Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1909-01-31

the oil gas. where does the coal gas come
in. in that same product?
Mr.. Forstall-That is made en-
tirely separate proposition.
Mr.. Sims-When is it mixed with the
other?
Mr.. Forstall-That depends. In some
plants il is mixed AT the inlet 10 the
holder after the entire manufacturing
treatment has been given to the gas. In
other plants it is mixed i'm the other part
Of the plants known the purifier.
Mr.. Sims-What is the object in mixing
the coal gas with carbureted water gas?
Mr.. FOraall--I should rather say ii
was usually considered the other way.
You mix the carbureted water gas with
the coal gas TO enrich it,
Mr.. Sims-Ennch the coal gas
Mr.. Fonstall-Yes.
Mr. Sims-Take it here: it has been
stated that Sb per cent OF carbureted
water gas is mixed with 20 per cent of
coal gas. What is the benefit of that?
Mr. Forstall-You get the benefit OF
cleapening the manufacture. If it was
not for the coal gas. you would have 10
buy all the fuel necessary To make the
water gas. and probably at higher price
than you can furnish your own coke for,
and having the apparatus to produce the
coal gas it is great deal cheaper to use
it to make coke and use that in the water
gas than it would be to let it stand idle
and make it all water gas.
MI. Sl1I1S-lI Is tH eCOHOIIIS III tIit
ufacture?
Mr.. Forstall-Yes. OF course. when you
get to that proportion it Is simply case
Of using apparatus that you have. You
probably would not design a new works
and start out with that proportion be-
tween the two gases
Mr.. Sims-Ip other words, then. the OBJ
ject of mixing is a benefit to manufacture,
without any special reference to the gas
that is produced?
Benefit to Manufacturers.
Mr. Forstall-Yes; it is a benefit to the
manufacture, and in these present days
of regulation it cannot benefit the manu-
facture at low cost of production with
out benefiting the consumer at the same
time.
While Commissioner Barker has treated
the history of the introduction of carbu
reted water gas from the Massachusetts
standpoint, it may be just we'll for me
to treat of it from the general standpoint.
I was right in the thick of that fight, al
though | was a very young man at the
time, but my father was one of the FEC. &
niZed old guard of the coal-gaS men.
When the water gas was first introduced.
or first proposed. he rather looked upon
it as a useless thing. He did not think
any consideration ought to be given to 1t,
and the reason was: as Mr. Barker mas
said that all over the United States. as
in Massachusetts. the opposition was
more to the method of promotion. the
method adopted by the promoters of the
process, than it was TO the process itself
In other words, the promoters of the wa
ter-gas process started in the wrong way.
They would go into a town and say: we
have a process. We know Ii is TO your
advantage to use it, and we are going to
force you to use it. If you do not do it
voluntarily, we will organize another gas
company and you will suffer-
Mr. Taylor-That is. they would say
that to the existing gas company
Mr.. Fcrstall-Yes. That naturally
aroused considerable antsgonism and the
managers of the existing companies could
see no good in such a process. That
was begun in the late seventies. There
were quite number OF plants put In up
to 1889, but after 1883 the tactics of the
owners of the water gas patents changed
somewhat: the company controlling the
patents got a different management and
the methods changed, the method OF APP
preaching gas companies changed, and
from that time on there was very rapid
increase in the amount OF carbureted
water gas made and distributed in the
United States. In 1885. my father put
in a water gas apparatus in the works
he was then in charge of. and in 1889,
for a gas society showing how much
better the carbureted water gas plant
was for the public than the coal gas
plant was.
the face Of the adverse opinion that
had been excited was simply the greater
merit Of the water gas process. The
points in which the process has greater
there are also others which need little
more application. In the first place.
the consumer uses less carbureted water
gas to do the same amount of work than
he does coal gas. That is not a matter
of theory. it is matter of actual fact.
I have been connected with two gas
companies which changed from coal gas
to a mixture. The Chicago company
changed from coal gas to straight water
gas while 1 was with them. and the
Newark Gas Company changed from
straight coal gas to a mixture Of 80 or
Do per cent water gas. In both cases
the year in which the change was made
there was practically no increase over
the preceding gas in sales. while for ten
years past we had been increasing from
10 to 20 per cent. 1t cut out entirely
our normal increase in sales; just put US
back year. That is pretty conclusive
evidence that less carbureted water gas
is used by the consumer than coal gas
to do the same amount of work He
gets q higher candlepCwer, and there is
another reason for it. Even without his
being conscious of it, with the same ap-
planes he cannot use as much carbu-
reted water gas as he can coal gas, on ac-
count of the difference in the specific
gravity The amount of flow from a
6lNSH oiiiSS. Will given Size ana a
given pressure behind it, is inversely
proportional to the square OF the specific
gravity, so that the higher the specific
gravity Of the gas the less flow you get
through an crifice of given size with a
given pressure. and the specific gravity
of carbureted water gas is considerably
higher than that of coal gas.
Higher Candlepower.
Then. another merit is, it is also possible
to make a higher candlepoWer satisfacto-
rily. On that point of candlepower Mr..
Tucker raised the question as to the diff
terent methods of testing. There is a
point which L am glad he brought I'D, be-
cause / have made note OF it as he
spoke of it. The legal testing Of coal gas.
as it is done in Massachusetts and in Eng
land, is specified to be done by the burner
not having a mantle, to give the light
which gives the largest amount of light
from the gas, and is practical for use by
the consumer. Under those specifications
the testing of coal gas of the ordinary
quality, IA to Is candle power, is entire
ly done by Argand burners, and those
Argand burners are not used to any great
extent by gas consumers. Before the
Welsbach burner came in there used to
be an Argand burner in the library where
table. If you were to test the coal gas
by fiat flame burner. instead of getting
IL You might get II or L.. In the carbu-
reted water gas candlepower is tested by
a fiat flame burner, and there is no earth
ly reason why the consumer cannot get
just as good candlepoWer IN his house
in his room, as is shown in the gas eN-