Part 19

Mr. DALLYN. There were two examinations made. We were on the river with a laboratory from about the middle of April until the end of May, and from about the 10th of August, to the 20th of August. It is reported in the progress report.

Mr. POWELL. Have you any data, exact or otherwise, as to the summer population of the district?

Mr. DALLYN. No; but I think there is something in Dr. McLaughlin’s report as to that. We made no calculations ourselves. I know the populations of Cape Vincent and Clayton double themselves in the summer; but what the island population and the excursion population were I have not any idea.

Mr. MIGNAULT. Is there any record available to show what that summer population amounts to?

Mr. DALLYN. I am not sure.

Mr. MIGNAULT. It is rather important to know because that is a feature, that and the pollution, and it strikes me at the present moment that even if the communities treat their sewage and the boats sterilize theirs, there will be still a danger from this summer population camping on the islands.

Mr. DALLYN. Yes; that is true. They will come, of course, under township regulations. I do not know just how they handle them on the American side. In the Muskoka Lakes we make them treat their sewage properly.

Mr. MIGNAULT. How do they accomplish that?

Mr. DALLYN. They have various methods of getting at it. Some use the chemical process, and store it and pump it out in a nocuous form into beds. Some lay piles through the sand.

Mr. MIGNAULT. What is your opinion as to the danger of pollution from your summer population?

Mr. DALLYN. It is very serious. We were very much amazed in making a minute survey on some of the islands to find that their sewage outlet and their intakes would be only 40 feet away from each other, making it practically certain that the two would mingle.

Mr. TAWNEY. Mr. Dallyn, I have here a report which you and Dr. McLaughlin and Dr. McCullough made, a portion of which I wish to read into the record. From page 50 of the progress report I read as follows:

While examination below Wolfe Island among the Thousand Islands did not show an average gross pollution, its intermittent character presents a menace to the summer residents in this section who take their supply of water from the river without purification.

Examinations made in the vicinity of Brockville showed that the shore samples collected from the cross section above Brockville carried considerable pollution. Toward midstream, where dilution and mixing had taken place, the samples showed constant pollution of lesser degree. Below Brockville the major pollution remained near the banks of the river. Samples collected in midstream showed very little pollution in the early work before navigation opened. The latter work in August showed a very general serious pollution, due probably to summer resort population and to boat traffic. The condition of the river between Brockville and Cornwall is very bad in the summer months, as evidenced by midstream samples Nos. 266-273.

Unquestionably, the water from this portion of the St. Lawrence River should not be used as a water supply without adequate purification.

Mr. POWELL. It is a fact, is it not, that the pollution at these summer resorts is steadily and rapidly increasing?

Mr. DALLYN. Undoubtedly so.

Mr. TAWNEY. There has been more this year than ever before, on account of the long period of hot weather, and also the fact that many people who have formerly gone abroad on their vacations have remained here.

Mr. DALLYN. The education of the people has improved very materially during the last few years, and they demand better conditions at the summer resorts.

Mr. POWELL. You are quite familiar with the Thousand Island region, are you not?

Mr. DALLYN. We spent about a month there in small boats.

Mr. POWELL. Passing in and out among the islands?

Mr. DALLYN. Yes, sir.

Mr. POWELL. Bearing in mind what Mr. Tawney read from the progress report to the effect that there was a greater admixture of water above Brockville than below, that would be due, would it not, to the various channels and rapids among these islands?

Mr. DALLYN. Yes, sir; and the channel is very tortuous just at that point.

Mr. POWELL. And there are jetties in all directions, which result in a general churning and admixture of the water.

Mr. DALLYN. We discovered that the Cataraqui Bay at Kingston periodically discharged itself completely into the St. Lawrence. That would give us a very high pollution. It is simply a tidal effect. The river seems to flow in both directions opposite Kingston.

Mr. MAGRATH. How far is it from Kingston to Charlotte?

Mr. DALLYN. I am really not aware. I imagine it would be about 130 miles.

