WHAT OUR RIVERS CARRY. Colorado River discharges during an average year into the Gulf of California 338,000,000 tons of mud and silt as suspended matter. In addition t o this the dissolved substances in the water include 4,j50,000 tons of sodium chloride, or common salt; 3,740,000 tons of Glauber’s salts; 4,0oo,ooo tons of lime; 2,400,ooo tons of gypsum; and 4,80o,oootons of Epsom salts, I n spite of all this dissolved material the Colorado a t its mouth is n o t considered to be a stream of unusually high mineralization for that region of the country. The reason is that the river also carries so enormous an amount of water t h a t the dissolved salts constitute a comparatively small proportion of the total discharge. Other streams in the country contain dissolved salts in greater concentration-for example, the Elm Fork of Red River, in Oklahoma, discharges nearly 1,30o,i~ootons of common salt annually. Although this amount is riot so great as t h a t discharged by the Colorado it is much greater in proportion t o the size of the area drained. The discharge of salt from thc Colorado is equal t o 2 0 tons annually to each square mile drained by the river, but the salt in Elm Fork of Red River is equal to 1,680 tons per square mile of area drained. The same river discharges annually I 77,000 tons of magnesium chloride, 168,000 tons of Epsom salts, 690,000 tons of gypsum, and j4,Ooo tons of lime. These quantities, too, are considerably greater than those carried in the Colorado in proportion t o the size of the drainage area. Belle Fourche River, a t Belle Fourche, S. Dakota, discharges 191,000 tons of gypsum, 79,000 tons of Glauber’s salts, and 236,000 tons of Epsom salts. The mud and silt carried in suspension by this river amount t o I,IOO,OOOtons. Milk River a t Havre, Montana, discharges annually 41,000 tons of soda; Payette River, in Idah.0, discharges 46,000 tons; Salt River at Roosevelt, -Arizona, discharges 2 8 8 , 0 0 0 tons of salt :md I 70,000 tons of Epsom salts; and the Rio Grande discharges 245,000 tons of lime and 368,000 tons of Glauber’s salts. The foregoing are a few of the figures of incidental interest presented by- IYater-Supply Paper 2 j 4 of the L-riited States Geological Survey, entitled “Some Stream IVaters of the \Yestern United States.” The Tx-ork reported by this volume is, however, of higher practical importance than the above statement would indicate. I t is the result of a n investigation of the quality of \vestern stream waters made for the purpose of determining their availability for use for irrigation and other purposes. For a water-supply system the quality of the water available determines its usefulness quite as much as the quantity. Some n-atcrs contain ingredients t h a t make it inipossible t o use them for irrigation unless certain precautions are taken in applying them t o the land and in draining them off. Certain ingredients in water make i t unavailable or destructive if used in boilers and the quality of water used in a manulacturing plant may rcry largely determine the quality of the product of manufacture. The report just published therefore can not fail to be of material value t o the manufacturing and agricultural interests of the \Vest; and the proper consideration of the information that it contains ivill prevent many costly mistakes in connection with the industrial development of t h a t part of the country.
CEMENT PRODUCTION TO
,1910.
Ten years ago the production of Portland cement for the first time passed the Io,ooo,ooo-barrel mark, showing an increase of 2,600 per cent. over the production of I O years previous, and the giant strides t h a t had been made in the industry \rere xidely remarked. Even this production v a s small compared with t h a t of the present day. In 1910, according to the report on cement by Ernest F. Burchard, of the Geological Survey, the production of Portland cement reached the enormous total of
76,549,951 barrels, n i t h a value of Q68,205,800. This is equivalent t o 12,986,152 long tons, valued a t Sj.25 a ton. I t is an increase over the output for 1909 of 11,j58,520barrels, or nearly 18 per cent., and an increase in value of $15,347,446, or more than 29 per cent. This increase alone’is greater than the total output of Portland cement in 1900. In addition to Portland cement there, \vas also produced last year I , 139,239 barrels of natural cement and 95,951 barrels of puzzolan cement, a total of 77,785,141 barrels. The price of Portland cement in 1910 was as 1017 as 73 cents a barrel in some places, the average for the United States being 89.1 cents a barrel. In 1890 the average price was over $ 2 a barrel and as late as 1903 i t was $1.24 a barrel. Mr. Burchard remarks t h a t measured by the capital invested the cement industry is one of the world’s three great extractive industries. In capital employed it apparently far outranks the gold-mining industry of the United States, including alaska, as well as the copper industry. Only coal and iron stand ahead of it. The principal constituent of Portland cement is limestone, and Mr. Burchard’s report summarizes the most important limestone formations in all the States. The greatest of these are found in the eastern half of the United States, where there are enormous limestone deposits. The report is accompanied by a map showing the distribution of these limestones. The areas they cover comprise many thousands of squar: miles. The map also shows the location of the operating cement plants in the United States. That the manufacture of cement is an American industry is shown by the fact t h a t while our production last year was over j j,ooo,ooo barrels our imports n-ere only 306,863 barrels. Our exports lvere 2 , 4 7 j,957 barrels. The following table shows the healthy growth of the American Portland cement industry and also the decrease in prices: P R O D C C T I O X OF P O R T L A S D CEIilENT I N T H E U N I T E D S T A T E S
1880 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1890.. 1895 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1900 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1905 .......................... 1909 1910 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
........................
..........................
1880-19L0
Barrels.
Average price per barrel.
42,000 335,500 990,324 8,182,020 35,246,812 61,991,431 76,549,951
$3.00 2.09 1 60 1.09 0.91 0.81 0.89
WORLD’S PRODUCTION OF COAL. The total coal production of the world in 1910 \vas approximately I ,300,000,000 sliorI tons, of which the Unitcd States contributed about 39 pci- cent. .I\ccording t o the Knite:l Stites Geological Surrey, it exceeded Great Britain, which ranks second, by over zoo,ooo,oootons. Great Britain’s production in 1910 was less than 60 per cent. of that of the United States, and Germany’s was less than half. The incrcase in both of these countries in 1910 over 1909 \vas comparativcl!: small, xhereas the increase in the United States was nearly equal to the cntire production of Francc and \vas more than the total production of any foreign country except Great Britain, Germany, Austria-Hungary, and France. The Enited States has held first place among the coal-producing countries of the ivorld since 1899, whcn i t surpassed Great Britain. In the 11 years since 1899 the annual output of the United States has nearly doubled, from 253,741,192 short tons to 501,j96,378 tons, whereas t h a t of Great Britain has increased only 20 per cent., from 246,506,155 short tons to 296,007,699 tons. The following table shows the coal production of the principal
.
