A STUDY OF LIMESTONE DUST PRODUCTION Thain hr the Down of I. S. W STATE COLLEGE Donald Hodgkin T949 . 4 1 “IT... \7 Ai‘lfi-‘l‘f, Xvivmflfl 1M. w. 1 n‘ . «.1: . T . . .ul......'. I ‘1 s{.\.HTA& .«X I! A STUDY OF LIMESTONE DUST PRODUCTION A Thesis Submitted to The Faculty of MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE of AGRICULTURE AND APPLIED SCIENCE by ‘Dontld.Hodgkiaa Candidate for the Degree of Bachelor of Science Jun. 1949 THESIS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author wishes to express his deepest thanks at this time to the many businessmen and manufacturers whose assistance with their knowledge and experience has been invaluable in the completion of this study. The author also wishes to express his indebted- ness to Professor C. L. Allen and Professor A. H. Leigh of the Department of Civil Engineering at Michigan State College for their assistance and criti- cisms. Donald.Hodgkiss May 17, 1949 r) "N {'7‘ f) “'7 M I J L} I TABLE OF CONTENTS The Proposed Study ............................. Transportation Cost ............................ Conclusions - Rail Transportation .............. Yearly Demand for Mineral Filler ............... Selection of a Site ............................ Cost of Quarrying Operation .................... Conclusions - Agricultural Limestone Production. Description of Equipment Needed for Plant ...... Cost of Entire Plant ........................... Cost of Mineral Filler Production .............. mat Stor‘ge 0.00.00.00.00...OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. Consideration of Dust as Calcium Additive to Feed Conclusions .................................... Ethibibs: Map #1 Map #2 Map #3 Sketch of proposed plant Page 11 12 15 19 21 22 28 29 50 51 THE PROPOSED STUDY It is the purpose of this thesis to study the economic possibility of the production of limestone dust somewhere in the upper part of the lower penin- sula of Michigan. Limestone dust could be used for three separate uses, each use requiring different gradation and chemical purity. 1) Mineral Filler - used in asphaltic highway 2) production. The usuage is 4.0 to 15% of the total weight. Michigan State Highway Dept. specification 4.11.02 reads, "Shall be lime- stone dust, dolomite dust, or Portland cement. Shall be dry, free from lumps, and objection- able materials and shall meet the following requirements: Pass No. 40 sieve 100% Pass No. 200 sieve 75% Agricultural Limestone - is spread on the fields to neutralize or "sweeten“ the soil. The dust must have neutralizing power, there is no re- quired percentage of calcium carbonate or other chemicals. The required gradation of Agricultural Heal is: Passing No. 10 sieve 100% Passing No.100 sieve 30-40% The Ag. Meal is favored by the Federal Govern- ment for the following reasons: a. It is much cheaper - 33.25 to $4.50 per ton delivered and spread. b. The coarser materal mixed with the fines gives greater lasting quality. 5) Feed Additive - limestone dust of the proper purity is used as a calcium additive to the diets of swine and poultry. Cattle of this state get enough calcium in the grass they eat. The poultry industry now uses only ground oyster shells. It is necessary for limestone used as a feed additive to meet the following specifications: a. lust contain 90-95 6+) % calcium carbonate b. must contain less than 5.00% magnesium car- bonate c. Must contain less than 0.45% florine (swine) 0.65% “ (poultry) An economic study such as this includes three major considerations. 1) Transportation cost (determining area possible to serve). 2) Estimated demand per year for area possible to serve. 