Mar., 1913
T H E JOURhTAL OF I N D U S T R I A L A N D EATGINEERIATGCHE:VfISTRl/
THE STEEL I N D U S T R Y The total production of stcel for 1912 was about 29,745,000 long tons, of which about 62.5 per cent. was basic and 37.5 per cent. acid. The United States Steel Corporation supplied about 45 per cent. of the steel production of the United States; it earned approximately $108,178,307, a n increase of $3,822,744 over 191I , although the tonnage of shipments increased about 35 per cent. and the prices rose about $6.00 per ton. The iron and steel trades are now in a strong position, and this prosperity seems likely to continue for some time. There was a n increase of 2 0 . 1 per cent. in exports of iron and steel, including machinery, over 191I , while there was a decrease of 0.04 per cent. in the imports; and the foreign trade for 1913 should be strong. THE PRODUCTION OF AMMONIUM SULFATE I N 1912 The world’s output of ammonium sulfate during 1912 was ncarly 1,290,000 tons, more than half as much as the total initput of nitrate of soda. This production was thus distributed: Toxs(e) (:errtiany. . . . . . . ..................... l’iiited Kingdoni., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I.nited S t a t e s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1:runce. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Belgium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . r\ustria-llungary and remainder of Europe. . . . . . .
..
465,000 379,000 155,000 68,500 49,500 170,000
Total output. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,287,000 ( a ) The figures given throughout refer t o ammonia production calculated into its sulfate equiralent, as customary.
I t will thus be seen t h a t Germany is now the largest producer, ivhich is partly ascribable to the development of the by-product coke-oven and producer plants, and partly to the increase in German consumption; in I 9 I 2 , there was a decrease, instead of a n increase, in the German exports. The production in the United Kingdom was as follows: TONS Gns works..
......................
166,000 Coke, carbonizing and producer gas plants.. , , , , , , , 132,000 Shale oil industry., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61,000 Iron works . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,000 Total British o u t p u t . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . 379,000
I n 1912, the Unitcd Kingdom exported 286,864 tons of ammonium sulfate, 39,333 tons of which went to the United States, 86,659 tons to Japan, and 66,731 tons to Spain and the Canaries. Unless Germany enters into the export trade more prominently during 1913, the producers of the United Kingdom look for an increased demand from the UnitFd States and Spain. Prominent British traders still regard the United States position as the crux of the market. About 2 I j,ooo tons of ammonium sulfate were consumed in the United States in 1912, of which amount 60,000 tons were imported. Of the home production, 155,000 tons, about 7 5 per cent. was produced by the by-product coke plants, and the balance by the bone-black and coal gas industries. The increase in production over 1911 was 28,000 tons, due to the larger operations of the by-product coke industry. At the beginning of 1912, there were 4,624 by-product coke ovens in operation and 698 in course of construction. Additional by-product plants are announced for 1913, and it is expected that the domestic recovery of ammonia will be carried out on a largcr scale hereafter. At all events, American manufacturers are not being intimidated, apparently, by either synthetic ammonia ur fixed-nitrogen. THE PETROLEUM INDUSTRY I N THE UNITED STATES IN 1912 T h y ( A m . Gaslight I., 98, 46; The Gas A g e , 31, 8 5 ) estimates
253
the crude petroleum production for 19 I 2 in comparison with that of 191I , as follows: BARRELSO F 42 GALLOAS
STATE
1911
California. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Oklahoma. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Illinois.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Louisiana. . . . . . . . . . . . . West Virginia. . . . . . . . . . . Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ohio. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pennsylvania. . , , , . . , . Indiana. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Kansas. . . . . . . . . . . . . S e w York.. . . . . . . . . . . . . Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . . . Colorado. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Other S t a t e s . , . . . . . . . . . . Total production..
..
