short of 

 either steam or power, but it is foolish extravagance to maintain a 

 power plant from two to four times larger than necessary. 



The gasoline engine is the source of power to which I direct your 

 attention. Its application to the creamery is of comparatively recent 

 date in view of the fact that a few years ago when all creameries 



