DOCSLIB.ORG

Experiment in Concrete; a Pioneer Venture in Grain Storage

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Experiment in Concrete; a Pioneer Venture in Grain Storage TUBULAR concrete grain elevator built in Minneapolis, 1899 EXPERIMENT in CONCRETE A Pioneer Venture in GRAIN STORAGE RUTH J. HEFFELFINGER UPON LEAVING Minneapohs via Lake though it now seems to have no purpose Street and proceeding along Highway No. other than to advertise the lumber sold near 7 in the direction of Excelsior, one passes a by. Certainly no one would associate it with large white structure on the left just west of the pretentious structure across the bridge, the bridge that spans the Belt Line. It is yet if it had not been for that single tube composed of a triple row of monoliths as of concrete, terminal grain elevators might classically symmetrical in outline as the col­ be built in a different, and perhaps less eflB­ umns of a Greek temple, although not as cient, way today. For apparently this was decorative. The Minneapolis structure is a the first tubular grain elevator of sohd con­ terminal elevator designed for the storage crete in the world. Although it was never of grain, and, like most modern terminal ele­ put to use, it was built as an experiment to vators, it is built of concrete. On the east side find out if it was practical to store grain in a of the bridge stands a single monolith with concrete bin of this shape. the words "Lumber Stores" running the Early in 1899, Frank H. Peavey and length of the tube. It looks as though it might Charles F. Haglin talked over the possibility once have been the chimney of a factory, of storing grain in bins constructed of mate­ rial other than wood. Both men were early MRS. HEFFELFINGER is thc WifC of GcOrgC W. P. residents of Minneapohs; both were out­ Heffelfinger and a daughter-in-law of the late standing in the fields of activity they pur­ Frank T. Heffelfinger, who died in July, 1959. sued. Peavey had built up a grain company His recollections of the trip made in 1900 and that contributed to the prosperity of Minne­ diary kept while abroad have provided much of apohs, Haglin had erected pubhc buildings the material for this article. that were the e'vidence of that prosperity. 14 MINNESOTA History Peavey was born in Eastport, Maine, in built, and concrete poured into them. As the 1850. He boarded a Chicago-bound train the concrete dried, the forms were pulled up, very day the Civil War ended, having sold braced, and another layer poured; it was like papers for two years to earn his fare. In 1866 building a giant layer cake. The result was he went on to Sioux City, Iowa, arriving a hollow monolith of concrete sixty-eight with a dollar in his pocket. After selling farm feet high, with an inside diameter of twen­ implements for a time, he organized a grain ty feet. The walls were twelve inches thick company, and 'within ten years moved his at the base, tapering to eight at the top.^ By business to Minneapolis, Haglin, who was of fall the structure was ready. Grain trans­ German and Huguenot descent, was born ported in railroad cars was shoveled into in 1849. Although his parents had settled in a bucket elevator, carried to the top of the Upstate New York, when Charlie reached concrete tube, and dumped in. There it the age of twenty, he set out for Minnesota. would remain through the winter, and in He was trained as an architect, but soon spring the condition of the grain would be became more interested in construction and tested. the contracting business. It is not known whether one of these men WHETHER or not this was a practical de­ was the first to conceive the idea of using sign was still in doubt, and since it was concrete in a hollow monolithic mass for the rumored that concrete elevators were used storage of grain, or if the idea came from an­ in Europe, Peavey gave his son-in-law, Frank other source. It was, however, the desire of T. Heffelfinger, the assignment of traveling Frank Peavey to build such a structure, and overseas with Haglin to find out about them the conviction of Charlie Haglin that such a at firsthand. Actually the trip had still an­ thing was possible. Up to this time even other purpose: Peavey wanted to ascertain terminal elevators in the United States were if it would be possible to build and operate squarish wooden structures similar to the a line of elevators in Russia. Accordingly, country elevators so famihar today through­ accompanied by Haghn and the contractor's out the Middle West. The two men were young son, Eddie, and armed with letters to faced with considerable opposition. Who grain merchants, millers, bankers, and diplo­ ever heard of such a thing! Contractors and mats, Heffelfinger sailed for Europe in Janu­ engineers throughout America argued force­ ary, 1900, on the "New York," a steamship fully that a tank of solid concrete would lack of five thousand tons. Upon arriving in Lon­ "give" and would therefore explode or, at don on February 1, he wrote in his diary: "I best, crack wide open when grain was dravra was much pleased and found it somewhat off. different than I had pictured."