STATEMENT OF F. S. EVANSON, MAYOR OF PRESCOTT, ONTARIO.

Mr. EVANSON. Prescott lies opposite Ogdensburg on the Canadian side of the St. Lawrence River, and the river at this point is about 1¼ miles in width. We have a splendid water system in Prescott for a town of its size. We obtain the water in the St. Lawrence River. We have three outlets for our sewers. We discharge our sewage into the river in a raw condition.

Mr. GARDNER. Have you ever contemplated the purification of your sewage in any way?

Mr. EVANSON. We have never considered it.

Mr. GARDNER. You have never had it under consideration?

Mr. EVANSON. No.

Mr. GARDNER. In your opinion, would it be a difficult thing to do?

Mr. EVANSON. No; I think we could treat it all right. Prescott has been most fortunate in that we have not had any experience of an epidemic of any kind. Brockville has been troubled with typhoid for some years, but we have been free from it. We never attempted to chlorinate the water until Brockville had an epidemic a few years ago, and we chlorinated the water as a precaution. At present we have not a case of fever in Prescott. You will find that the fever cases in Prescott are much below the average.

Mr. MAGRATH. You are satisfied?

Mr. EVANSON. We are satisfied with the conditions as they exist at present.

Mr. GARDNER. How long have you been treating your water?

Mr. EVANSON. Since the epidemic in Brockville we have been treating it most of the time. I regret that the medical health officer of the municipality could not come here to-day. I may state that the quantity of chlorine we put into the water is lowered at certain seasons of the year.

Mr. GARDNER. Did you have anything of the nature of an epidemic in your town before you commenced to treat the water?

Mr. EVANSON. We never had. I was mayor of the town in 1910 and 1911 and during that time I asked the medical health officer frequently to send in samples of our water, and he did so. He took the water from the taps in the town, and not from the river, and it was rarely shown that it was contaminated in any way. I can only remember one occasion on which there was slight contamination.

Mr. GARDNER. At what point in the river is your intake?

Mr. EVANSON. The intake pipe is at the most westerly point in the town and it runs into the river for 400 feet.

Mr. GARDNER. Do you find the channel within that distance?

Mr. EVANSON. No; we would not be out in the channel at that distance. The nearest sewer pipe is 1,500 feet from the intake pipe.

Mr. GARDNER. That would be down the river.

Mr. EVANSON. Yes. Of course I think the current of the river at Prescott improves the conditions there. It is said that the water flows by there at about 4 miles an hour. We have no eddies at all such as they have at Brockville. At Brockville there is a point that juts out and obstructs the flow of the river at the west side, and that is the cause of the eddy there, but we have no eddy whatever at Prescott.

Mr. GARDNER. Is the river narrower opposite Prescott than it is opposite Brockville?

Mr. EVANSON. I think it is about the same width as at Brockville; we are about a mile and a quarter across here.

Dr. MCCULLOUGH. The river is one mile and three-quarters wide at Brockville.

Mr. GARDNER. What is the average depth of the river here from shore to shore?

Mr. EVANSON. I can not say as to that. Of course, along our docks at Prescott, the river is 14 or 15 feet, and the two Richelieu boats are in there every morning, the one from the west coming in at 7 o’clock, and it remains there until 10 o’clock or half past 10, and the boat from the west comes in at 10 o’clock and remains there until noon. The sewage would not contaminate our water because the sewage outlets are at least half a mile east of our intake pipe.

Mr. GARDNER. Did you notice any disturbance of the river bottom when these steamboats are leaving or arriving at the wharf?

Mr. EVANSON. No. Of course the town owns the western wharf where our water system is and no boats tie up there at all; the only boat that comes there is an occasional boat with coal.

Mr. POWELL. Have the town authorities at Prescott ever considered the advisability of purifying or sterilizing the sewage?

