By SAMUEL INSULL.[1]

[Footnote 1: Before the Electrical Engineering Department of

Purdue University, Lafayette, Ind., May 17, 1898.]

The success of the low-tension system was followed by the introduction

of the alternating system, using high potential primaries with the

converters at each house, reducing, as a rule, from 1,000 down to

either 50 or 100 volts. I am not familiar with the early alternating

work, and had not at my disposal sufficient time in preparing my notes

to go at any length into an investigation of this branch of the

subject; nor do I think that any particular advantage could have been

served by my doing so, as it has become generally recognized that the

early alternating work with a house-to-house converter system, while

it undoubtedly helped central station development at the time, proved

very uneconomical in operation and expensive in investment, when the

cost of converters is added to the cost of distribution. The large

alternating stations in this country have so clearly demonstrated this

that their responsible managers have, within the last few years, done

everything possible, by the adoption of block converters and

three-wire secondary circuits, to bring their system as close as they

could in practice to the low-tension direct-current distribution

system. I do not want to be understood as undervaluing the position of

the alternating current in central station work. It has its place, but

to my mind its position is a false one when it is used for

house-to-house distribution with converters for each customer. The

success of the oldest stations in this country, and the demonstration

of the possibilities of covering areas of several miles in extent by

the use of the three wire system, resulted in much capital going into

the business. One of the earliest stations of a really modern type

installed on either side of the Atlantic was built by the Berlin

Electricity Works. The engineers of that station, while recognizing

the high value of the distributing system, went back to Edison's

original scheme of a compact direct-connected steam and electric

generator, but with dynamos of the multipolar type designed and built

by Siemens & Halske, of Berlin, the engines being of vertical marine

type.

This was followed by the projecting in New York of the present Duane

Street station, employing boilers of 200 pounds pressure, triple and

quadruple expansion engines of the marine type, and direct-connected

multipolar dynamos. Almost immediately thereafter, the station in

Atlantic Avenue, Boston, somewhat on the same general design so far as

contents is concerned, was erected. In 1891 a small station, but on

the same lines, was projected for San Francisco, and in 1892 the

present Harrison Street station of the Chicago Edison company was

designed, and, benefiting by the experience of Berlin, New York and

Boston, this station produces electric current for lighting purposes

probably cheaper than any station of a similar size anywhere in this

country.

It is not necessary for me to go into detail in explanation of the

modern central station. You are all doubtless quite familiar with the

general design, but if you will examine the detail drawings of the

Harrison Street station, which I have brought with me, you will find

that every effort has been made to provide for the economical

production of steam, low cost of operating, good facilities for

repairs and consequently low cost, and for permanency of service. You

have but to go into any of the modern central stations in midwinter,

to see them turning out anywhere from 10,000 to 80,000 amperes with a

minimum of labor, to appreciate the fact that central station business

is of a permanent and lucrative character.

To go back to the question of alternating currents, the work done in

connection with the two-phase and three-phase currents and the

perfection of the rotary transformer has resulted in introducing into

central station practice a further means of economizing the cost of

production--by concentration of power. According to present

experience, it is (except in some extraordinary cases) uneconomical to

distribute direct low-tension current over more than a radius of a

mile and a half from the generating point. The possibility of

transmitting it at a very high voltage, and consequently low

investment in conductors, has resulted in the adoption of a scheme, in

many of the large cities, of alternating transmission combined with

low tension distribution. The limit to which this alternating

transmission can be economically carried has not yet been definitely

settled, but it is quite possible even now to transmit economically

from the center of any of our large cities to the distant suburbs, by

means of high potential alternating currents, distributing the current

from the subcenter distribution by means either of the alternating

current itself and large transformers for a block or district or else,

if the territory is thickly settled, by means of a system of

low-tension mains and feeders, the direct current for this purpose

being obtained through the agency of rotary transformers.

There are various methods of producing the alternating current for

transmission purposes. In some cases the generators are themselves

wound for high potential; in others they are wound for 80 volts, and

step-up transformers are used, carrying the current up to whatever

pressure is desired, from 1,000 to 10,000 volts. In other cases

dynamos are used having collector rings for alternating current on one

side and a commutator for direct current on the other side of the

armature, thus enabling you, when the peak in two districts of a city

comes at two different times, to take care of this peak by means of

the same original generating unit, furnishing direct low-tension

current to the points near the central station and alternating current

to the distant points. In other cases, where a small amount of

alternating current is required on the transmission line, it has even

been found economical to take direct current from a large unit, change

it by means of a rotary transformer into alternating current, step up

from 80 to, say, 2,000 volts, go to the distant point, and step down

again to 80 volts alternating, and then convert again by means of a

rotary transformer into low-potential direct current.