^ One busy In spite of such misgivings, during the day was spent in London calling on grain importers, getting available information summer of 1899, constmction was started. about Russian grain markets, and securing Round forms braced with steel hoops were passports to Russia. Then the travelers went 'These measurements were supphed by Mr. on to Hamburg, Germany. George FuUerton, who now owns the structure. "First impressions of Hamburg, good," The height was soon increased to 125 feet. Measure­ ments given in the press vary greatly. See, for Heffelfinger reports. And again, "This after­ example, E. S. Rolhns, "Modern Elevator Construc­ noon I went with Haglin to see the harbour. tion," in the Northwestern Miller (Minneapohs), It is a wonderful place and I was much 50:637 (October 3, 1900); and the Minneapolis Journal, October 3, 1901, impressed with the enormous amount of ^HeflEelfinger Diary, February 1, 2, 1900. The shipping." In Hamburg the travelers learned original journal, kept from February 1 to April 3, that Russian methods of handhng grain were 1900, while Heffelfinger was abroad, is owned by "crude." They were disappointed to find the Minnesota Historical Society. It has furnished much of the material for this sketch. that "there was no such thing as a concrete March 1960 15 elevator in or near Hamburg," though they located on the Danube. Grain was trans­ "Had a wire from Antwerp . that ele­ ported down the river to the Black Sea, vators there are of brick and stand the then via the Bosporus to the Mediterranean, climate all OK." and on to European markets. After leaving On February 5 the Americans moved on Braila, Heffelfinger recalled that "The PR's to Brunswick to meet a man named G. Lu­ of Romania and Bulgaria all lead to the ther, designer of an elevator constructed of Danube and the grain from both countries Hennebique concrete and steel. This had comes down the river. Most large farmers square bins with walls about eighteen inches ship it to Braila them-selfs. Braila is the thick, supported by horizontal and vertical principal market of the country. The farmers rods. Elevators of this type, holding fifty all live in bands as it were and go out daily thousand tons of grain each, had been built to there farms." He beheved that everyone in at Braila and Galatz in Romania, and had Braila, which had a population of eighty been in use five or six years. Reportedly they thousand, was directly dependent on grain had not cracked, and the grain had kept for a hvehhood.^ better than when stored in wood. While in Braila the Americans examined Before visiting these cities, Heffelfinger the local Hennebique elevator. The bins and Haghn decided to travel to Copenhagen were hexagonal with rounded corners, to see "bins of Monier" concrete with inside and were fitted together hke the cells of a divisions of wood. According to the diary honeycomb. This was "a finer looking build­ for February 9, they found "a warehouse ing than I expected to see and better con­ of brick five or six floors and at first we structed and arranged than any we have seen thought we had been fooled once more, but heretofore," writes Heffelfinger in his entry after some investigation discovered in center for February 19. He found "no cracks -visi­ of building the grain silos. Haghn is ble" and was "advised by men that grain down there this morning to take some meas­ keeps all OK. Claim it would keep for a yr if urements and of course will have an accurate put in in good condition," The diarist, how­ sketch. The wall[s] seemed all OK but were ever, was "fully con-vinced that our construc­ cracked shghtly, but H. says it is largely on tion is all right and even better than this." account of the thinness and the improper The 'vdsitors also "saw them loading a boat quantities of cement." with corn. Mostof the gr[ain] is