3) Production cost. -5- _IBANSPORTATION COST Since shipments of’limestone dust (mineral filler and feed additive) would be mostly by rail the freight rates of the railroads are considered under transporta- tion cost. The shipment of Ag. Meal is made by truck and is considered separately under Ag. Meal. The con- sideration of freight rates is in two categories: 1) Interstate Commerce Commission. The tariffs set by this group are only applicable when a State line is crossed by the shipment going from the point of origin to the point of des- tination. , 2) Michigan Public Service Commission. The tariffs set by this group apply to shipments within the boarders of the state of Michigan. The tariffs consulted are: 1) Detroit to Mackinac Railway Company C. P. D. No. 860-D effective September 1, 1942. 2) Pere Marquette (Chesapeake & Ohio) Railway Com- pany. Tariff No. 6215-F effective July 17, 1940 5) Pennsylvania Railraod Company Tarriff No. 1885-3 effective December 51, 1942 Tariff No. lOO-E effective August 1, 1944 4) Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Company -4- Tariff No. 187-F effective August 21, 1944. There are two types of freight rates, class rates and commodity rates. A producer is granted commodity rates which are, usually, much less than class rates. If, for some reason, the class rate is less than the commodity rate, the class rate will apply. Just as many other things, the rail rates have increased since 1940. The increases take the form of blanket percent increases with some exceptions. The exceptions are usually in the form of a maximum rate increases in cents per net ton of limestone. The Interstate Commerce Commission rates now in effect are: 1) Tariff X-l48 effective March 18, 1942- gave 5% increase to existing rate on limestone. 2) Tariff x-162 effective January 1, 1947 - gave to rate on limestone in: a. Open cars - 15¢ per net ton increase b. Closed cars - 20% increase but max. 50¢ /NT 5) Tariff X-166 effective May 6, 1948 - gave on limestone a 50% increase over October 12, 1947 but max. of 35¢‘/ NT. 4) Tariff x-168 effective January 1, 1949 - gave an emergency 6% increase. It must be noted that an emergency increase is not an increase in rate but is an increase in charges. Exmmple - one -5- carload of dust, wt. 60,000 lbs. at $1.00 per ton (rate in effect including increases). Charges would be tonnage times rate per ton or 50 tons X $1.00 = $50.00 and to this charge would be added 6% of the charge for emergency charge, then, of course, 5% federal tax to that total. 0r $50.00 x 1.06 = $51.80. with federal tax $51.80 x 1.05 = $52.80 for this carload. This 6% emergency in— crease cannot be applied to the rates in this thesis for the individual weight of the cars is not known. The Michigan Public Service Commission rates now in effect are: 1) Tariff X - 162 effective January 25, 1947 - gave an increase of 25% to the base scale but with a maximum increase of 50%/NT. 2) Tariff 1-166A effective May 6, 1948 - gave a 50% increase over x-l62, but a maximum of 55¢/ NT. on limestone. 5) Tariff X-168 effective January 11, 1949 - gave an emergency 6% increase. These two governing rulings will be used as a basis of determining the approximate increase of freight rates. It is next to impossible to compute the exact rates to each point due to the fact that this procedure requires two things: 1) A set of tables governing the increase of freight rates. 2) A great deal of time. So, estimating the freight rates by use of the blanket percentage increases, although not absolutely accurate, will be on the conservative side. It is necessary to note that the means used by the railroads to increase their rates (that is a blanket percentage increase) is not at all satisfactory to the producer. First of all the percent increase disrupts the differentials established by the original tariff between shippers. This disruption shortens the dis- tance possible to serve from the point of production and shipment to the consumer. An example is the best means to show this effect: Let A = producer on rail line C. B = producer producing the same commodity as A on rail line C. To reach the same point on line 0 say A's rate is $2.00/ton and B's rate is only $1.50/ton. However, A is willing to absorb the 50%/ton to obtain the business. Say, then, the railroad increases their rate by 20%; A's rate is than $2.00 X 