Mr. EVANSON. In 1911 we put in a further sewerage extension in the east end of the town. We had two outlets then. We extended the sewer in the east end of the town, and in order to get an outlet for that extension we had to put the east one farther west, and the question was considered then, but it was decided that it was useless to purify the sewage at one small outlet and let the two larger outlets go without purification. The question received some consideration then. It was suggested that we could put in a plant which would take care of the purification of the sewage.

Mr. POWELL. Have you the same rock formation at Prescott as at Brockville?

Mr. EVANSON. I do not know of any harder rock than we have at Prescott; you are liable to run into it at any place in the town.

Mr. MAGRATH. What is the assessed value of the property in your municipality?

Mr. EVANSON. A little over $2,000,000.

Mr. MAGRATH. What is your rate of taxation?

Mr. EVANSON. The rate of taxation varies from 25 to 27 mills.

Mr. MAGRATH. Is the water supply of your town satisfactory to the public health authorities of Ontario?

Mr. EVANSON. I think so.

Mr. GARDNER. What is the basis of taxation; is it the full value of the property?

Mr. EVANSON. No; I think it is about 75 per cent of the value of the property, I think that is the way the assessor places it.

Mr. POWELL. What is the rate of taxation?

Mr. EVANSON. Twenty-seven mills on the dollar last year; that is $27 on the thousand.

Mr. POWELL. Does that cover everything?

Mr. EVANSON. Yes; of course it does not cover the water and light rate; it covers the general taxes of the town and the school rate; the school rate is about 11 mills.

Mr. POWELL. The individuals who consume the water pay for it?

Mr. EVANSON. Yes; and the municipality owns it.

Mr. GARDNER. What is your indebtedness?

Mr. EVANSON. Our indebtedness would run about $170,000. I should say that in the neighborhood of $100,000 of that covers the water and light system. Of course, the water and the light take care of their own departments. We own the water and the light plants.

Mr. GARDNER. And a proportion of your indebtedness is because of your ownership of these utilities?

Mr. EVANSON. Yes. When we put in the water and light systems in 1900 we issued debentures for $120,000 at that time to take care of it. We have extended the sewerage system since at a cost of $25,000 or $30,000.

Mr. POWELL. If the purification of sewage is made obligatory along the river here I suppose that your town would have no objection to comply with the general rule?

Mr. EVANSON. Certainly not.

Mr. POWELL. But you would have objection to be singled out and compelled to do that if other people were allowed to go free?

Mr. EVANSON. Yes. Prescott is most fortunate in having first-class water in the river here, and that has been the condition for a number of years. I think it proves that flowing water will purify itself in a distance of 12 miles, because there must be a great amount of sewage flowing into the river at Brockville, which is 12 miles above us.

Mr. GARDNER. Unless you have some general statement to make to the commission I think that is all we want to hear from you, Mr. Evanson.

Mr. EVANSON. I have nothing further to say. I say that the municipality of Prescott will be glad to carry out the wishes of this commission and of the United States and Canada if a means can be devised to purify sewage.

STATEMENT AS TO ASSESSED VALUE OF BROCKVILLE.

Mr. GARDNER. I wish to ask the mayor of Brockville what the assessed valuation of the town is.

Mr. DEWEY (city clerk, Brockville). The assessed valuation of the town is about $5,000,000, and the population 9,500.

Mr. GARDNER. What is your rate of taxation?

Mr. DEWEY. Thirty mills this year.

Mr. GARDNER. What is your basis of value; is it full value?

Mr. DEWEY. No. Under the law it is supposed to be.

Mr. POWELL. Is that a supposition contrary to the fact?

Mr. DEWEY. Taking it on the whole, I presume it would be 75 or 80 per cent of the value.

Mr. GARDNER. It is high enough at that rate, I should think. What is your indebtedness?

Mr. DEWEY. The net debt, including public utilities, is $600,000.

Mr. MAGRATH. What do your public utilities cover?

Mr. DEWEY. Electricity, gas, and water.

Mr. POWELL. Is there any surplus from the supply of electricity, gas, and water?