loaded From Denmark the Americans went to and unloaded by hand. Where taken to or Budapest, arriving on February 16. There, from the sheds, it is done by quaint little four indeed, they were in the "bread basket" of wheeled pony carts with one pony owned Europe. A letter of introduction put them in by the man who drives." touch with a local banker who owned "most On February 20, the travelers left Braila of the elevator prop[erty] of Budapesth." for Galatz aboard a "steamer which runs on Heffelfinger records that "he was a charming the Danube between the two places." The man and had visited Mpls and dined 'with elevator in the latter city and conditions in Pillsbury." The diarist also describes the general were much like those at Braila, The magnificent quays running the length of the foreman of the Galatz plant reported that city along both banks of the Danube River, "they have had corn in the elevator, without where lighters were unloading grain.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Why Millers Prefer to Hedge at the Kcbot and Grain Elevator Operators at the Cbot
    Why millers prefer to hedge at the KCBoT and grain elevator operators at the CBoT Sören Prehn1, Jan-Henning Feil2 1 Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO), Halle, [email protected] 2 Georg August University Goettingen, Goettingen, [email protected] Contribution presented at the XV EAAE Congress, “Towards Sustainable Agri-food Systems: Balancing Between Markets and Society” August 29th – September 1st, 2017 Parma, Italy Copyright 2017 by Sören Prehn and Jan-Henning Feil. All rights reserved. Readers may make verbatim copies of this document for non-commercial purposes by any means, provided that this copyright notice appears on all such copies. Why millers prefer to hedge at the KCBoT and grain elevator operators at the CBoT Abstract In this paper, we analyze why grain elevator operators tend to hedge hard red winter wheat at the CBoT and not at the KCBoT. They do so because they trade not only the basis but also the premium risk. Like the basis, also premiums of hard red winter wheat have a tendency to increase after harvest. Only a short hedge in the lower priced CBoT wheat contract makes it possible to participate in a post-harvest premium increase. For this reason, grain elevator operators favor a loose hedge at the CBoT. Our results underscore the importance of premium risk for hedging decisions. Keywords: Wheat, hedging, millers, grain elevator operators, Kansas City Board of Trade, Chicago Board of Trade 1 Introduction In his seminal paper “Whose Markets? Evidence on Some Aspects of Futures Trading” (Journal of Marketing, Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • Grain Elevators and Processes
    9.9.1 Grain Elevators And Processes 9.9.1.1 Process Description1-14 Grain elevators are facilities at which grains are received, stored, and then distributed for direct use, process manufacturing, or export. They can be classified as either "country" or "terminal" elevators, with terminal elevators further categorized as inland or export types. Operations other than storage, such as cleaning, drying, and blending, often are performed at elevators. The principal grains and oilseeds handled include wheat, corn, oats, rice, soybeans, and sorghum. Country elevators are generally smaller elevators that receive grain by truck directly from farms during the harvest season. These elevators sometimes clean or dry grain before it is transported to terminal elevators or processors. Terminal elevators dry, clean, blend, and store grain before shipment to other terminals or processors, or for export. These elevators may receive grain by truck, rail, or barge, and generally have greater grain handling and storage capacities than do country elevators. Export elevators are terminal elevators that load grain primarily onto ships for export. Regardless of whether the elevator is a country or terminal, there are two basic types of elevator design: traditional and modern. Traditional grain elevators are typically designed so the majority of the grain handling equipment (e.g., conveyors, legs, scales, cleaners) are located inside a building or structure, normally referred to as a headhouse. The traditional elevator often employs belt conveyors with a movable tripper to transfer the grain to storage in concrete or steel silos. The belt and tripper combination is located above the silos in an enclosed structure called the gallery or bin deck.
