BY BENJAMIN BALL FREUD, B. S.

[Assistant Professor of Analytical and Organic Chemistry, Armour

Institute of Technology.]

Chemistry has always been a utilitarian science, a science whose

direct applications to our every-day interests has been on every side

recognized. Even in the days of alchemy, that fantastic forerunner of

our present science, her devotees were concerned with the changing of

the base metals into the noble ones, of lead into silver, and of

copper into gold, and also with the search for the philosopher’s

stone, that mysterious something which would give perpetual youth.

From these workers arose in the course of the years, the facts and the

theories which were incorporated into the science of chemistry. But it

is not entirely to the alchemists that chemistry owes its development.

By far the greater number of facts, if not of theories, came down to

us through the traditional knowledge of the chemical industries.

Numerous animal and vegetable products, such as sugar, starch, the

oils, gums and resins, had been familiar commodities as long back as

history records. And the ancients were informed in such typically

chemical industries as that of dyeing with vegetable dyes, pigment

manufacture, varnish making, soap making, paper making and the

fermentation industries. In fact the science of chemistry as we have

it today owes much more to these unknown workers in the industries who

transmitted their chemical facts from father to son, than it does to

the creations of the imaginations of those picturesque, if not so

truthful, alchemists.

It is entirely impossible to divorce the science of chemistry from 342

its industrial applications. The science owes much to the industries.

The industries owe even more to the science. And if that relationship

has been very close in the past, it is much closer now than it ever

was; and it is getting closer all the while. The utilitarianism of our

age makes it absolutely necessary that the two shall be so united that

the utmost of good shall result from the union.

The application of science in general, and of chemistry in particular,

to the industries has this one general result. It takes that industry

out of the “rule of thumb” class, and places it firmly on a sound

basis. It is no longer conducted in a haphazard manner, but according

to intelligent design, based on the most accurate scientific

information. Of course the fierceness of business competition has

ordered this change, more than any other factor. The pure science of

chemistry would have developed without industrial applications,

because there are investigators who are seeking the truth regardless

of any of its immediate applications. But in the industries, it is a

matter of dollars and cents. The most efficient is the winner. And the

most efficient is the one who utilizes in his business all the

scientific information that can be brought to bear on the subject, and

who is always looking for new facts that can be applied.

Chemistry, then, is applied to the industries in two distinct ways,

the first in discovery, in finding a new substance which can be used,

or a new process by which some useful or necessary substance can be

made; the second in improvement, in making a certain product better,

or cheaper, in utilizing wastes, or in starting from cheaper raw

materials.

There are but two kinds of industries: (a) Those which are based on

processes which change the form of matter, such as the manufacture of

furniture for example, and (b) those which are based on processes

which change the composition of matter, such as the manufacture of

Portland cement from clay and limestone. Now group “b” comprises 343

by far the greatest number of industries, and since the science of

chemistry concerns itself with just those changes in the composition

of matter, it is evident that most of our industries are chemical in

their nature. We have but recently come to realize this. A list of

such industries and operations which are essentially chemical would be

found to include almost every industry that we can think of. I need

only make mention of the subject of fuels, gas and coke, of cement,

mortars, brick and other building materials; of petroleum and its

products; of asphalt; of the products of the destructive distillation

of wood; of cellulose and of paper; of pigments, resins, varnishes; of

rubber; of soap, fats and the fatty oils; of gums; of sugar and of

starch; of the textile industries and of the dyes; of leather and

glue; of explosives; of the heavy chemical industries, the manufacture

of acids, alkalies and salts; of the manufacture of glass and the

ceramic industries; of the fermentation industries; of the manufacture

and standardization of medicines; of the subject of soils and

artificial fertilization; of the subject of foods, and of nutrition;

of the subject of water, sewage and sanitation; of photography; of all

the electro-chemical industries and processes; of the production of

steel, of copper, of lead and of all the other metals. I need only

mention this formidable array of subjects and industries to convince

the most sceptical one that chemistry does in fact, concern us,

directly or indirectly, in all of our activities.