1912
81,134,391 56,069,637 31,317,038 10,720,420 9 795,464 9,526,474 5,517,112 8,248,158 I , 695,289 1,278,819 952,515 472,458 226,926 194.690
87,000,000 52,000,000 28,000,000 10,000,000 11,800,000 10,500,000 8,500,000
220,449,391
220,200,000
~
Y ,ooo, o m 1 , 200,000
1,3oo,ono 700,000 sn0,ooo 200,000 500,000
The Engineering and Mining Journal, 95, 152, gives a lower estimate, namely, 218,970,815 barrels. The decline in production during 1912 exerted an influence on the price; for example, Mercer, Pa., black, quoted a t $0.87 per barrel a t the beginning of 1912, was quoted a t $1.53 a t the end of the year; North Lima, Ohio, jumped from $0.84 to $ 1 . 2 2 , Indiana from $0.79 to $1.17, Kansas and Oklahoma from ,%.jo t o $0.80, and Electra and Henrietta, Texas, from $0.53 to $0.85. Judging from the dividend disbursements by the constituents of the “old” Standard Oil Company, 1912 was a year of prosperity for the Eastern oil companies. While the California oil companies made a creditable showing in dividends, the year closed badly for them, owing to the Standard’s refusal to take low-grade oil after the existing contracts expired. The exports of mineral oils from the United States for the year ended December 31, were 1,736,230,014gallons in 1911 and 1,844,530,045 gallons in 1912. The exports in 1912 included 173,522,223 gallons of crude; 1,023,681,414gallons of illuminating oils; 213,j59,784 gallons of lubricating oils and parafin; 17j,089,;71 gallons of naphthas and gasoline; and 2 j9,276,851 gallons of residuum. During the year the demand for gasoline greatly increased; there was a considerable extension in the use of oil-driven tractors and agricultural machinery, and the employment of oil engines to reduce power costs in remote districts became more fully appreciated. Modern refining methods were described in brief during the year by Thomas T. Gray (The iLfiizeruZ Industry, 20, 5 7 7 ) , w h o also jndicated some technical problems requiring solution. CONDITIONS O F THE PLATE GLASS INDUSTRY I N THE UNITED STATES’ The annual production of plate glass in the United States is about 60,000,000 square feet, about 4; per cent. of which is produced by the Pittsburgh Plate Glass Company and the rc mainder by the following clevcn separate companies : Allegheny Plate Glass Co., Glassmere, Pa. American Plate Glass Co.. Kane, Pa. Columbia Plate Glass Co., Blnirsville, Pa Federal Plate Glass Co., Ottawa, Ill. Ford, Edward, Plate Glass Co., Rossford, Oliio. Heidenkamp Mirror Co., Springdale. P a . Kittanning Plate Glass Co., Kittanning. l’a. Penn-American Plate Glass Co., Alexandria, I n d Saginaw Plate Glass Co.. Saginaw, hlich. St. Louis Plate Glass Co., Valley Park, %Io. S t a n d a r d Plate Glass Co., Butler, Pa. Much of this information has been taken from The c ; l a . s ~ i ~ o r k e rS1, , For a review of the present status of t h r WIII~OIV glnss industry in the 1.nite.d States, see Tiirs ~ O I ~ R N . A I5.,. ’10. 1
Nos. 16 and 1 7 (1913).
254
T H E J O U R N A L OF I N D U S T R I A L A-VU ESGI.VEEKI.VG
None of the American product is exported, with the exception of a negligibly small quantity to contiguous tcrritory to supply pressing requirements. The capital invested in the plate glass industry in this country is about $49,ooo,ooo,the smallest concern in the industry having a capital investment of about $I,OOO,OOO. The average number of men employed directly in the industry is about I I ,000, but those indirectly employed will equal more than twice this number. The average cost of manufacturing plate glass in the United States in 191 2 was 23.98 cents per square foot without considering depreciation; with depreciation added, but ‘without allowing anything for interest on bonds or capital invested, the cost of plate glass per square foot was 28.45 cents. I n 1909, the same cost figures were 28.16 cents and 33.71 cents, respectively. A comparison of the foregoing costs, before deducting depreciation or any interest on bonds or capital, with the average selling prices for the same periods, shows t h a t all glass under five feet was sold a t a large loss, while the margin of profit on glass over five feet was but 1.81 cents per square foot in 1909 and 4.66 cents in 1912. If we include depreciation, there existed on sales of plate glass over five square feet a n actual loss in 1909 and but 0.19 cent profit per square foot in 1912. The production of plate glass throughout the world is estima. ted a t ~ z ~ , o o o , o osquare o feet, a little less than one-half of which is produced and consumed in this country. The producing countries in Europe are Belgium, Germany, Austria, France, England, Italy, Spain, and Russia; but Belgium produces more glass than any of the other countries, a t the lowcst cost, and exports 9 j per cent. of its product. The production of all b u t two of the European plate glass factories is curtailed and prices are fixed under a trust combination; each factory is said t o have a capacity of 45 to 50 per cent. more than their present production. Since the organization of the International Convention abroad, the plate glass manufacturers of Europe have prospered and many improvements in machinery have been made, particularly in polishing machines. At present the cost of manufacturing plate glass in Belgium is $1.06 to $1.25 per square meter (10.76 square feet), and rough glass is being manufactured a t a cost of less