1.20 = $2.40, while B's rate is $1.50 x 1.20 = $1.80/ton. This gives a new difference of 60¢ instead of 50%/ton for the commodity. This works additional hardship -7- on producer A. The extra log/ton probably could not be absorbed as readily as the 50%/ton origi- nally, so’A would have to shorten his scope and no longer serve the point in question. There is little doubt that competition in the dust field would bring lower rates from.both Gibson- burg, Ohio and Waukesha, Wis. but these reductions would also bring reductions of rates on the northern Michigan road handling this production plant. The economy of this part of Michigan is such that the railroads could and would reduce their commodity rates so as to guaran- tee the travel of these thousands of tons of freight over their road each year. This is already evidenced by the existing rates from points in northern Michigan south are less per mile covered than the rates of the Iout of Michigan" carriers shipping north. The procedure used for estimating the increase of rates is as follows: 1) Using Michigan Public Service Commission ruling, tariff - Detroit to Mackinac RR GFD No. 860-D Commodity - Stone and limestone dust in car- load lots - 90% marked capacity of car. Consider rate from Calcite (Rodgers City) to Alma, Michigan. Considering percentage increases: Increase #1 $1.17 I 1.25 = $1.46 Increase #2 $1.465 X 1.50 = 51.90 Considering maximum increases. Increase #1 $1.17 - $0.50 8 51.47 Increase #2 51.46 - $0.55 ' $1.79 I rate. 2) Using Interstate Commerce Commission ruling, tariff - Pennsylvania RR No. 18853 Commodity - Limestone dust in bags or bulk in box cars. Minimum weight is 60,000 lbs. Takes rate group #7. Consider rate from Gibsonburg, Ohio to Ann Arbor, Michigan. Considering percentage increases. Increase #1 $1.58 X 1.05 ' $1.42 Increase #2 $1.42 X 1.20 = $1.71 Increase #3 $1.71 x 1.30 = $2.22 Considering maximum increases. Increase #2 $1.42 - $0.50 = $1.72 Increase #5 $1.71 - $0.55 $2.04 8 rate All the rates shown on the included.maps have been computed in this manner. -9- CONCLUSIONS - RAIL TRANSPORTATION A study of the map comprising the rail rates from Calcite, Michigan discloses a lower rate to points on his New York Central (Michigan Central) RR than on the rail- roads under different ownership. This means that there will be an increase in area over the present estimated area possible to serve (see Map #5). The shady shows also that although the distance from Calcite to Detroit is more than from Gibsonburg, Ohio to Detroit, the rail rate is less. Since the major market for limestone dust, for use as mineral filler, is in the Detroit area, a plant at Calcite could compete with the Gibsonburg, Ohio plant for that market. It should also be noted that when it is necessary for a railroad car to change lines during transit an additional increase in freight rate may be ex- pected over that expected if distance of haul were the only factor in determining the rate. 1) Example - Telegram from Waukesha Products Corp., Waukesha, Wis. “Quote on limestone dust for filler in bulk $5.55 and in bags $5.15 both prices net per ton at plant. Freight rate to Manistique $1.98 plus five per cent. Into Seney $2.95 plus five per cent.” The seeming excessively high difference in freight rates between these two points, where the milage differ- -10- ence is, at the most, 70 miles, is due to the number of railroad lines required to handle the shipment to Seney. The freight rates are always less on a one line haul than on a two line haul and greatly excessive on a three line haul or over. Limestone dust from Wankesha, Wisconsin, can supply the entire upper peninsula except for the extreme eastern section. The division line would run north and south through Newberry. The demand for dust as mineral filler is small in the upper peninsula, therefore, no demand is figured in that area. It may well be, however, that core tain asphalt pavement projects could be supplied over the span of years. -11- YEARLY DEMAND FOR MINERAL FILLER Almost the entire usage of mineral filler is for state highway projects. Since it has been determined that for all practical purposes the entire state may be served, the entire estimated annual tonnage was deter- mined in the following manner: There are four types of pavement which require the use of mineral filler. 