As I have said previously, chemistry influences industry in two

distinct ways: First, in the discovery of new substances and new

processes; secondly, in the perfection of known substances and known

processes. In either of these fields the chemist is proud of his

record. The conquests are so numerous that he is at a loss as to how

or where to begin if he would tell of them. The whole field of

industrial chemistry is one succession of chemical achievements,

mammoth industries that had their humble birth in the chemist’s test 344

tube, his beaker, or his retort; the wealth of by-products saved to

the world from what was a few years ago sheer waste; and above all

increased efficiency in the manufacture of all products. The chemist

does not claim more than his due when he points out that his activity

covers the whole field of our daily experiences, and that his activity

has always been for the lessening of waste, for greater efficiency, in

a word, for the development of civilization. To illustrate the points

which have already been brought out, the story of the soda industry,

the beginning of the modern chemical industries, can be used. The

beginning is far back in another century, so intimately is the

development of the soda industry bound up with the advance of

civilization.

The value of what we now call the alkalies as detergent substances,

was known from the earliest times. The first alkali recorded in

history is burned lime, and was called “caustic” on account of its

characteristic property. Caustic lime is but slightly soluble in

water, hence its use is greatly limited. History fails to tell who it

was who first solved the problem of making a more soluble alkali, but

some one, early in the Middle Ages, discovered that by the action of

caustic lime on the so-called potashes, the ashes which remained on

burning wood, a very soluble caustic was formed. And to this, the long

since forgotten chemist gave the name “caustic potash.” The chemistry

of the discovery is as follows: All plants take potassium, a very

light metal, in some form or other from the soil, to form the

so-called mineral, or bony structure, in other words the skeleton, of

the plant. When these plants are burned the potassium in the form of a

salt, chiefly potassium carbonate, is formed in the ash. These

potassium salts can be extracted by water, and recovered on the

evaporation of the water. These potassium salts, the so-called

“potashes,” were extensively used in the industries of the time, for

example, in making soap, in making glass, in dyeing and in a score of 345

other minor ways. But even as our forests cannot now meet the demand

for timber, so they could not then meet the demand for the “potashes,”

for it requires a large amount of wood to give a comparatively small

amount of potashes, the percentage of potassium salts in wood being

very small indeed. Simultaneously with all this, in northern Spain, on

the seacoast, a number of towns were engaged in burning sea weeds. It

was found that the ashes of sea weeds while not the same as potashes,

nevertheless could be substituted for them. This is historically

recorded as the “barilla” industry. Barilla consisted of 5 per cent of

carbonate of sodium, a metal very similar to potassium. Sodium does

for sea plants just what potassium does for land plants. Barilla was

merely a substitute for potashes, and a very poor substitute at that.

But it was destined to offer the key that solved the whole problem.

The chemists of that time showed the chemical similarity between the

active ingredient of potashes, carbonate of potassium, and the active

ingredient of barilla, carbonate of sodium. The demand for these

alkalies made by the industries was incessant and ever-increasing. The

chemists realized that the direct natural sources of the two, namely,

the wood of the forest and the weeds of the sea, were and always would

be, inadequate to meet the enormously growing demands of the

industries. They saw that some other source would have to be

discovered, or the bodies would have to be prepared artificially. They

realized that while potashes were better than barilla, nevertheless

potassium salts, the ingredients of potashes, were much less widely

distributed in nature than the sodium salts, the ingredients of

barilla. So they set out with the definite object of preparing sodium

carbonate. In 1791 LeBlanc took out a patent for his now famous

process. He was not the only one who worked on the problem; he

happened to be the successful one.

This was the first of the great triumphs of chemistry in the industrial 346

field. The significant point in this story of soda, is that those

industries which were using the alkalies had reached the limit of

their development, because the supply of the alkalies was so limited.