The introduction of alternating current for transmission purposes in

large cities is probably best exemplified in the station recently

erected in Brooklyn, where alternating current is produced and carried

to distant points, and then used to operate series arc-light machines

run by synchronous motors, the low-tension direct-current network

being fed by rotary transformers, and alternating circuits arranged

with block converters, and even in some cases separate converters for

each individual customer in the scattered districts.

It would be very interesting to go at length into the details of cost

in this, the latest development of central station transmission, but

time will not permit; nor have I the time at my disposal to go at

length into the central station business as developed by the electric

street railways now so universally in use, or another phase of the

business as exemplified by the large transmission plants, the two

greatest examples of which, in this country, are probably those at

Niagara Falls, N.Y., and Lachine Rapids, near Montreal. So far as

street railways and power transmission are concerned, I would draw

your attention to the fact that the same underlying principle of

multiple-arc mains and feeders originally conceived by Mr. Edison is

as much a necessity in their operation as it is in the electric

lighting systems, whether those systems be operated on the old

two-wire plan, the three-wire plan or by means of alternating

currents.

Passing from a review of central station plants and distribution

system naturally bring us to the operating cost and the factors

governing profit and loss of the enterprise. In considering this

branch of the subject, I will confine my remarks to the business as

operated in Chicago by the company with which I am connected.

Our actual maximum last winter came on December 20, our load being

approximately 12,000 horse power. A comparison of the figures of

maximum capacity and maximum load of last winter shows that we had a

margin in capacity over output of about 20 per cent. The load curves

shown this evening represent the maximum output of last winter

(December 20), an average summer load last year (June 4), and an

average spring load of this year (May 2). For our purposes we will

assume the maximum capacity of the plant and the maximum load of the

system to be identical. The maximum load last winter occurred, as I

have stated, on December 20, about 4:30 o'clock in the afternoon, and

lasted less than half an hour. It should be borne in mind that the

period of maximum load only lasts for from two to three months, and

that the investment necessary to take care of that maximum load, has

to be carried the whole year. It should not be assumed from this

statement that the whole plant as an earning factor is in use 25 per

cent. of the year. The fact is that, during the period of maximum

load, the total plant is in operation only about 100 hours out of the

8,760 hours of the year; so that you are compelled, in order to get

interest on your investment, to earn the interest for the whole of the

year in about 1½ per cent. of that period, on about 50 per cent. of

your plant.

This statement must bring home to you a realization of the fact that

by far the most serious problem of central station management, and by

far the greatest item of cost of your product, is interest on the

investment. It may be that the use of storage batteries in connection

with large installations will modify this interest charge, but even

allowing the highest efficiency and the lowest cost of maintenance

ever claimed for a storage battery installation, the fact of high

interest cost must continue to be the most important factor in

calculating profit and loss. This brings home to us the fact that in

his efforts to show the greatest possible efficiency of his plant and

distribution system, it is quite possible that the station manager may

spend so much capital as to eat up many times over in interest charge

the saving that he makes in direct operating expenses. It is a common

mistake for the so-called expert to demonstrate to you that he has

designed for you a plant of the highest possible efficiency, and at

the same time for him to lose sight of the fact that he has saddled

you with the highest possible amount of interest on account of

excessive investment. Operating cost and interest cost should never be

separated. One is as much a part of the cost of your current as the

other. This is particularly illustrated in connection with the use of

storage batteries. Those opposed to their use will point out to you

that of the energy going into the storage battery only 70 per cent. is

available for use on your distribution system. That statement in

itself is correct; but in figuring the cost of energy for a class of

business for which the storage battery is particularly adapted, the

maximum load, that portion of your operating cost affected by the 30

per cent. loss of energy in the battery, forms under 4½ per cent.

of your total cost, and it must be self-evident, in that case at

least, that the 30 per cent. loss in the storage battery is hardly an

appreciable factor in figuring the operating cost of your product. So

far as I have been able to ascertain, it would appear to be economical

to use storage batteries in connection with central station systems

the peak of whose load does not exceed from two to two and one-half

hours.

In order to illustrate the important bearing which interest has on

cost, I have prepared graphical representations of the cost of

current, including interest, under conditions of varying load factors.