    [Show full text]
  • Grain Facilities in the U.S. Specializing in Originating Grain for Export and Soybean Processing Plants
    RESEARCH CIRCULAR 241 SEPTEMBER 1978 Grain Facilities in the U.S. Specializing in Originating Grain for Export and Soybean Processing Plants JOHN W. SHARP OHIO AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER U.S. 250 and Ohio 83 South Wooster, Ohio CONTENTS * * * * Acknowledgments . .. .. • . .. • . • . • . • . .. • . 1 Introduction ................................................................ _. 2 Po rt Fa c i 1it i es in the U.S. • •.•..•..........•......•..•.•..•.....•...•·. • 3 Mississippi River Barge Loading Facilities . • • . • . • • . • • . • . • . • • . • • 6 Missouri River Barge Loading Facilities ........•.•.•......•...•.•.....•..•..••. 12 Ohio River Barge Loading Facilities .....•.•....•...•............•.........•••.. 13 Illinois River Barge Loading Facilities ........................................ 14 Arkansas River Barge Loading Facilities •..••...•..•..•..•.•.....•.•••.•.•..••.• 16 White River Barge Loading Facilities ..•........••••••..••.•...•.•.•..••.•...... 16 Black River Barge Loading Facilities ...•.•...•.••••..•••••....•....•••••...•••. 17 Yazoo River Barge Loading Facilities ..•.•••..•.•.•.•...•..•...•.....•••........ 17 Quachita River Barge Loading Facilities •.•.••..•.•••.•.••••...•••..•.....•.•••. 17 Snake and Columbia Rivers Barge Loading Facilities .•••.••••••.•......••...••.•. 18 Unit Train Facilities in Ohio •...••••.........•••••.•.•••.•....•.........•.••.. 20 Unit Train Facilities in Indiana .•.•.......•..••..•.•••...•..•........•.••.••.. 21 Unit Train Facilities in Kentucky .............................................
    [Show full text]
  • Reconsidering Concrete Atlantis: Buffalo Grain Elevators
    Reconsidering Concrete Atlantis: Buffalo Grain Elevators Lynda H. Schneekloth, Editor ISBN: Copyright 2006 The Urban Design Project School of Architecture and Planning University at Buffalo, State University of New York Cover Graphic: Elevator Alley, Buffalo River (Photo by Lynda H. Schneekloth) Reconsidering Concrete Atlantis: Buffalo Grain Elevators Lynda H. Schneekloth, Editor The Urban Design Project School of Architecture and Planning University at Buffalo, State University of New York The Landmark Society of the Niagara Frontier Buffalo, New York 2006 CREDITS The Grain Elevator Project was initiated in 2001 by the Urban Design Project, School of Architecture and Planning, University at Buffalo, SUNY, in collaboration with the Landmark Society of the Niagara Frontier. It was funded in part by the National Endowment for the Arts through the Urban Design Project, and by the New York State Council on the Arts/Preservation League through the Landmark Society of the Niagara Frontier. The Project was managed by Lynda H. Schneekloth from the Urban Design Project, and Jessie Schnell and Thomas Yots of the Landmark Society. Members of the Advisory Committee included: Henry Baxter, Joan Bozer, Clinton Brown, Peter Cammarata, Frank Fantauzzi, Michael Frisch, Chris Gallant, Charles Hendler, David Granville, Arlette Klaric, Francis Kowsky, Richard Lippes, William Steiner, Robert Skerker, and Hadas Steiner. We would like to especially thank Claire Ross, Program Analyst from the NYS Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation for her assistance. Thanks also to all of those who, through the years, have worked to protect and preserve the grain elevators, including Reyner Banham, Susan McCarthy, Tim Tielman, Lorraine Pierro, Jerry Malloy, Timothy Leary, and Elizabeth Sholes.
    [Show full text]
  • Silo Buster Forage Mixture Silo Buster Is a Forage Mixture Comprised of 50% Climbing Forage Peas, 25% Spring Triticale and 25% Forage Barley
    Silo Buster Forage Mixture Silo Buster is a forage mixture comprised of 50% Climbing Forage Peas, 25% Spring Triticale and 25% Forage Barley. Preparation Prepare a smooth seed bed to ease accurate seeding. Avoid surface trash unless proper no till seeding is used with appropriate equipment and an experienced operator. Planting Sow 2-2 ½ units per acre, ½ - 1” depth. Do not seed deeper than 1’ and sow as early as possible in the spring. The later part of April is ideal. Underseed with your normal hay or grass mix at the usual rate. For the proper amount of seed per acre start by setting the drill as if you were planting 120 lbs. of wheat. Feed quality and yield will suffer if less than 100 lbs./acre are planted. Fertilizer requirements are approximately 60 lbs. N, 30 lbs. P, and 60 lbs. K in the absence of a soil test. Silo Buster really comes into its own when its values as a nurse crop are examined. After quick emergence, Silo Buster develops more slowly than most nurse crops, allowing the underseeding to develop strong vigorous seedlings. When harvest is about three weeks away, Silo Buster grows very rapidly resulting in lots of high quality feed (approximately 7-9 ½ tonnes wet weight per acre). The peas in the mixture provide large amounts of nitrogen through heavy nodulation, if sufficient climbing pea inoculant is mixed with the seed. Harvest Harvest 55-70 days (depending on your area) from seeding but weather can accelerate or delay harvest. Remember the calendar is only a guide.