Remember, also, that those industries were fundamental ones. Some

historian has said that you can measure the civilization of a people

by the amount of soap it uses. And here, we see the soap industry of

Europe, the seat of our present civilization, crippled for want of an

alkali. The position of the chemist, his responsibility to society, is

the significant thing in the story. Here was a crisis in the

development of civilization, as important to us as the crisis of the

battle of Marathon. Because the problem was solved in the retort,

instead of on the battle plain, because the battle was fought by the

quiet hand of the chemist, instead of by the fighting men of Greece,

we do not hear so much of it. But it was a triumph, and the credit

belongs to the chemist. To us, as much depended upon the result of the

battle of the molecules in the retort, as upon the defeat of the great

Darius.

Nor was this battle in the retort a tame one. LeBlanc’s method is an

extremely complicated one. To conduct the process at all requires

chemical knowledge of the most varied kind. And to apply the

improvements that have been worked out in the laboratory, and to carry

into practice the many subsidiary manufactures that have sprung from

this main industry, demands so much technical ability that it has been

said that this manufacture is not merely the foundation of the immense

chemical industries of today, but is also the guiding spirit in them.

LeBlanc, of course, could not foretell the enormous development his

industry was to attain. Nor could he conceive of the ramifications

running from it into countless other activities of our present

civilization. The manufacture of sulphuric acid, one of the most

important products of modern industry, is intimately bound up with

that of soda. And, in the manufacture of sulphuric acid, nitric acid 347

is required, and must be made. Hydrochloric acid is a by-product of

the soda process, and was for a long time permitted to go to waste.

Now it is one of the most valuable products of the LeBlanc soda

process. It is used to make bleaching powder, potassium chlorate, and

otherwise in the industries. Also, the alkaline waste from the soda

process is rich in sulphur. This sulphur is now recovered and put on

the market as such, helping to meet the demand for sulphur that the

Sicilian mines cannot supply.

All those varied industries that were either created or fostered by

the soda industry have made possible the almost fabulously complicated

processes that are now carried out in the manufacture of the aniline

dyes, the artificial odors, like vanillin whose complexity can be

gathered from its formula, C_{6}H_{3}OHOCH_{3}CHO, which tells many

things to the chemist, but not much to the layman, and the artificial

febrifuges like antipyrin, whose formula is C_{11}H_{12}N_{2}O. All

these chemical industries that are the outgrowth of the soda industry,

and that are so dove-tailed with our civilization, have been built up

on the science of chemistry, and worked out by chemists. I have

selected this story of soda to show the commanding position held by

the science of chemistry in directing the course of civilization. It

shows, too, how the entire structure of that civilization is built

around the contributions of the chemist.

As has been already said, it is impossible to separate chemistry from

industry. The farther we go and the more we develop and the more

complex our civilization becomes, the closer become the ties uniting

science and industry. And as everything that deals with the change in

composition of matter is chemistry, it is evident that chemistry is

omnipresent. In the light of what it has accomplished, who shall say

that it is not omnipotent?

The story of soda is a beautiful example of how industry and the need

of civilization can act as a beacon light for the science of 348

chemistry. This illustration will show how the pure science has

created new industries and opened up new activities for civilization.

In 1838 in England, there was born a boy who afterwards was to be

known as Sir Wm. Perkin. He came of a very intelligent family.

Besides, he was gifted with a natural aptitude for chemistry. More

than that, he was put under the direction of Professor Hofmann, one of

the most brilliant of chemists. Perkin would have been called by any

one, an ideal bit of raw material. Hofmann, like many others of those

German chemists, had a faculty of instilling that enthusiasm that is

necessary in the performance of an epoch-making advancement. Perkin

caught that enthusiasm. He rigged up a laboratory in his house and

worked at night and in his vacations on those interesting problems

that Hofmann discussed in his lectures. During one of these vacations,

he was trying to build up, artificially, the substance called quinine,

which was up to that time a purely natural product. His work took an

unexpected turn. Instead of building up quinine, he built what

chemists call now phenyl-sufranine, or mauvëine. This was a new

substance with properties that rendered it an excellent dye. Perkin

established a factory in which the new substance could be prepared on

a large scale; and within a year of its discovery, he had it on the

market. This discovery of Mauve, the first of the artificial dyes,

gave a great impetus to the study of coal tar, from which it was made.