1) Oil Aggregate Surface - 4.5% filler/ton of mix. 2) Bituminous Aggregate Surface Class F-l -- 4.0% filler/ton of mix. 5) Bituminous Concrete Surface - 5.5% filler/ton of’mix. 4) Sheet Asphalt Surface - 15.0% filler/ton of mix. TYPE TONNAGE 1948 TONNAGE 0F FILLER 011 Age. Surface 56,844 1,660 Bit. Age. Surface 52,180 2,086 Bit. Concr. Surface 507,000 16,850 Sheet Asphalt Surface 12,207 1,850 22,426 An unofficial estimate by the State Highway Dept. is that the average yearly demand in the future will be 80% of the 1948 tonnage. Therefore, the yearly demand used for estimation purposes is 80% x 22,42 = 17,720 tons of mineral filler per year. -12- SELECTION OF A SITE The selection of a site in Northern Michigan bases on two factors: 1) Quarrying expense 2) Mineral purity Quarrying, even on a small scale requires large equipment. Quarrying limestone would require, at the minimum, the following equipment: one 1% cu.yd. power shovel, two 1% ton dump trucks, one pneumatic drill for dynamite holes, one compresser, rental on tractor and scraper for stripping overburden, and crushing equipment.’ The quarry of the Michigan Limestone and Chemical Company at Calcite, Michigan (near Rodgers City) is used mainly for the production of stone for use in the steel industry. Their products require stone above %” diameter and stone smaller than i" has been simply stockpiled for years as waste. The gradation of this waste is: Calcite Waste Passing Mesh 5 99.19% 4 97 .57 6 95.15 8 91.57 10 87.55 14 82.01 20 76.12 28 70.07 55 64.55 48 59.20 65 54.60 150 48.02 200 54.17 -13- The price of these stone washings has been quoted at 25¢ per ton in the pile. There is little question but what a section of their property could be leased and a railroad siding erected. The distance from the roller mill to the pile is estimated at one mile. Electricity is available. Mineral purity is not an important consideration for the production of mineral filler but is all im- portant when considering the agricultural feed supple- ments for swine and chickens in Michigan. To locate a quarry in Michigan that will give an extremely pure calcite 13 difficult. Quarrys in Northern Michiganl: Calcite Quarry, (Rodgers City) Is exceptionally pure. An average of 255 analyses gave: 1) 97.85% calcium carbonate 2) 1.26% magnesium carbonate 5) 0.54 silica Certain of the beds contain 5-10% mag. carbonate. The local average is 5-6% mag. carbonate. The yearly average in cargos of mag. carbonate is 1.81%. 1. Mineral Resources of Michigan, Michigan Geological and Biological Survey. Publication 21, Geological Series 17. -14- Afton Quarry (Afton) Is in the same Dundee limestone as Calcite. No railroad passes within ten miles. Quarrying would be necessary. Petoskey Portland Cement Co. Quarry (Petoskey) The chemical analysis is: 1) 95.00% calcium carbonate 2) 5.00% magnesium carbonate Quarrying would be necessary since washings are used in cement production. Charleviox Quarry (Charlevoix) Same limestone as Petoskey except that considerable layers of high calcite are encountered. Quarrying would be necessary. Huron Portland Cement Co. Quarry (Alpena) Is in same Detroit limestone as Petoskey and has same analysis. Quarrying would be necessary as washings are used in cement production. It may be concluded, then, that Calcite Quarry is the most practical selection for a plant site. If quarrying were necessary it would cost approxi- mately $2.27g/ton. Demand: 1) Tonnage per year 2) Yardage per year 5) Time required -15- COST OF QUARRYING OPERATION 17,720 tons 15,650 yards 454.5 hours Equipment: 1) Power Shovel (capacity 50 yds/hr.) 2) a. be e. de 9. f. 8. Original cost $26,000.00 Fuel & oil 8 gal/hr. @ 15¢/gal)= $1.20/hr 544.00 One operator @ $1.75/hr. 794.00 Workman's Compensation-rate $4.74/5100 57.60 Depreciation is 20% capital investment 6,500.00 Overhaul, repairs, etc. are 15% cap.invest.5,900.00 Interest, insurance are 11% cap. invest. 