For the purpose of this chart I have assumed an average cost of

current, so far as operating and repairs and renewals and general

expense are concerned, extending over a period of a year, although of

course these items are more or less attested by the character of the

load factor. For the purpose of figuring interest, I have selected

seven different classes of business commonly taken by electric light

and power companies in any large city. Take, for instance, an office

building. It has a load factor of about 3.7 per cent., that is, the

average load for the whole year is 3.7 per cent. of the maximum demand

on you for current at any one time during that period; or, to put it

in another way, this load factor of 3.7 per cent. would show that your

investment is in use the equivalent of a little over 323 hours a year

on this class of business. This is by no means an extreme case. You

can find in almost every large city customers whose load factors are

not nearly as favorable to the operating company, their use of your

investment being as low as the equivalent of 75 or 100 hours a year.

Take another class of business, that of the haberdasher, or small

fancy goods store. As a rule these stores are comparatively small,

with facilities for getting a large amount of natural light and little

use for artificial light. The load factor as shown by the chart is

about 7 per cent., the use of your investment being not quite twice as

long as that of the office building. Day saloons show an average of 16

per cent. load factor; cafetiers and small lunch counters about 20 per

cent., while the large dry goods stores, in which there is

comparatively little light, have a load factor of 25 per cent. and use

your investment seven times as long per year as the office building.

Power business naturally shows a still better load factor, say 35 per

cent., and the all-night restaurant has a load factor of 48 per cent.

You will see from this that the great desideratum of the central

station system is, from the investors' point of view, the necessity of

getting customers for your product whose business is of such a

character as to call for a low maximum and long average use. This

question of load factor is by all means the most important one in

central station economy. If your maximum is very high and your average

consumption very low, heavy interest charges will necessarily follow.

The nearer you can bring your average to your maximum load, the closer

you approximate to the most economical conditions of production, and

the lower you can afford to sell your current. Take, for instance, the

summer and winter curves of the Chicago Edison company. The curve of

December 20, 1897, shows a load factor of about 48 per cent.; the

curve of May 2, 1898, shows a load factor of nearly 60 per cent. Now,

if we were able in Chicago to get business of such a character as

would give us a curve of the same characteristics in December as the

curve we get in May; or, in other words, if we could improve our load

factor, our interest cost would be reduced, an effect would be

produced upon the other items going to make up the cost of current,

and we probably could make more money out of our customers at a lower

price per unit than we get from them now.

Many schemes are employed for improving the load factor, or, in other

words, to encourage a long use of central station product. Some

companies adopt a plan of allowing certain stated discounts, provided

the income per month of each lamp connected exceeds a given sum. The

objection to this is that it limits the number of lamps connected.

Other companies have what is known as the two-rate scheme, charging

one rate for electricity used during certain hours of the day and a

lower rate for electricity used during the balance of the day, using a

meter with two dials for this purpose. Other companies use an

instrument which registers the maximum demand for the month, and the

excess over the equivalent of a certain specified number of hours

monthly in use of the maximum demand is sold at greatly reduced price.

The last scheme would seem particularly equitable, as it results in

what is practically an automatic scale of discounts based on the

average load factor of the customers. It does not seem to be just that

a man who only uses your investment say 100 hours a year should be

able to buy your product at precisely the same price as the man who

uses your investment say 3,000 hours a year, when the amount of money

invested to take care of either customer is precisely the same. Surely

the customer who uses the product on an average 30 times longer than

the customer using it for only 100 hours is entitled to a much lower

unit rate, in view of the fact that the expense for interest to the

company is in one case but a fraction per unit of output of what it is

in the other. This fact is illustrated by the interest columns on the

graphic chart already referred to. Supposing that the central station

manager desired to sell his product at cost, that is, an amount

sufficient to cover his operating, repairs and renewals, general

expense, and interest and depreciation, he would have to obtain from

the customer having the poorest load factor, as shown on the load

chart, over four times as much per unit of electricity as it would be

necessary for him to collect from the customer having the largest load

factor. No one would think of going to a bank to borrow money and

expect to pay precisely the same total interest whether he required

the money for one month or for twelve; and for the same reason it

seems an absurdity to sell electricity to the customer who uses it but

a comparatively few hours a year at the same price at which you would

sell it to the customer using it ten hours a day and three hundred

days a year, when it is remembered that interest is the largest factor

in cost, and the total amount of interest is the same with the

customer using it but a few hours a year as it is with the customer

using it practically all the year around.

