We have found that, as we could persuade mill owners to put in more
boilers and extend their furnaces, so that coal could be burned
moderately and time for combustion afforded, we often saved as high as
1,000 tons in a yearly consumption of 4,000.
Now, when the ordinary locomotive sends particles of coal into the
cars in which I am riding, I do not think it would be unfair criticism
to say that the process of combustion was not properly carried out.
When we see dense volumes of gas emitted from the stack, it is evident
that a portion of the hard dollars which were paid for the coal are
being uselessly thrown into the air; and it will be well to remember
that only a little of the unburnt gas is visible to the eye.
One point I wish to make is this: We find, as I have said, that as we
spread out with boilers and furnaces in the mills, so that we can take
matters deliberately, we save money.
Now, coming again to locomotives. I think, if we examine the subject
carefully, the fact will strike us a little curiously. The first
locomotive built in Philadelphia weighed about 14 tons. Judging from
the cut I have seen, I should think her furnace might have been 30
inches square. We have gone from that little 14 ton engine to machines
of 50 and 60 tons--perhaps more. The engines have been increased over
four times, but I will ask you if the furnace areas have been
increased (applause) in proportion? Some of the furnaces of the
engines are six feet by three, but that is an increase of less than 3
to 1 of furnace, as against 4 to 1 of weight of engine.
Pages:
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42