2,860.00 Estimated yearly operating cost. $14,655.60 Two 1% ton dump trucks. f. 8. Original cost $5,200.00 Fuel & 011 5.8 gal/hr @ 25%/gal = 95¢/hr. 452.00 Driver @ $1.10/hr. 500.00 Workman's Compensation-rate $4.74/S100 25.70 Repairs 50¢/hr. 227.15 Depreciation is 25% of capital investment 800.00 Interest, storage, insurance is 11% cap investment. 552.00 $2,133.35 -15- Estimated yearly operating cost for two trucks $4,269.70 5) Pneumatic drill a. Original cost $5,200.00 ‘ b. Two labors @ $1.00/hr. 908.60 c. Workman's Compensation-rate $4.74/$100 45.00 d. Depreciation is 55% of cap. invest. 1,000.00 e. Overhaul, repair, and drills 1,000.00 f. Interest, insurance 552.00 Estimated yearly operation cost. $5,570.27 4) Compressor a. Original cost $4,500.00 b. Fuel & oil 5 gal/hr @ 25%/gal.= $1.25/hr 567.50 c. Depreciation is 25% of cap. invest. 1,125.00 d. Overhaul, repair 675.00 e. Interest, insurance y495.00 Estimated yearly operation cost $2,862.50 5) Tractor & scraper for stipping overburden. It is estimated that 5500 cuyds. of over- burden will have to be moved. This would be done in a continuous operation. Cost would be approximately 50¢/cu.yd. Estimated depth of cut is 5 feet. cost of stripping 50¢ x 5500 $1,050.00 6) Dynamite required g. Use 2#/cu.yd. It/year = 27,260# 7) 3) -17- Cost Prima-Oord 18%¢/# Caps 11¢/°“P 27,260 x 18%¢ 54,980 plus caps 800 $5,780.00 b. Labor required for setting the charge. _ One labor @ $1.50 681.40 Workman's Compensation-rate 84.74/5100 _ 52.80 Estimated yearly Operating cost $7,175.60 One large jawcrusher a. Original cost 6,000.00 b. Depreciation is 17% cap. invest. 1,020.00 6. Repair is 15% cap. invest. 900.00 d. Power (80 HP Diesel) . 1. Original cost ‘ 6,000.00 2. Depreciation is 12% cap. investment 720.00 5. Repair is 12% cap. investment 720.00 4. Fuel 3: oi1 8 gal/hr. e 20¢/ge1.= $1.60 727.00 Estimated yearly operation cost. $4,087.00 One small hammermill a. Original cost 4,500.00 b. Depreciation is 17% cup. investment 765.00 c. Repair is 25% cap. investment 1,158.00 d. Power (40 HP Diesel) 1, Original cost 5,000.00 2. Depreciation is 12% cup. invest. 560.00 5. Repair is 12% cap. investment. 560.00 4. Fuel & oil 5 gal/hr. @ 20¢/ge1.= $1.00 454.50 ~18- Estimated yearly Operation cost. $5,077.50 The estimated cost of quarring this amount of stone per year is $40,511.72 which may be reduced to a unit cost of $2.96 per cubic yard or 82.27% per ton. The initial investment required is $61,650.00. The only means possible to make this quarring opera- tion economic would be to produce road gravel, aggregates, and road chips. This would not be practical due to the existing large capacity competition in Northern Michigan. -19- CONCLUSIONS - AGRICULTURAL LIMESTONE PRODUCTION Ag. Meal is used on fields growing timothy, clover, and alfalfa. It is spread on the fields once in 5-8 years. (Use 5 years). It is not necessary to dry the meal. The usage is on the average of ZSOfi/acre or 8 acres/tonl. The counties practical to serve were deter- mined by truck transportation. The rate charged by truc- kers is at the minimum 5%g/ton-mile. The maximum cost, delivered to the farmer, is $4.50. Even if the cost, at the plant, could be $1.50 the added area would do no good for existing competition is too great. There are producers of Ag. limestone at Charlevoix, Petoskey, Manistique, Essexwille, Afton, and Bayport, Michigan. If their area was penitrated, it would be by rail, the rate being at least $1.50 per NT, then the meal would have to be transferred to trucks for distribution. With the trucking rate at 5%¢/ton then the radius of trucking would be 75 miles, and the maximum transportation cost would be $2.50 per ton. Counties possible to serve: Count Acres Tons Tong/year CEeBoygan 19,975—’ 2,490 492 Presque Isle 20,695 2,588 518 Otsego 8,986 1,122 222 Montmorency 7,875 984 197 Alpena 24,985 5,122 622 Crawford 1,055 129 26 Kalkaska 7,188 892 178 Oscoda 5,516 689 158 1. Michigan State College, Extension Division, Folder #8 -20- Alcona 16,215 2,050 406 Missaukee 24,509 5,062 612 Roscommon 1,210 151 50 Ogemaw . 