_Static caloric_ is what we call _latent heat_, and
_dynamic caloric_ is what we call _electricity_. Therefore what may we
expect of it (electricity) is merely a matter of economy in the
development and utilization of dynamic caloric; in other words, can we
unlock static caloric by non-luminous combustion, and thus develop
_dynamic caloric as a first power_ more economically per foot pound
than we now do or can hereafter do by luminous combustion? Second, can
we utilize water and wind for the production of _dynamic caloric as a
first power_? Third, can we utilize the differential tension of
dynamic caloric in the earth and the atmosphere as _a first power_?
Fourth, will it pay to use luminous combustion as a first power to
generate dynamic caloric as _a second power_?
WHAT MAY WE EXPECT OF IT.
Let us take the steam engine, and see what we are now doing by
luminous combustion. Good Pittsburg coal contains 87 per cent. of
carbon, 5 per cent. of hydrogen, 2 per cent. of oxygen and 6 per cent.
of ash; we therefore have in one pound of such coal:
8,080 x 9 14,544 x 87
--------- = ----------- = 12,653 units in carbon.
5 100
34,662 x 9 62,391 x 5 3,119 units in hydrogen.
---------- = ---------- = ------
5 100 15,772 units in coal.
Pages:
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101