I have dwelt thus at length on the question of interest cost in

operating a central station system, not alone for the purpose of

pointing out to you its importance in connection with an electrical

distribution system, but also to impress upon you its importance as a

factor in cost; in fact, the most important factor in cost in any

public service business which you may enter after leaving this

institution. Most of the businesses presenting the greatest

possibilities from the point of view of an engineering career are

those requiring very large investment and having a comparatively small

turnover or yearly income. Of necessity, in all enterprises of this

character, the main factor of cost is interest, and if you intend

following engineering as a profession, my advice to you would be to

learn first the value of money, or, to put it another way, to learn

the cost of money.

Before leaving this question of interest and its effect upon cost, I

would draw your attention to the fact that while interest is by far

the most important factor of cost, it is a constantly reducing amount

per unit of maximum output in practically every central station

system. When a system is first installed, it is the rule to make large

enough investment in real estate and buildings to take care of many

times the output obtained in the first year or so of operation. As a

rule, the generating plant from the boilers to the switchboard is

designed with only sufficient surplus to last a year or so. In the

case of the distributing system the same course is followed as in the

case of real estate and buildings, with a view to minimizing the

ultimate investment. Mains are laid along each block facing, feeders

are put in having a capacity far beyond the necessity of the moment;

consequently interest cost is very high when a plant first starts,

except, as I have stated, in the case of the machinery forming the

generating plant itself. As the business increases from, year to year,

the item of interest per unit of maximum output consequently will

constantly decrease, owing to the fact that each additional unit of

output following an increase of connected load increases the divisor

by which the total interest is divided. The result is from year to

year the interest cost of each additional unit of maximum output is a

constantly reducing amount, and consequently the average interest cost

of each unit of maximum output should, in a well regulated plant, grow

less from year to year until the minimum interest cost per unit is

reached. This minimum interest cost is reached when the capacity of

the whole system and the total units of output at maximum load are

identical, although of course it will always be necessary to have a

certain margin of capacity over possible output, as a factor of

safety.

This same rule, although to a less extent, applies to the operating

and general expense cost, that is, the cost other than interest. To

particularize, the manager's salary and other administrative expenses

do not increase in proportion to maximum output of station; therefore,

the cost of administration per unit of output, if the business is in a

healthy condition, must be from year to year reduced. There are a

great many other expenses that are not directly in proportion to

output, and these follow the same rule. In a well-run plant the

percentage of operating expenses to gross receipts will stand even

year after year, while the income per unit of output will be

constantly reduced. This is an excellent evidence of the fact that the

cost per unit of output is constantly being reduced, as, if it were

not, the percentage of expenses to gross receipts would be increased

in direct proportion to the reduction in price. Moreover, it should be

borne in mind that there are many difficulties in the way of universal

use of electric energy from a central station system. It is the rare

exception to find a house not piped for gas and water. In the case of

the latter it is almost invariably the rule that owners are compelled

to pipe for water, under the sanitary code of the municipality. On the

other hand, in a large residential district, it is the exception to

find a house wired for electric light; consequently the output of

current per foot of conductor is at the present time very low as

compared with the output of gas per foot of gas pipe in any of the

large cities. The expense of wiring (which must of necessity be borne

by the householder) is large, and it is often a barrier to the

adoption of electric illumination, but as the rule to wire houses

becomes more general, the output per foot of main will constantly

increase, and therefore the interest per unit of output per foot of

main will constantly decrease. This same rule will apply in the case

of expenses of taking care of and repairing the distribution system,

although to not so great an extent.