25,045 5,155 627 Iosco 14,505 1,815 565 Estimated yearly demand for Ag. Meal 4,451 tons. If a small hammermill were added to the plant setup and its production divided between the roller mill and ag. meal, with an estimated rate of production at 50 tons per hour of ag. meal, the time required to produce the yearly demand would be 148 operating hours or 18% - 8 hour days. It may be concluded, therefore, that the production meal would be impractical because of the small demand and the competition already existing for that small demand. -21- DESCRIPTION OF EQUIPMENT NEEDED FOR PLANT Transportation of screenings to plant: 1) Use a i yd. front loader with rubber tired tractor. 2) Use a 1% ton dump truck. Plant: 1) Dumping bin. 2) Single deck %" vibrating screen. 5) 4) 5) 6) Approximately 74' of 14" conveyor belt. Raymond.#5048 High Side Roller Mill, complete with feeder, pneumatic feed control, single wizzer se- parator with variable speed control and drives, main cyclone collector with double type discharge valve, main exhauster with flexible coupling and motor sub-base, vent fan, concentrator collector, and connecting piping, along with the necessary oil» burning furnace, including all of the hardware, the burner unit, and both fire brick and common brick in the required numbers for erection of the furnace at the plant. 50' of 6" galvanized pipe to handle dust from bin to railway cars or trucks. Bagger - use a St. Regis 50l-FB with a capacity of 10 tOHS/hre 7) Steel dust bin. Data: 1) Tonnage per year -22- COST OF ENTIRE PLANT 17,720 tons 2) Hours of Operation 3 2,965.5 hrs/year Transportation of screenings 1) & cu.yd. front loader b. °9 d. o. ’9 8e Original cost $5,500.00 Fuel & Oil 2.0 gal/hr @ 25¢/ga1 8 50%/hr. 1,481.65 Operator (also drives truck)@ $1.25/hr. 5,695.75 Workmans Compensation-rate $5.54/5100 150.77 Repair 25¢/hr. 740.85 Depreciation is 25% cap. invest. 825.00 Interest is 6% cap. investment 198.00 Estimated yearly operating cost $7,070.00 2) One-1% ton dump truck 1. b. Ce do 0e f. Original cost 5,200.00 Fuel & oil 2.0 gel/hr. @ 25%/gal = 50%/hr. 1,481.65 Driver (above) Repair 25%/hr. 740.85 Depreciation is 25% cap investment 800.00 Interest is 6% cap. investment 192.00 Estimated yearly operating cost $5,214.48 The total yearly cost/ton of stone is $0.576/ton -23- Plant: 1) Steel dumping bin. a. Original cost $1,000.00 be Freight 40.00 c. Depreciation is 20% cap. investment 260.00 2) Single deck %" vibrating screen a. Original cost $1,100.00 b. Freight 50.00 c. Depreciation is 25% cap investment 280.00 d. Repair is 10% cap. investment 112.00 e. Electricity 0.27 KWH/ton @ Zé¢ 124.04 Estimated yearly operating cost 3 516.04 5) Two 14" conveyor belts are required. a. Belt of 60' length for main feed from dumping bin to roller mill. Five HP motor and drives _ & gears are extra. b. Belt of 14' length to take oversize stone from screen to waste pile. One HP motor and drives & gears are extra. c. Cost: 1. Original cost $2,175.00 2. 60' belt extras a) 5 HP motor $150.00 b) Drives and gears100.00 250.00 -24- 5. 14' belt extras a) 1 HP motor $25.00 b) Drives & gears 50.00 55.00 4. 14" belt - length = 74' 0 $25.00/ft. 1,850.00 5. Freight 6. Depreciation is 25% cap. invest. 7. Repair is 15% cap. investment 8. Electricity is 2.1é/ton Estimated yearly operating cost 40.00 545.75 526.00 572.12 $5,416.87 4) Raymond.#5048 High Side Roller Mill. Basis for cost per ton breakdown: 1. b. Ce d. e. f. 8e h. 1. Hours operated per day 8-hr. days operated per year. Output of pulverized stone/hr. 8 hr. day /year Labor cost - mill operation Fuel cost (oil) Power cost Original cost Freight Wt. 25 tons @ $20.00/ton Approximate cost of motors (161 HP 8 hrs 5'70. 