New Britain herald., 1926-12-24
SEWERAGE ESTIMATES DOJIBIE IN COST

poSal would be made, he estimate
 was that the work would cost the city approximately s500.000." Now
 we discover, upon the competent testimony of Mr. Wadhams, direc- tor of the state water board, that
 the cost will amount to s1,O00,000 ! We are either worse off than We l thought we were, or the cost of sewage disposal increases the fur
 ther one investigates the methods
 10 be adopted.
 It is a cost that cannot be avoid
 ed. The city is faced with this
 heavy expenditure and there is no possible way 10 tune up with a song
 of economy about it. There is no
 such thing as economy In such a matter. In short, we are up against it, as the boys in the city hall
 would say.
 The sewage disposal system of
 the city has been inadequate for a long time. l. is steadily getting
 worse. The city is fortunate in only
 one thing. that it has officials who are willing to face the music and do | something about it regardless of the price charged by the fiddler.
 The modus opcrandi of Mayor Weld has brought good preliminary results. From the sewer fund S7000 was appropriated to finance a sur vey, which is not yet completed. but sufficiently so to warrant the issu- ance of first report. That was printed yesterday by the local committee consisting of William H. Judd, Thure Bengston and City En- gineer Joseph D. Williams, and which was supplemented by state ment by Director Wadhams him. self. This report was of vital i'm portance 10 every citizen, was con- else and pointed, and left the i'm pression those concerned were en- titled 10 the congratulations of fel- low citizens.
 We now know that sand beds, similar to the 37 acres already own- ed by the city, would require 11O acres in the future, the plant would have capitalized cost of s1,T00,- 900, and the annual charges would be s160,000. This would be a more costly undertaking than either of the others to be described and would also result in the highest maintenance cost.
 Imhoff tanks, a modern type of sewerage disposal, would require only Is acres of land, would cost s1,275,000, and require s100,0O0 an- nually to maintain. The low cost of maintenance is especially to be taken note of.
 The activated sludge system would require merely eight acres of land, would cost the least of any of the systems proposed-only s900,- 000-but would take s135,O00 annu- ally for maintenance. The latter is clearly a drawback, for a sewerage system is not built for short time but for at least 25 years-or ought to be.
 In 25 years the cost of maintain ing Imhoff tanks would amount to S2,57o, o,000-bascd on s100,oO0 year and assuming the carrying charges would not lessen in that | time. During the same period the | activated sIudge system would cost | S3.275.0 .000. If the bonds are re- tired before then the activated | sludge system would cost consider ably more than the tanks 10 main- tain. as from the start there would i be s300,00 less investment charges to carry, so that it is fair to assume a greater proportion of the main tcnance costs of the sludge system is due to the higher costs of opera ton.
 Of course, We are not the judges of the matter, and do not intend 0 advise the committee in technical and financial matters. It merely seems from the basis of the first re- port at hand that cheapest system is not necessary the one costing least to install. We think citizens generally will agree as to this point.
 It is gratifying 10 realize that ac- tion is being taken upon q question long mooted and discussed in this city, Industrial waste, ground and storm water and lubricating oil . from garages have tended 10 intensi- fy the difficulties at hand; but they are not insurmountable The city must improve is pipe line system along with the sewerage system, and it may be necessary 10 spend con- siderable additional money to keep the ordinary sewer pipes and storm sewer pipes separate.