Coal tar, up to that time, was a waste product, made in the process of

heating coal for the manufacture of gas. This coal tar is the raw

material which is used in that enormous chemical industry, the

manufacture of the derivatives of tri-phenyl methane, the so-called

aniline dyes. There is invested in this industry alone, $750,000,000;

and the whole structure, complex as it is, is built on the foundation

of a pure chemical research that was undertaken merely to gratify the

investigative desires of a true scientist, with no thought of its 349

financial results. This achievement of Perkin stands out as one of the

great discoveries of chemistry. And the story of Mauve shows how

science has led the way for industry, just as the story of soda shows

how industry has pointed out the way for science.

Many more stories of the victories of scientific industry could be

told. Much has been done. But the chemist does not live in the glory

of the past. He lives in the possibilities of the future. Every

advancement of the past has opened up many fields of possibilities. If

much has been done, much more remains to be done. And the work of the

future will require the services of the scientist more than did the

work of the past. Those problems whose answers were obvious, have all

been solved. The problems of today are deep ones; they require all the

ingenuity, all the ability that the trained chemist can bring to bear

upon the problems. And they will all tend to increased efficiency.

While chemistry is a fundamental science, while it covers such a

variety of subjects, while the total amount of its established facts

is indeed enormous, nevertheless, it must be said with frankness that

this vastness is made up for the most part by details and more or less

isolated facts and ideas. Chemistry can boast of remarkable

achievements. But the greatest achievements are yet before it. And the

reason is this: Chemistry is not yet a really unified science. The

real fundamentals which will string together all of the isolated facts

and ideas, material of which the chemist has, indeed, reason to feel

proud, are for the most part lacking. That is why the future is so

much larger than the past. And that is why the world can expect from

the chemists much greater achievements in the future than it has seen

accomplished in the past, great as they have been.

In the most fundamental terms, chemistry concerns itself with the

changes which the different kinds of energy produce upon matter. 350

Chemistry concerns itself with two things, energy and matter. And yet

chemistry must admit that it does not know the nature of matter or the

nature of energy. And not knowing, it cannot appreciate.

In this direction lie the achievements of the chemistry of the future.

As the nature of matter and the nature of energy gradually unfold

themselves to the advances of chemical investigation, remarkable

possibilities for future development are disclosed. We are beginning

to see how really wasteful we have been. The frightful wastes which

the movement toward the conservation of our natural resources has

called to our attention, sink into utter insignificance when we

consider what we have lost on account of our ignorance. We are just

beginning to appreciate our wastefulness of chemical energy. A piece

of coal, for example, has in it the possibility of doing ten times as

much work as it is doing now. A piece of radium has stored in it an

almost infinite amount of energy. How to change this internal or

chemical energy into the other forms of energy with which we are

familiar, into heat, or electricity, or ordinary mechanical energy,

that is the problem of the future. The utilization of this vast amount

of potential energy that is stored up in all forms of matter, the

harnessing of it in the service of humanity, this is the problem which

confronts the chemist. It goes down to the very fundamentals of his

science.

But the start has been made. The point of the wedge has already found

entrance. The discovery of radium, and the study of its

decompositions, has opened wide our field of vision. The problem must

yield, as the blows of chemical investigation fall upon the wedge and

drive it home.

Chemistry has always been a utilitarian science. Its results have

always been at the service of humanity. And if we can judge the future

by the past, even discounting for the enthusiasm of the chemist, we

can forsee improved processes which will reduce our present wasteful 351

methods; we can see new processes making for us such things as india

rubber from starch, for which we must now depend upon the bounty of

nature; and we can dimly see the time when we shall be able to utilize

some of that energy which is hidden away in the recesses of matter,

and whose vastness we have just begun to appreciate.

THE CLOSE RELATION OF THE PRODUCER-GAS POWER PLANT TO THE CONSERVATION 352

OF OUR FUEL RESOURCES.

Business Administration: Theory, Practice and Application. [Vol. 1] Business Economics · 第 68 / 172 题