4 days 6 tons 48 tons 17,720 tons $1.00/hr. 0.15/hr. 0.02g/KWH $24,500.00 500.00 connected) 4,000.00 Approximate cost erected and ready to Operate 45,000.00 -25- Estimated cost per ton of stone. Power (22KWH/ton @ 2%5/KWH) E 0.55 Fuel for drying .08 Labor .17 Maintenance .05 Fixed charges (20% of total installed cost/ year .52 Miscellaneous .05 ”—- Total cost, less bags and bagging labor 5 1.42 Bagging: . Cost of paper bags - 7¢ each ' 1.40 Bagging labor - 2 men @ $1.00/hr each .54 Workman's Compensation A .05 Total cost, in bags in railway cars $ 5.16 5) 6V Galvanized pipe- 50' long. - a. Cost = $1.00/ft. 50.00 6) Bagging machine a. Original cost $2,750.00 b. Freight 150.00 c. Labor (included in 4) d. Depreciation is 25% cap investment 725.00 e. Repair is 15% cap. investment 455.00 f. Electricity 50.00 Estimated yearly operating cost $1,270.00 -26- 7) Steel dust bin (20 cu.yds.) a. Original cost $1,000.00 b. Freight 40.00 c. Depreciation is 20% 089. investment 260.00 Estimated yearly operating cost $ 260.00 Cost of material is 255/ton in pile The building to house the plant would be of general steel construction with beams, columns, trusses and pur- lins and including struts for attaching the galvanized sheets on the out side of the building. 1) Estimated cost $15,000.00 2) Pay off in 8 years - yearly cost/ton .106 The foundation for the roller mill will be of reinforced concrete and of dimensions of 10' X 11' 1 6' 1) Cost of concrete for foundations a. Cost of concrete/cu.yd. $10 b. Cost of lumber & labor 15 c. Cost of steel .__§_ $50.00 2) Cost of foundation 10xllx6'x $50 $ 755.00 5) Cost of incidental motgz foundations 267.00 Total for foundations $1,000.00 Two steel frames are necessary to hold the collector and concentrator. The cost of fabricated steel is approximately 10¢/#. The estimated total poundage required is 9,612#. -27- 1) Cost of frames 9,612 @ 105/# 8 961.20 2) Freight . 50.00 Total cost of frames 51,011.20 Starting-up stack for furnace, 14' 0, length is 50' 1) Cost of stack 50' @ 15£/' @ 10¢/# E 75.00 Cost for a railroad siding would be approxi- mately $5,000.00 -28- COST OF MINERAL FILLER PRODUCTION First year cost: Transportation of screenings $ .576 Raymond mill Operating cost 1.420 Other Plant costs .529 Material .106 Building .250 Frames & foundations .115 Railroad siding . _4282 Cost of mineral filler, bulk, f.o.b. plant $5.08 Bagging 1.77 Cost of mineral filler bagged, f.o.b. plant $4.85 Second year cost: Transportation of screenings 3 .576 Raymond mill Operating cost 1.420 other plant costs .515 Material .250 Building .106 Cost of mineral filler, bulk, f.o.b. plant $2.67 Bagging 1.77 Cost of mineral filler, bagged, f.o.b. p1ant$4.44 The present prices charged by existing competition: 1) Waukesha, Wis. - bulk $5.55 bagged $5.15 2) Gibsonburg, Ohio. - bulk $5.50 bagged $4.50 The initial investment required would be $81,641.20. -29- DUST STORAGE Bulk dust -- Since the construction of storage silos is expensive and storage space is not absolutely necessary, there will be no provision for storage. A 20 cu.yd. steel bin is used to supply enough storage so that it would not be necessary to stop the Operation of the roller mill while railway cars are being moved. This bin would give 22.14 tons or 5.69 hrs. of production. Limestone dust weighs 82#/cubic foot. Bagged dust - Ho storage space is provided for bagged dust. The dust is bagged only when needed, and is chuted from the bagger into the railway car where a man with a buggy places it in either corner. -30- CONSIDERATION OF DUST AS CALCIUM ADDITIVE TO FEED As indicated under mineral purity in Selection of a Site, Calcite Quarry would give the necessary purity. No doubt the material wouli have to be selected with care as to avoid high percentages of magnesium carbonate. This would naturally increase the cost of production slightly. It would be necessary to investigate the feed ad- ditive business a little further, all