235 



From these figures it \Adll be seeu that there is only a slight difference 

 in the cost of power for the two types of machinery, but these figures 

 would diA-erge in favor of the gas producers as the size of the plant was 

 increased. If the plant were located in the coal fields and the power 

 l)rought over as high voltage current, the amount of money saved on freight 

 would pay for the transmission line in about eighteen months. In fact, for 

 such a plant the line losses and cost of transformers at both ends of the 

 line would bring the price of power to about the same figure. 



Probably the ideal solution for the power question would be to furnish 

 the entire district with power. This plant to be located in the coal fields 

 and be of the by-product recovery type with gas engines and the power 

 transmitted at 33,000 volts. Such a line and voltage would ]>e the cheapest 

 for conditions as they would be in this district. 



There are numerous plants in Europe which depend upon the by-prod- 

 ucts recovered for their profits. A good example is the ])laut at Dudley 

 Port, South Staffordshire. England, where a Mond by-product plant prac- 

 tically pays for all the fuel used, in the by-products )-ccovered. The two 

 principal by-products are ammonium sulphate and tar. The ammonium sul- 

 phate alone returned $2.25 per ton of coal burned, and the tar sells for 

 $0 19 per ton of coal burned. 



Ordinary bituminous coal will return SO to 90 pounds of sulphate of 

 ammonia per ton. Such plants now in operation produce a Kilowatt per 

 hour of power on l.o4 lbs. of coal fired. Since the price of coal is so low 

 in this district the cost of power would be but little over the fixed charges 

 on the investment. This problem of power economy for the quarries begins 

 to be of especial interest over the entire district, and if the issue were met 

 squarely a great saving of money would re.sult. as well as great economy in 

 coal consumption. 