    [Show full text]
  • The Architecture of Grain Elevators
    Economic History Theme Study A HISTORY OF GRAIN ELEVATORS IN MANITOBA PART 2: THE ARCHITECTURE OF GRAIN ELEVATORS THE ARCHITECTURE OF GRAIN ELEVATORS The first commercial grain elevator in Western Canada, built along a railway siding, was constructed in 1878 in Niverville, Manitoba. It was an unusual 25,000 bushel round structure constructed to store and ship the surplus grain produced by German- speaking Mennonite settlers who had arrived in Southern Manitoba from Russia a mere four years earlier. This structure, however, was to be the only one of its kind. During the later half of the nineteenth century, in Western Canada, as in the United States, grain was stored in flat warehouses because it was invariably handled and brought to market in bags. Before long, these warehouses were divided into bins into which the sacked grain was dumped after weighing. Such warehouses were typically 8 x 20 x 40 feet, and held approximately 4,000 bushels of grain. Bins were arranged on opposite sides of a central alley which provided access for handcarts on which grain was trundled from wagons, and later, on to boxcars. The system was later improved by constructing raised overhead bins into which grain could be mechanically loaded, and then spouted by gravity into waiting boxcars. Only one such early flat warehouse remains in Manitoba, and is located in Brookdale. Classic prairie grain elevators, of the type which western Canadians are most familiar, were first built during the early 1880s. They generally were built according to standards set by the Canadian Pacific Railway. Such “Standard-plan” elevators offered much greater efficiency in built grain handling and larger storage capacities.
    [Show full text]
  • Dynamic Changes in Rail Shipping Mechanisms for Grain
    Agribusiness and Applied Economics Report No. 798 June 2020 Dynamic Changes in Rail Shipping Mechanisms for Grain Dr. William W Wilson Department of Agribusiness & Applied Economics Agricultural Experiment Station North Dakota State University Fargo, ND 58108-6050 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS NDSU does not discriminate in its programs and activities on the basis of age, color, gender expression/identity, genetic information, marital status, national origin, participation in lawful off-campus activity, physical or mental disability, pregnancy, public assistance status, race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, spousal relationship to current employee, or veteran status, as applicable. Direct inquiries to Vice Provost for Title IX/ADA Coordinator, Old Main 201, NDSU Main Campus, 7901-231-7708, ndsu.eoaa.ndsu.edu. This publication will be made available in alternative formats for people with disabilities upon request, 701-231-7881. NDSU is an equal opportunity institution. Copyright ©2020 by William W. Wilson. All rights reserved. Readers may make verbatim copies of this document for non-commercial purposes by any means, provided this copyright notice appears on all such copies. ABSTRACT Grain shipping involves many sources of risk and uncertainty. In response to these dynamic challenges faced by shippers, railroad carriers offer various types of forward contracting and allocation instruments. An important feature of the U.S. grain marketing system is that there are now a number of pricing and allocation mechanisms used by most rail carriers. These have evolved since the late 1980’s and have had important changes in their features over time. The operations and impact of these mechanisms are not well understood, yet are frequently the subject of public criticism and studies and at the same time are revered by (some) market participants.
