Show ILL OMU I LU L LII Ul UI vii I I COPPER PRODUCTION IN UNITED STATES Revised Figures Show Gain of Only 48 Per Cent in 1 1906 APPARENT LOSS FOR UTAH Much Ore Went Into Raw Material Material Ma Ma- for Garfield teral Plant Plant Time The production of or copper In him the tho United Heel States In 1 was 00 In him statistics pounds our OU preliminary published hl January C f. f l lf we VI reported tl 1 pounds Our OUI final fl figures differ diffor dif tUf- for fer from the pl preliminary by my le less than Limo 03 per pe cent They show an nn increase over 11 RO of only 18 48 per Iler cent cent The fine tetIR lc- lc te- te tails of or the time production In comparison tIR with the f figures for COI IH anti and l JJ I 0 arc given 1 in the time following table met Ii U i Hf IC r Copper 1111 In Sri I oil l n a I ei In n Pounds State tute Wl lIH Alaska ka W.- W. n. n d. d oi O tc Arizona At J I. I h 2 S. S i 3 California v. v a ir 1 Colorado 9 98 O Idaho s. s n. n A K 1 Michigan 7 4 71 2 71 Montana r 01 tn r. r r H. H sn I 1 New Nev Mexico n t r. r C co I r GOCI South and anel Rat Eat 1 1 Itah R il il I 7 l Other States 8 io Total 3 i a n This figure Includes 10 i pounds of copper produced in mm tl tho forum form orin oi of hll and onel also considerable copp copper r which b belongs not to other states but hul to those above enumerated to which however it Il cannot be lie accurately a allocated I I oca t 01 Our statistics ore are based on reports of or tine the copper COPPI content of or blister copper I except c pt that a n cl comparatively small smal part lart of or time the total production which could not he be con conveniently reported in that thai wa way was r reported as us refined copper r. allocated according to trio tine states of or orl ln This Introduces little oils dis- origin a nto time tho statistics hut html such fuCh discrepancies as thoro may Jay ho iii ht on ott In I that hat account a ar 11 ii Immaterial In tim view of the tine incorporation of or this thiH refined m copper Lopper In Inthe the tonal tOll Instead of the copper l' l content of buster blister from rota which It was c derived the time copper in product by-product sulphate cori cor cor- i capon ding with wih It 14 has imas been Included In Iii th the grand total rue Tho Michigan an production pro pro- of course Is reported entirely as ns refined copper coppom Accurate curot JIN OS IN The computation of oC th time tho production of copper on the time basis of or time the copper COPIer con- con tent teni of bl blister tel produced gives gl es the production pro pro- ducton in the time nearest practicable way wa to I origin anti and ant permits a n classification tion ton among time the states of or origin with a degree of accuracy that no other method meth od of collecting the time statistics affords However Howe even c on omi this timis basis hasi It IL I Is impossible im mi- possible to make an nn t aLsol absolutely ly accurate ate allocation Tho The blister copper basis Is not the time proper one upon which to reckon consumption because c this copper cop cop- tier per Is several mon months In t transit t an and d process o rf DC refining 1 before il it I Is put In Cna filial 1 m bl i 1 a ami l' l tho time Is variable Thum Thus huf 1 the tm of hr transit lt W was sis Ion longer r ll t han than ordinarily because because be be- he cause e of or time the t congestion In raIlway traffic flu fic ft during h tho tw lie latter portion porion of or t th th- th he year YlI Moreover the lime fine copper r content content content con con- tent of the time blister copper produced ol does coes not represent rep exactly what finally is delivered in mm marketable form forni because there is a loss in which on tho the grand total of so o lar large e an nn output as the American amounts to a considerable considerable considerable consid consid- erable figure Cure Vc We have not mande any allowance for such a loss los because It I has been heen considered desirable to leave the time statistics for COL 19 In mm a a. a form directly comparable with wih those for HI 1905 TIme The reasons for the changes in mm th the tho production of the time various vallous states stales have been disc s discussed c in mm previous lous articles so I that it II i is unnecessary ar to enter further Into that subject at t the II tm time I The lw on wily only 1 explanations that arc lt required re- re refer the time tom for Alaska to t. t statistics or Utah and Other States las Alaska did tle not noL produce so much mich copper in as ns Is credited in iii the time of above lVe table but Lut the smelters rs produced t that hat quantity of copper copper copper cop cop- per from Alaska ore a C considerable part par of or which wl ch was mined in HI Cause a inne of ur If Utah DH The rime decrease in iii the time production of or Utah which vinich Is shown sho n in the time above c table Is stat statistical rather than real real Il I Is explainable i b by a n. more complete distribution of the time product of uC the Lers leIs in Iii Utah than timan was In lii the lie I previous year year- These smelters receive a n great deal ceal of ore from other states e especially California and unil Idaho In 1503 thO those states stales received credit for less than ther production while Utah received 1111 credit for more As S a. a matter mater of tho of or fact copper production Utah Increased in 1000 19 but a a considerable portion pOlton of ts oro on-o was a not smelted goIng go- go o- o lug Ing Into the stock of or raw material of or orthe the time Garfield Smelling com company pan whose hoc plant was put nut In lit operation during doming the time year car Our statistics being ba based cd on blister copper production the time copper content of this timis material was ms-cs not In In- In Ap Approximately the same fame Quan will vill remain In stuck stock the time tt llly wil HO long lont n as IK Is hi In operation and when tho time latter laller later ceases Its IH copper content con con- II tent will till wil appear in the prod production I COl-I for tOl that lint year Car Under tIme the caption capton of o Other Is hi Included the production of Nevada Nc Washington Oregon on South Dakota Da Dc- kotu kota and ant Texas together with wih an nn al allowance allowance allowance al- al lowance of or pounds of or copper in iii product by-product h sulphate for or the time reason explained explained ex ox- plumed above and tl together with wih further fur fur- thor ther quantities o of copper which actually produced according to the states stales of or origin The Tue The above c statistics are arc h based ed on orm re reports so- so ports r eel cd from every cry producer Inthe in iii time the United States among among which all al duplications have t been carefully slim elim elm elm- In 1 entering tho totals for Cor tho tim several se states stales thu tiui nearest e thousand has been heen used in order to have hae roun round f figures In 11 erich each case Engineering and amid Mining Journal |