Mr. DEWEY. There is a slight surplus over the operating charges and the amount necessary to take care of the debt.

Mr. GARDNER. How are you paying that? Is it by a sinking fund?

Mr. DEWEY. Some of it. Some of it is payable in annual installments. We issue debentures both ways.

Mr. POWELL. Is your debt diminishing or increasing?

Mr. DEWEY. I think it is diminishing. Our local improvement debt constitutes the bulk of the debt.

Mr. POWELL. And these public utilities carry themselves?

Mr. DEWEY. Yes. The local improvement indebtedness is paid largely by the property owners.

Mr. MAGRATH. It might be well to state for the information of those gentlemen who have come here from a distance that we are to hear this afternoon Mr. Paterson, an expert in the matter, in reference to methods of treating pollution. It might be interesting to these gentlemen to stay here to hear Mr. Paterson.

Mr. POWELL. It may interest these gentlemen, because Mr. Paterson claims that the municipalities could make a large profit out of the treatment of this sewage.

Mr. GARDNER. You would be able to pay off your indebtedness, perhaps, if you took Mr. Paterson’s advice.

(The commission took recess for luncheon.

After the luncheon recess.)

STATEMENT OF MR. EDWARD A. PATERSON.

EDWARD A. PATERSON, chemical engineer, London, England, appeared before the commission and said:

After I received the telegram from the secretary of the Canadian section of the commission asking me to come here I cabled to London for certain plans and models and additional samples, as I only had a few samples on this side and a few notes. These samples and reports have not yet got here, I suppose owing to the war conditions. I therefore have to rely upon rough laboratory notes, which I hope to augment with further information as soon as the data arrive here. I hope you will excuse me for not having the short report which I have made in fuller detail. I shall be glad to give you more interesting information later.

I may state, first, that my remarks are purely from the British point of view; I am not at all familiar with the conditions on this side, except as to a few of the plants, such as the Baltimore plant and others, where they have erected up-to-date plants for the collection of the solids. I have been investigating this matter for about six years purely from the point of view of the disposal of the solids, and I have looked upon it from the utilization point of converting waste products into a commercial enterprise. Our difficulty in Great Britain is that we have an enormous accumulation of what we call sludge cake or sewage cake, which comes mostly from the filter press, and in some cases it is taken out to sea and in others it is disposed of on the land and in other cases they burn it. In England alone we have enormous quantities of this material, which costs from 1 shilling to 5 shillings--that is, from 25 cents to $1.25--per ton of wet sludge. When I refer to “wet sludge,” I mean sludge that contains from 50 to 60 per cent of water.

As to the raw material, the process to which I will refer deals with the raw sewage which has been precipitated or agglomerated by means of lime, “ferro-alumina,” or other agent, and rendered solid either by filter pressing or “lagooning” at the sewage-disposal works. This solid material contains on an average 50 to 55 per cent moisture and must, owing to its nature, be quickly disposed of, because for about six months in the year it becomes extremely offensive, and they have in England a very small area in which to dispose of it. It has to be taken away by railway trains and in boats and such like conveyances. In Great Britain the amount of solid material--containing 50 per cent moisture--produced by each 1,000 inhabitants is approximately 100 tons per annum, and, for the purposes of this report, those towns in the United Kingdom having a population of over 100,000 people produce annually 1,800,000 tons.

In disposing of it we look upon it from the commercial point of view, and, therefore, the composition of the sewage is very important.

The composition of raw sewage, of course, must vary very considerably, depending on the time of year and the district which it is derived from--trades waste, and so forth, e. g., paper factories, iron works, dye works, render it very complex, and an ever-varying mixture, but the following analysis will give a very general idea of its character and composition in Great Britain:

_Analysis of raw sewage per 100,000 parts as solids._

In solution, 125.4 } In suspension, 62.9 } 188.3 Chlorine 8.9 Free ammonia 2.1 Organic (albuminoid). Ammonia 76

I have a sample here of the material that is generally produced at the sewage works.

