The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

Does It Pay To Burn Coal Now? Great Difference in Cost of Fuels May Overcome Other Advantages—It Is Important To Make a Careful Analysis and To Weigh All Factors Concerned HE advantages claimed for oil as a steamship fuel are so firmly implanted and its special suit- ability for marine service so apparent, that the question of converting oil burners to coal, because of its cheap- ness, is one that may not receive the attention which it deserves. Oil fuel has several distinct advan- tages; in convenience of fueling, stow- age in waste space, steaming radius per unit of weight and bulk, saving in fireroom force, cleanliness, and, under best conditions, high efficiency in com- bustion. At the present cost of oil, however, a premium may be paid for these advantages which on many ships may be out of all proportions to their necessity. With the existing compe- tition in shipping, the lowest cost at which the propeller can be made to turn up the rated revolu- tions should be the prime measure of engine room. effi- While the price of fuel oil ciency. BY J. S. BURROWS Fuel Expert, Castner Curran & Bullitt, Inc. ing surveys of the future of oil as a fuel; their final action indicating more plainly than any report, a conclusion of stability for coal and uncertainty as to the future of fuel oil. ' Oil For Fuel Will Cost More In fact the basic trend of oil is to- wards better and more profitable uses than -as a fuel and while, on the one hand we are told of the rapidly di- minishing supplies of oil, on the other we hear of new methods of refining the poorer oils that were heretofore con- different problem to be worked out separately. From the standpoint of comparative engine room cost on a basis of 4.33 to 4.75 barrels of oil per ton of coal of various grades at cur- rent prices; with due allowance for 10 per cent difference in efficiency, cost of increased fireroom force, including ad- ditional galley help and subsistence; there will usually be found a decided saving in favor of coal. To ascertain the net advantage however the revenue value of the additional space required for bunkers in using coal must be de- ducted from the has been _ steadily advancing the price of coal has _ been gradually declining until now in cases with all the proper factors consid- ered coal isthe cheapest fuel available for steaming purposes. If we take oil at $1.85 per barrel and an average grade of bunker coal at $5.00 per ton, both on board in bunkers, and we consider that 4Y% barrels of oil is equal in steaming to one ton of coal, the margin of dif- ference is about 70 per cent or more than three dollars per ton in favor of coal and at current quotations this mar- gin is even greater. Many of the large and _ important steam plants on shore have already taken advantage of this situation with great savings in power cost. Several of the electric light and street railway companies which have been using oil since the war, have made substantial investments in mechanical coal stoking niachinery as a result of their painstak- users of fuel oil must inevitably com- pete as buyers with the automobile in- dustry, manufactures of lubricants and all the other users of the products of crude oil so that the cost of convert- ing a set of boilers from oil to coal is justified by the future outlook if the change is warranted by a lower operating cost. There are ships operating on oil to- day on which a greater profit per cubic foot of the required bunker space can be shown than if this space were util- ized for revenue freight. Where oil is stowed as usual in space not available for cargo, the essence of the problem is the revenue value of the cargo space and increased dead-weight which must be given up for bunkers in using coal. Consequently, each ship presents a 181 saving indicated in the engine room cost and it is here that it will appear whether the change will be worth while or not. For exam- ple—A ship is en- gaged to carry three cargoes aggregating 36,600 tons per month on an eighty cent freight. Fuel oil costs her $1.75 per barrel, best steaming coal can be had at $4.50 a ton. The final com- parison of cost of the two fuels fig- COAL AT NORFOLK, VA., READY FOR SHIPMENT ured out, per ton of freight carried per many sidered only fit for fuel purposes. As month, will come out as follows: progress is made in oil refining the Fuel cost per ton of freight per month Fuel oil at $1.75 per bbl. See are $.1790 Coal: at: $4503 nerton.: = ee $.0977 Cost of additional firemen, mess- men with subsistence for same, add<: to \coali (sag eee -0067 ‘Coal—total engine room cost... 1044 Saving in engine room over oil $.0746 Less loss of revenue at $.80 per ton D. W. due to additional buker space required for coal $.0157 Net saving with coal.......... $.0589 On 36,600 tons of revenue freight, this makes a total saving of $2155.74 per month. The accompanying charts have been drawn to facilitate the work of mak- ing such comparisons as the above. The chart on page 182 shows from 1000 to 7000 barrels of tuel oil compared with the deadweight of the same and