indications are that it would supplement the mineral filler production and would add considerably to the profits. Since the poultry business alone uses approthately $500,000 of ground oyster shells per year in this State or, at a unit cost, bagged, of from $20-24 per ton, there is a definite possibility in this field. -51- CONCLUSIONS Producing mineral filler alone, the first year could show a profit of $5,670.40. The second year of production could show a profit of $14,707.60. In the competitive business world this is not a comfortable profit for such a large capital investment, for, without a doubt, there would be price slashes by existing competition to drive the new producer out of business. Therefore, the entire conclusion would rest on either of two factors: 1) There would have to be enough of an Opportunity in the production of feed additive to carry the firm over the initial attempt to drive the new producer from business. It is the opinion of the author that such a field of Opportunity does exist and that such a produc- tion plant could be constructed and put into Operation at Calcite, Quarry, Michigan. 2) It would require either a company or an indivi- dual with substantial financial backing to attempt such an enterprise, for, the first year or two of operation would, undoubtedly, display very little, if any, profit. 2.10712 77.5w Jac/ .S‘JO//o,0 4/ 9.70 Z/mOJ/j‘ safpy‘ a!” JOQJV (let/bf 'é/J Jog/anA/ O7l /‘/0J7 (7% / /) £70 ,1 / / M \ “ ~20 Himmflggfi)‘ ‘ burg/[4, r r '\\ \ , §\ .l ng /, \ \_ V K s « f: Iggfi; n m ” z///1..‘\R ‘ 74 e \ v ‘k. V \\J ,, N? F C ‘ V§\ V I / \ ‘ EMA/>5 44/ Vi'rfii ‘ .V‘ ilk _,\ \f' FVWT‘V'fiv/fr‘,’ ,, a L k, / :\\Wo,%L¥,/y/A\::&J fa§§p ‘gé': J ' 6&sz wmv 551%} “(8‘75 ' - " 2 \ 5; \ AXE/f /1>’7{7\>‘ , ' “Mg‘ WISCONSIN =£\\- " ~‘7\\» q/x _ ,7 q NE W / . / e, A . A, ,1 J Dr \L \ -, - w; Kg Exp X’\ «A 6// “Av/gm ,1 f _/ L nnnnnn ~rgfi 51A 0 a E E Ono-(viii ‘ x o s 67%.... 5U); % , ' /"/ TAWAS / V/ T; /' MAP W0 2' ”W <0 ,1 MICHIGAN STATE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT CHARLES M. ZIEGLER STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSIONER —-_.....-.;.s---.._. __._ .2 ADA/L RCA 0 £34755 flan? §xb5 ox? bury) 0/7 /0 SCALE OF MILES o 5 IO 20 30 40 \\\\\‘\\\\)\‘\{ \\ \‘\\\\\ FFFFFFFFF \ \\\\\ '50.”, 25/ 5:32;). .. £07185 O/z é/MéS/Ofle (W 00.974, 13:37: or [Du/AP, /'/z_ 0‘ 50Xcor5. p/PP 757‘1'7‘)‘ A/o. /8858. —A7c77‘e Group 46 7 KEV A/ew )6”? {/7124} (‘cm‘ro/RR. C/fefa/a sake f O/‘u'oooere /%2r7uez‘z‘e) RI? Granc/ 77‘U/7/é ffi/f. Pen/75‘ /l/al7/'c7 Rd? Def/19:34 7’39 Mack/n06 AWE x4/7/7 flrbor 2477?. Rafe-r Jfioa/xr are x}? o’o//or5 per 491‘ £04, a : ‘ ’ , ‘ d» I . @2311; ' I ’HLI.‘ s D A SEEM—5h“ £02 _. K r sssssss W ® (in [A ® __N ,(ll , fgfiz ) 7. «‘36ng cccccc 7 63‘) In MINNESOTA Sci 4 ‘ ’ ‘K@BK ‘2‘ I WC/ ,7 ‘5 «3/ / 7%; \\://—— \\7-« , . l J "“\\\\n , : \k F CHflNWZ-Ji Ni WW /-\- /’//F\ fi~ \ '3". L- \flW%\ ,V / fl WWI/215% r , ' DRUMMOND e v 'SL/(ND (IQ/i,” / .mnww: I,N/ \_/ Vigil/«EM . I l l ' ‘ \i: , 3‘. \ “”0 9 H '53 EE[ 1 €§ C: (:D IFJ' 5% 1 IE? \ ,, mom MOUNTAIN \ 533:\\ 1\ 7'5 an /l 1‘ \ a :\ \ If \ 34k : ° 19' '. 1 H 7:7)? 0 ‘ ‘ T Q LC OrJA ; ~\ \ EE c ..... , I ruin/I ’/ 7‘ / r HARM VlLLE ...... \’75% 2: //‘,/ ‘TRAVERS <> 1 M%( i 7 Mm‘ ‘H y\ IL nl<>ahwmiCz>lhf Fm.” L: 777777 ,, MIFJSTAUKEE , ) Qg T ‘ w“— \ la‘e \- MAP N0. 3 MICHIGAN STATE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT CHARLES M. ZIEGLER STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSIONER . 74% P. /7*‘:‘ 4A.: v. / I mTfQEWfifi/‘E DB [ewes K'fg @l “ Ru. ...'— ® nnnnnnnnn \ 1 | , . STANTON SCALE OF MlLES 0 5 IO 30 40 KE Y L028 07’ eoua/ fray/27‘ rav’es 05 Comw flU7/‘ec/ LII/79 0%57 Ua/ {re/37M rafes‘ 45‘ 9371/7 flyar’ed wx'7‘/7 yéfie New f’Ofi/P (”é/é) Ceflfro/ ADA? as C arr/Er. 5T JONN Sr 2! \\ 6 LI N T 0 N) Z; @ , {lec STON "M, nnnnnnnnnnn - CNARLOTTi I _ . ’ EV“ if!” I,“ v u. : l , 83.421. // /:, a Iywxmr sJuflgg’ ,, I . navzx \ CD ’ I . SAN ’ ST AT ERs IT YLI RIFS l } RII‘ I 12 53