    [Show full text]
  • The Mississippi Kite Grain Elevator Supports Winter
    THE MISSISSIPPI KITE 5 GRAIN ELEVATOR SUPPORTS WINTER BARN OWL NEST James L. Key Department of Biological Sciences Mississippi State University Mississippi State, Mississippi 39762 Nesting Barn Owls (Tyto alba) have been documented within the united States for every month of the year (Otteni et al. 1972, Marti 1991). In Mississippi, I have found Barn Owls nesting in the central and eastern portions of the state throughout the year, although they show a peak in egg-laying during January and February. These regions are relatively diverse in habitat, with mixed pine (Pinus spp.) and hardwood stands, pasture, and croplands. Although most Barn Owl nests have been located in areas rich in croplands, there are other prey-supporting habitats available during the periods when fields are bare. In west Mississippi, in the Delta region, available habitat is almost exclusively cropland, and I have found nesting efforts to be much more seasonal. Egg-laying occurs almost exclusively within the December to February period. These are often the harshest months in Mississippi, but these nests usually produce fledglings in March, April, and May, when crops begin to flourish and prey abound. Late fall and winter offer little more than barren fields, and I have found only one Barn Owl nest initiated just prior to that period. This nest was located at "Big River Seed Company," a grain elevator in Cleveland, Bolivar County, Mississippi. The clutch of five eggs was laid in a small room at the top of the complex, above the silos. Egg-laying began in early October 1991, and I saw three fledglings there on several occasions during January 1992.
    [Show full text]
  • Nature's Metropolis
    NATURE'S METROPOLIS Chicago and the Great West WILLIAM CRONON + W·W·NORTON & COMPANY New York London F ..5J.l8.� jacket illustration: A bird's-eye view of Chicago in 1857, 5 from a lithograph by Charles Inger after a drawing by 1. T Palmatary. t� Courtesy, The Chicago Historical Society. I � q I (!. 0- Copyright @ 1991 by William Cronon All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. The text of this book is composed in Baskerville, with the display set in Radiant Bold. Composition and manufacturing by the Haddon Craftsmen, Inc. Book design and cartography by Jacques Chazaud. Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Cronon, William. Nature's metropolis: Chicago and the Great West/William Cronon. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. I. Chicago (Ill.)-Description-To 1875. 2. Chicago, (Ill.)­ Description-1 875-1950. 3. Man-Influence on nature-Illinois­ Chicago-History-19th century. 4. Chicago (111.)-Historical geography. I. Title. F548.4.C85 1991 977.3'l l -dc20 90-40835 ISBN 0-393-02921-2 W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., 500 Fifth Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10110 W.W. Norton & Company, Ltd., 10 Coptic Street, London WCIA IPU 234567890 Contents MAPS AND GRAPHS X'/, PREFACE Xlll PROLOGUE: Cloud over Chicago 5 PART I TO BE THE CENTRAL CITY 1: Dreaming the Metropolis 23 Patterns on a Prairie Landscape 23 Booster Dreams 31 Metropolis and Empire 41 Reading Turner Backwards 46 2: Rails and Water 55 Market in the Mud 55 Artificial Corridors 63 Railroad Time 7 4 The Logic of Capital 81 vm CONTENTS PART II NATURE
    [Show full text]
  • Grain Elevator Guidance Doc-NSPS Subpart DD
    Grain Elevators in Kansas New Source Performance Standard (NSPS) Guidance Document What is 40 CFR Part 60 Subpart DD? You also have testing requirements to demonstrate The new source performance standards (NSPS) for you are meeting your emissions standards. Testing grain elevators were established by the U.S. requirements under this standard are located in 40 Environmental Protection Agency on August 3, 1978. CFR 60.303, but also refer to 40 CFR 60.11, These standards are located in the code of federal compliance with standards and maintenance regulations (CFR), Title 40 (environment), part 60, requirements. Specific test methods for Method 2 – subpart DD (written as “40 CFR 60 Subpart DD”). Determination of stack gas velocity and volumetric These regulations define the emission limits for a new flow rate, Method 5 – Determination of particulate source, in this case, grain elevators, and the matter from stationary sources, and Method 9 – Visual requirements to maintain compliance with the determination of the opacity of emissions from standard. stationary sources, are located in Appendix A of 40 CFR 60. Does the NSPS standard for grain elevators apply to my facility? Now that I have done the tests, what do I do with The standards of performance for grain elevators (40 the information to prove my facility is in CFR Subpart DD) apply to each affected facility (i.e., compliance? each truck unloading station, truck loading station, Notification and recordkeeping requirements are listed barge and ship unloading station, barge and ship in 40 CFR 60.7. The Kansas Department of Health loading station, railcar unloading station, railcar and Environment (KDHE), Bureau of Air (BOA), has loading station, grain dryer, and all grain handling the authority to conduct inspections at permitted operations) at any grain terminal elevator or any grain facilities.
