Evening journal., 1897-01-02
SOME THING OF NOTHING
Grave Doubts That Garbage
Can Become Money.
ITS DESTRUCTION MUST COST


ITS DESTRUCTION MUST COST
REVIEW OF THE LIGHT EXPENSE
INCURRED BY WILMINGTON FOR
THE CONSUMPTION OF AN OVER
WHELMING AMOUNT OF GAR
BACE.
Prominent citizens. always with The
interests of their commonwealth at
heart, are just now giving many opin-
ions, both pro and con, as 10 the pro-
posed establishment of a private plant
in Wilmington to take all the citys
garbage and convert 1t into a fertilizer
that will bring good money in the mar
kets.
A prevailing opinion seems to be
that this scheme is impracticable. and
because it cannot be carried cut in
some large cities, Wilmington has been
selected as an advantageous place
to further experiment.
TWO WAYS TO DISPOSE OF IT.
Careful investigation shows that
there are but two systems thus far in
vented for the consumption of garbage
ID Cremation or entire destruction
by fire; (2) Utilization or the conver-
sion OF garbage into a commercial pro-
duct for fertilizer.
In the utilization system there are
several processes. The main one is
that OF reduction. Here the garbage Is
treated chemically in some instances
the application of naptha. the purpose
Of which is to liberate the oils or fats,
and is similar to the old process in use
at slaughter-houses, commonly refer
red to as the bone-bOiling business.
In this the garbage is dumped into
large watts or digesters and treated with
O hien pressure of steam until all the
fats are liberated, siphOned off and sold
to sOap-makers.
The greater part of this soap fat Is
| shipped to Germany The water re-
naming in the tanks IS then run of
into the sewers or the nearest streams.
The residue is then pressed and dried.
and is known as tankage. This tankage.
which has little or no commercial
value, is sold TO large phosphate deal
ers and is used as a vehicle for making
the cheaper phosphates.
EX-SECRETARY COLQUHOUNs
VIEWS.
An Evening Journal reporter solicit
/ ed an opinion from ex-Secretary Col
| quhCun, Of the Board Of Health. He
was found in his office in the Equitable
| Building, and said:
Reduction processes, while they
| have been tried in many cities, have
been condemned on account of being
unsanitary. Reduction was at one
] time carried ON IN coma nx-for,f L., UT,s-
! rope-Berlin and Hamburg It has
heen entirely discarded they having
universally adopted cremation
From experiments the reduction in
this country has thus far proved un.
successful Providence, Brooklyn, New
Orleans and some other cities con-
demned the process after trying it for
years One in Milwaukee was removed
| by injunction to fifteen miles beyond
the city limits In Washington. d. c..
the government spent large sums OF
money trying the various systems. the
chief object being to obtain the most
sanitary methods In 1892 they built
at an expense CT over 100000, a re-
duction plant, which was considered
the best system Of the kind known, be-
ing designed, built and operated un-
der the management of one Arnold
who had given this subject much
study, having visited all the European
cities in his Investigations. There tn,
system proved a failure both from Fl.
: nancial and sanitary standpoints. the
odors emanating from the place beinf
a source Of much complaint and an.
noyance to the health department.
there.
Frequent examinations were made
"a ] In
brought before the commissioners. Tn,
b plant was finally burned down. prob
ably the act Of parties in that neighbor
hccd who had failed TO get relief from
the commission.
"The proposition now made to de
: stroy the garbage in Wilmington TO
no cost, carries with it the organization
Of a local company to operate the same
- This carries forth the inducement tina
r the company will pay large dividends
Experience shows that these com
p Danies have never paid large dividends
b but in every instance they have me
2 with loss and disaster. Reduction o
utilization is net as cheap as crema
tion. From satisfies gathered IN tn
United States for one year, from July ]
2 1895. to July /. 1896, perfectly authonti
: and reliable. show that the minimum
d cost of reduction was Is cents per cap
- ita while the maximum cost was G
b cents per capita.
e For the same period, the cost q
n cremation, the minimum cost was
d cents per capita, and the maximum
L cost was 20 cents. In very large citie
the cost was from to 6 cents per car
ita. Cities Of medium size, from {
, 10 cents. Small cities. 20 cents.
This argument shows cremation {
q be the cheaper. The same statistic
I show that Wilmington gathered MOI
. garbage per capita than any city {
= the Union, and the cost was ~ cent
9 per capita. Wilmington has to-da
Z what is recognized by sanitarians &
the best and most economical systel
Of cremation ever known The troub