Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1891-08-08
ers, and the captain may not know what
time his coal may give out.

ers, and the captain may not know Wnat
! time his coal may give out.
SOME OF THE DISADVANTAGES.
On the other hand, there are certain diff
entities and disadvantages to be considered
if oil is to replace coal in navigation
First--Oil tanks and supply pipes would
have to be supplied at certain stations along
the coast. These oil stations need not be so
numerous as coal stations, however, because
steamers burning oil need not replenish
their fuel as often as if they burned coal.
The cost of erecting and maintaining such
stations. with pumping machinery, oil-tight
tanks and trucks with pipes, by means of
which many vessels may be supplied at the
same time, would probably not exceed the
expenditure on coal stations, which must be
provided with sheds in good repair, landing
Jetties, tipping appliances etc.
Second-The cOmbustibility of oil might
occasion an explosion in case of shell hit
ing the tanks. This objection, however, can
be met by the statement that the oil can be
easily stored below the water line, where it
would be comparatively safe. Nor is it GER
tain by any means that oil in tank will
ignite if pierced by a she'll In case an oil
tank, partially empty, is pierced by she'll,
the water that enters will rise to the top.
The oil remaining at the bottom may still,be
drawn off and burned, and, although water
may continue to flow in until it fills the
tank, the buovancy of the ship will be in
creased rather than diminished, because
water is lighter than oil. On the contrary,
stantly shut off. The coal remaining in it
cannot be used and the water that enters
the bunker reduces the buoyancy of the
ship. This fact is as important as it is inter-
esting.
1T wOTTT.D COST MORE THAN COAL.
Third-The cost Of oil Is about three
used very largely In D,erchant steamers, for,
notwithstanding the saving in stokers, the
cheapness of loading and other advantages,
the saving in expense of labor will not, as
rule, compensate for the greater cost of the
oil except in certain localities where special
conditions obtain. And If many steamers
were to burn oil the price would be largely
increased at once, owing to this increased
demand. But war navies, not being SO de-
pendent upon prices as the merchant ma
rine, will watch the experiments now being
made to see if the much-vaunted tactical su-
periority of oil over coal justifies the addi-
tlonal expense. It Is quite possible that
England, Russia, France and the United
States may decide to usa oil for torpedo
boats at least Russia and the United States
have large supplies Of mineral oil; England
could easily procure shale oil from its own
bituminous slate clay, and France may
draw upon its few oil wells for fuel, be-
cause there is danger that its coal mines
may not be adequate to furnish all the coal
needed by its navy in time of war. IT the
torpedo feet burns oil, the coal supply may
be sufficient for the large ships
Liquid fuel will, no doubt, be used in all
submarine boats, and it will probably be
adopted by the owners of pleasure yachts,
with whom economy is mattef of secondary
consideration. They will need fewer men
on board, and will get rid of coal dust,
smoke and cinders-important points in
steam yacht. In this, as in all matters
affecting the efficiency of the navy, the
Naval Intelligence Office at Washington
keeps abreast the times and renders great
assistance to the service by directing the
attention of officers to every new phase of
modern naval warfare.