If you will take into account these various factors constantly

operating toward a reduction of operating and general expense cost,

and interest cost, the conclusion must necessarily be forced upon you

that the price at which current can be sold at a profit to-day is in

no sense a measure of the income per unit which it will be necessary

for central station managers to obtain in the future. In 1881-82 it

was difficult to make both ends meet with an income of 25 cents per

kilowatt hour, to-day there are many stations showing a substantial

return on their investment whose average income does not exceed 7

cents per kilowatt hour, showing 70 per cent. reduction in price in

less than two decades. How far this constant reduction in cost,

followed by a constant reduction in selling price, will go, it is

difficult to determine; but if so much has been accomplished during

the first 20 years of the existence of the industry, is it too much to

predict that in a far less time than the succeeding 20 years electric

current for all purposes will be within the reach of the smallest

householder and the poorest citizen? But few industries can parallel

the record already obtained. If you will trace the history of the

introduction of gas as an illuminant, you will find that it took a

much longer time to establish it on a commercial basis than it has

taken to establish most firmly the electric lighting industry. All the

great improvements in gas, the introduction of water gas, the

economizing in consumption by the use of the Welsbach burner, have all

been made within the time of those before me, and yet, notwithstanding

that when these gas improvements started, the electric lighting

business was hardly conceived, and certainly had not advanced to a

point where you could claim that it had passed the experimental

stage--notwithstanding this, the cost of electrical energy has

decreased so rapidly that to-day there are many large central station

plants making handsome returns on their investments at a far lower

average income per unit of light than the income obtained by the gas

company in the same community. In making my calculations which have

led me to this conclusion, I have assumed that 10,000 watts are equal

to 1,000 feet of gas. This comparison holds good, provided an

incandescent lamp of high economy is used as against the ordinary gas

burner. To make a comparison between electric illumination and

incandescent gas burners, such as the Welsbach burner, you must figure

on the use of an arc lamp in the electric circuit instead of an

incandescent lamp, which is certainly fair when it is remembered that

incandescent gas burners are, as a rule, used in places where arc

lamps should be used if electric illumination is employed.

With such brilliant results obtained in the past, the prospects of the

central station industry are certainly most dazzling. While the growth

of the business has been phenomenal, more especially since 1890, I

think it can be conservatively stated that we have scarcely entered

upon the threshold of the development which may be expected in the

future. In very few cities in the United States can you find that

electric illumination exceeds more than 20 per cent. of the total

artificial illumination for which the citizens pay. If this be the

state of affairs in connection with the use of electricity for

illuminating purposes, and if you will bear in mind the many other

purposes to which electricity can be adapted throughout a city and

supplied to customers in small quantities, you may get some faint

conception of the possible consumption of electrical energy in the not

far distant future. Methods of producing it may change, but these

methods cannot possibly go into use unless their adoption is justified

by saving in the cost of production--a saving which must be sufficient

to show a profit above the interest and depreciation on the new plant

employed. It is within the realms of possibility that the present form

of generating station may be entirely dispensed with. It has already

been demonstrated experimentally that electrical energy may be

produced direct from the coal itself without the intervention of the

boiler, engine and dynamo machine. Whether this can be done

commercially remains to be proved. Whatever changes may take place in

generating methods, I should, were I not engaged in a business which

affords so many remarkable surprises, be inclined to question the

possibility of any further material change in the distributing system.

Improvements in the translating devices, such as lamps, may add

enormously to the capacity of the distributing system per unit of

light; but it does seem to me that the system itself, as originally

conceived, is to a large extent a permanency. Should any great

improvements take place in the medium employed for turning electrical

energy into light, the possible effect on cost, and consequently

selling price, would be enormous.

* * * * *

THE PROPOSAL of Gov. Black, which has now become law, to depute to

Cornell the care of a considerable tract of forest land, and the duty

of demonstrating to Americans the theory, methods and profits of

scientific forestry, has a curious appropriateness much commented on

at the university, since two-thirds of the wealth of Cornell has been

derived from the location and skillful management of forest lands, the

net receipts from this source being to date $4,112,000. In the course

of twenty years management the university has thrice sold the timber

on some pieces of land which it still holds, and received a larger

price at the third sale than at the first. The conduct of this land

business is so systematized that the treasurer of the university knows

to a dot the amount of pine, hemlock, birch, maple, basswood and oak

timber, even to the number of potential railroad ties, telegraph poles

and fence posts on each fourth part of a quarter section owned by

Cornell. Certainly, Cornell is rich in experience for the business

side of a forestry experiment such as Gov. Black proposes. The

university forest lands from which its endowment has been realized are

in Wisconsin.

* * * * *

Books may be called heavy when the qualifying term is not applied to

their writers, but to the paper makers. It is falsifications in the

paper that give it weight. Sulphate of baryta, the well known

adulterate of white lead, does the work. A correspondent, writing to

The London Saturday Review, gives the weight of certain books as: Miss

Kingsley's "Travels in Africa." 3 pounds 5 ounces; "Tragedy of the

Cæsars," 3 pounds; Mahan's "Nelson" (1 vol.), 2 pounds 10 ounces;

"Tennyson" (1 vol.), 2 pounds 6 ounces; "Life and Letters of Jowett"

(1 vol.), 2 pounds 1 ounce. To handle these dumb-bell books, The

Saturday Review advises that readers take lessons in athletics.

* * * * *

Scientific American Supplement, No. 1178, June 25, 1898 · 第 28 / 43 题