than $0.48 j per square meter. The American plate glass manufacturers are not associated with the European syndicate and consequently the latter has established a low range of prices for the American market. It can undersell competitors in any market in the world and then recoup its losses by adding them to the price of platc glass in markets t h a t i t controls, and is in a n immediate position to makc a strong invasion of the American market. THE PRESENT STATUS OF THE SUGAR INDUSTRY’ The year 1912 was indeed a peculiar one in the sugar industry in the United States. I n the beet sugar States, with one or two exceptions, the yield was the highest on record, while in Louisiana the output of cane sugar was the lowest recorded for a generation. The “campaign” is now over in the latter State and the product is put a t less than 170,000 tons, as against 316,000 tons in 191I . Hundreds of acres of land in the cane parishes were inundated when the levees broke last spring and the young cane was destroyed. Then, too, a freeze occurred early in November, 1912, and another the latter part of the same month. Nevertheless, the Louisiana cane planters have laid plans for a successful campaign in 1913, although during much of the month of December persistent rains retarded field work and delayed the planting of the seed cane. The 1912 statistics of the beet sugar industry arc given in the accompanying table. The heavy beet yield all over the country has had the natural result of enlivening interest in the industry, and therc is hardly a State in the bcct belt from Ohio 1 Most of the above information has been taken from American S u g a r l a d u s t r y , 16, 21
C N E M I S l ’ R 1’
Mar., 19 I 3
west to the Pacific but has one or more projects on foot with the view to locating new beet sugar factories. Some of the projects are sufficiently developed to insure operation in 1913 if i t were not for the tariff situation; in the case of others not so well developed, work has been suspended until the question is definitely settled. It is of interest t o note t h a t Texas is rapidly coming to the front as a sugar State. T H E B E E T S U G A R Ih’DUSTRY
Factories in opcration
STATE California . . . . . . . . . . 10 Colorado. . . . . . . 17 Idaho.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Michigan. . . . . . . . . . . 1G Nebraska.. . . . . . . . . . . 2 Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . One factory states: Ariz.. Ill., Ia., Kan., Minn., Mont., Nev., I n d . Total..
...............
6 4
Y
I X T H E U N I T E D STATES FOR
Acres harvested 100,612 142,369 18,500 114,012 19,248 27,,500 36, 1 0 0 23,400
4 9 , son
Yield of beets in short tons 980,894 1,683,1.5Y
m,noo I , 026,208
2 13 , nnn 268,214
1912
Sugar production in short tons 155,432 223,181 25,132 1 1 9 ~ 6L 1 2.5,1 s o 28,433
469, 000 250,000
5 0 , 51)O
30 , 000
-
___
____
466,710
__
72
531,601
5,541,151
730,166
63,637
For comparison, the following European statistics on liect sugar crops for 1 0 1 2are available: TONS
Russia., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,182,iOi) Gennany. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,604,000 I h n c e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 891,620
THE PRODUCTION AND CONSUMPTION O F RUBBER I N 1912 The statistics which follow are taken from T h e I n t l z c ~Rubber LVorld, 47, 194. PRODUCTION
Tow ion
South America (East Coast). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S o u t h America (West Coast). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Central America a n d Mexico., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Africa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Assam, Rangoon a n d Borneo. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Guayule a n d Jelutong rubber.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Plantation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . All other sources., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
40,
2,o m 5,no0 15,000 2,500
io,nnn 2 8 , son 1, non
,. I otal production.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
104,700
COXSUMPTION
TONS America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 8 , non 17,250 Great Britain.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Germany. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,000 1:rance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . in,nnn 7,000 Russia.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,nnn Belgium. . . ....................... 8,no0 All other countries.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
_--
108,250 Totnl consumption. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,550 Excess over p r o d u c t i o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IMPORTS I X T O T H E U N I T E D STATES
During the fiscal yearending June 30, 1912, 110,210,173pounds of crude rubber were imported. For the ten months ending October 31, 1912, 97,308,544 pounds of crude rubber were imported. From January I to November 18, 1912, the United States received 3,572,959 pounds of Ceylon grown rubber. THE UTILIZATION O F BLAST-FURNACE AND COKE-OVEN GASES. Gouvy (Eng., 94, No. 2446, 684) statcs that the French iron and steel works have failed t o derivc from their waste gases all the advantages possible, largely from having considerecl the matter from too general an aspect, in caple of studying each