    [Show full text]
  • The Silo and Silage
    5000. Bulletin No. 6. June, 1901. OREGON AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STI'I! CORVALLIS, OREGON. THE SILO AND SILAGE. J. WITHYCOMBE. The Bulletins of this Station are sent Free to all ResIdents of Oregon who request them. Oregon Agricultural College Printing Office. Gro. B. ICEADY, Printer. 1901. Board of Aegeots of the Uregiiio AgriciituraI College aod [x[IerieI1t Sta[iffll1 Hon. J. T. Apperson, President Oregon City, Oregon. Hon. John D. Daly, Secretary Corvallis, Oregon. Hon. B. F. Irvine, Treasurer Corvallis, Oregon. Hon. T. T. Geer, Governor Salem, Oregon. Hon. F. I. Dunbar, Secretary of State Salem, Oregon. Hon. J. H. Ackerman, State Supt. of Pub. Instruction, Salem, Oregon. Hon. B. G. Leedy, iWaster of Slate Grange Tigardville, Oregon. Hon. W. P. Keady Portland, Oregon. Hon. Benton Kuhn Portland, Oregon. Hon. Jonas M. Church La Grande, Oregon. Hon. J. K. Weatherford Albany, Oregon. Hon. William B. Yates Corvallis, Oregon. Hon. J. T. Olwell Central Point, Oregon. OFFICERS OF THE STATION. STATION COIJNCIL. I'hos. M. Gatc.ti, A. M., Ph. D Presid.ent and Director. James Withycombe, M. Agr. Vice-Director and Agriculturist, A. t,. Knisely, M. S. Chemist, A. B. Cordley, M. S Enlomologist. E. R. Lake, M, S Ho-rilculturist and Botanist. F. Pernot '. Bacteriology. Other Member's of Staff'. George Coote Florist. L. Kent, B.S - Dairying. J. Fulton, M. S Chemistry. C. M. MeKellips. Ph. C Chemistry. FE. Edwards, B. M. E. -- -. - Chemistry. he o anc iage. The growing tendency among our agridulturists to give more at- tention to dairying, brings frequent appeals for information relative to the construction of the silo; suitable crops to be grown for silage and methods of handling the same.Hence this bulletin is prepared more with the view of supplying this want of practical information as to the silo and silage, and less with the purpose of submitting at this time technical conclusions from the limited data at hand.
    [Show full text]
  • Grain and Soybean Industry Dynamics and Rail Service
    Grain and Soybean Industry Dynamics and Rail Service Analytical Models of Rail Service Operations Final Report Michael Hyland, Hani Mahmassani, Lama Bou Mjahed, and Breton Johnson Northwestern University Transportation Center (NUTC) Parr Rosson Texas A&M University 1 Executive Summary To remain globally competitive, the United States’ grain industry and associated transportation services underwent significant restructuring over the past fifteen years. New technologies, helped by weather changes, led to sustained yield volume increases in the Upper Midwest. To move larger volumes faster and at lower cost, the railroad industry introduced shuttle train service. Traveling as a unit to the same destination, shuttle trains save considerable time in transit and potential delay, bypassing intermediate classification yards. Grain shippers concurrently began consolidating and storing grain in larger, more efficient terminal elevators (shuttle loaders) instead of country elevators. This report examines the effectiveness of shuttle train service and the terminal elevators supporting the shuttle train system, under different demand levels, through the formulation of simple mathematical models. In order to compare shuttle and conventional rail service, this paper introduces three distinct models. The first model, referred to as the ‘time model’, determines the time it takes to transport grain from the farm to a destination (e.g. an export elevator). The second model, referred to as the ‘engineering cost model’, determines the aggregate variable costs of transporting grain from the farm to an export elevator. The third model, referred to as the ‘capacity model’, determines the maximum attainable capacity (i.e. throughput) of a rail network as a function of demand for rail transport and the percentage of railcars on the network being moved via shuttle service and conventional service.
    [Show full text]