Waterbury Democrat., 1901-01-11
A LIGHTING PLANT
Stamford Investigates and
 Shows Good Results
LIGHTS ONLY COST ONE HALF.

 When Operated By the Municipal An.
 thorities, and at That They Will Get
 More Candle Power Than Water
 bury Is Now Getting.
 Stamford one of our neighboring cities, has been doing some investigat- ing relative to the matter of municipal ownership of an electric lighting plant, and such Information as 1t has been able to obtain has been printed now in possession of City Clerk NJ. J. Ryan, forwarded to him by Graham R. Holly, Stamford's city clerk. The report was prepared by Thomas c. Perkins of Hartford, a competent cleo trical engineer, and should be put in the hands of every taxpayer in Water bury and then let him decide for him. self whether or not people who are aiming to put the city of Waterbury an a position to do its own lighting are chasing shadows, introducing wild- cat schemes. talking about things they do not understand, and seeking for permission to rush blindly into ven- lures without regard for the public good" In brief, let the public decide whether municipal lighting is good thing or not. We have some good peo- pie in Waterbury opposed to it be- cause they believe it would not pay, while other equally well disposed citi- zens who have given the subject con. siderable thought feel satisfied that We can save money by doing our own lighting, and contend that no time should be lost in going into the busi- ness. If those who fbvor the project are right it is for the interest of the city to stand behind gem, and on the other hand. if the men who differ with them can make good their case, then all who are agitating for this new de parture should step to the rear. The report gives a list of the cost of lights in the different cities in Con- | necticut. Stamford is paying $1.2O per year for arc lights of 1,20O candle l power the same to be in use all night Greenwich comes next, the price there I being $11O. The two next highest are | Waterbury and New London. price $1OO per arc light. In Hartford the ] price for the same candle power lights | as used in this citysis $15 q year; New Britain. $9O; New Haven, $91.25; Nor wich. $9O; Winsted, $50; Bridgeport. S94. The incandescent lights in Wa terbury cost $2O year for all ngne and are rated at twenty-five candle l power. Iue Sdulo StIS4Se IOStS F%.s'-.4>'' | in Hartford, but Winsted gets a thir- ty-two candle power incandescent light, all night, for SIS.
 |; Tn. other states the prices Of arc l lights such as are in use in Waterbury. l are far below what We are paving l Taunton, Mass, for example, receiving 1 the same service for S6S.97 that costs
 Waterbury $1OO. In some places the 1 figures are startling. An all night 2- | Iyt,f l ST5 a year in Bangor, Me, and III; Wa
 teryille, same state, the price or a 2,-
 900 candle power lamp per year 1a
 down to S35. :, 1 After going into the question Of
 lighting at considerable length. the re-
 port states a plant such as Stamford needs can be installed at q price nor
 exceeding ssO,OOO. This includes every
 thing. Such q plant is designed to
 furnish 200 arc lights, each. to be of
 2,OOO candle power, and 5OO 1pean-
 descent lamps, each of twenty-hve
 candle power. The running expense
 including the interest on the SSO,otN
 invested in it is given at $13,o4l.
 '.The actual cost" the report states,
 ssto the city of Stamford for street
 lights of 2,OOO candle power, provided
 it owned it's own plant. would De
 SIS. .SS q year, as against $120 for lights I l,--O
 tract system. The price of the small j. lights would be reduced from $s2.50
 to $65O.'
 Without going into the matter in de-
 tail. for there is not room Tor TUT
 discussion of such questions in the
 crowded columns of Q daily paper, 1E
 is safe to state that according t0 the , figures submitted to the Stamford Iu-
 thorities by MT Perkins, Waterbury can put $1OO, 600 into sn electric light ing plant and save money on the
 scheme the first year without counting T cent profit from electricity sold to 5 nriyata individuals The interest on money necessary to install and oper- ate a plant such as would meet the .. requirements of Waterbury would De l but a mere bagatelle compared Wltn inc S23, 900 or $24. GOO riie city is plank ing down for about POO lights of sso0 } candle power and q few incandescents ' of twenty-five candle power. And the t public should bear in mind that the F city buys n good deal of electricity be- 5 sides what is used for street nghting- : and this added to the doing away wltn 9 gas where the city uses it would aou ] to our savings.
 9 The present contract between the Q city and the trolley company was en s tered into during Mayor Barlows $ Q term of office and will not expire unti t March l, 19O3 There was big how e at the time about the signing of 2 hve r year contract, but we were told dha' e the terms were favorable and that Il would be well to have q long contract $ We have no desire to whine aDou e what has been done. We are dealini e with the present and mSking m effor 1t to profit by the mistakes of the past 2 and if enough people in Waterbury n look at this matter in business wa,
 the city can make handsome sav1ng'
 by owning and operating an electra
 lighting plant.
 $ =