(Sample produced and shown to the commissioners.)

That sample contains from 55 to 60 per cent of water and is as it comes from the filter press, and it is called filter-press cake.

Mr. GARDNER. That is not in commercial form?

Mr. PATERSON. No; that is in the form, as it comes from the sewage works, and it is material that gives us much trouble to dispose of. The analysis of that material, not air dried, is approximately--by “approximately” I mean the general analysis of that class of material over the United Kingdom--as follows:

_Analysis of press cake (not air dried)._

--------------------------------+-----------+-----------+----------- | London. | Leeds. | Wimbledon. --------------------------------+-----------+-----------+----------- |_Per cent._|_Per cent._|_Per cent._ Water | 50.00 | 58.05 | 56.15 Organic matter | 15.40 | 16.69 | 11.36 Silica | 6.40 | 8.08 | 7.10 Carbonate of lime | 10.30 | 7.94 | 11.14 Nitrogen in sewage sludge (dry) | 1.63 | ... | ... To ammonia | 1.95 | ... | ... To ammonia sulphate | [2]7.67 | ... | ... --------------------------------+-----------+-----------+-----------

[2] Or per ton sludge, 171.8 pounds.

The ordinary air-dried sewage--we do not have very much of it in England--mostly comes from the small towns, in which the sludge is pumped up into lagoons and allowed to dry there, and the composition of that material is, generally speaking, as follows:

----------------------------+-----------+----------- Air dry. | London. | Leeds. ----------------------------+-----------+----------- |_Per cent._|_Per cent._ Water | 11.86 | 16.40 Organic matter | 24.61 | 27.92 Phosphoric acid (P₂O₅) | 1.04 | .75 Sulphuric acid | 1.12 | 1.02 Carbonic acid | 10.98 | 13.11 Lime | 14.33 | 17.51 Magnesia | 2.34 | 7.67 Oxide of iron | 3.02 | 2.32 Alumina | 4.13 | 6.33 Nitrogen | .86 | .70 ----------------------------+-----------+-----------

These analyses will give a general idea of the composition of filter-pressed sewage cake, which we treat in Great Britain, and of which we have 1,800,000 tons per annum.

The object of the process under consideration is to dry the solids so that they may be available either for a fertilizer or, secondly, to be in a condition that by-products of commercial value can be recovered. The greatest difficulty with which we have had to contend was to provide a way of liberating the moisture, of which the pressed cake contained from 55 to 60 per cent, without volatilizing valuable material, and at the same time achieve the object in a short space of time and at low cost. One of the difficulties that has caused a great deal of time and trouble to solve is how to get rid of that moisture and dry the material at a moderate cost without losing any of the valuable constituents, because the valuable products are volatilized at a very low temperature. A very large amount of money and time has been spent in Great Britain in trying to dry sewage pressed cake, or sewage sludge, economically, and many ingenious mechanical appliances have been invented to try and solve the difficulty, but they have not been a success, as they have been costly to operate and required high temperature, with consequent loss of some of the valuable constituents of the sewage. This is due to the water in the sewage being in so many different forms, namely, hydroscopic water, water of combination, and water of crystallization; the first being easy to drive off and the two latter extremely difficult. So it is recognized now that the problem is one of chemistry and mechanics applied, and I can safely say that there is now a satisfactory solution of these difficulties on a practical scale.

Further on in this report I will give you some figures as to the cost of plant and cost per ton of drying pressed cake.

Having dried the material, it is in a condition to be treated by destructive distillation, whereby ammonia, oil, gas, fat, phenols, and other materials suitable for drugs and dye making may be extracted.

I show you a sample of the material as dried. It appears in that form [specimen exhibited], and it contains 50 to 55 and 60 per cent of water. After it is dried it becomes absolutely, as you see it there. That specimen is practically free from water; it contains only about 2 per cent of water. That material is valuable as a fertilizer, and it is sold in the form of a butter. [Butter specimen exhibited.]