History of the Water Supply of the World / arranged in a comprehensive form from eminent authorities, containing a description of the various methods of water supply, pollution and purification of waters, and sanitary effects, with analyses of potable waters, also geology and water strata of Hamilton county, Ohio, statistics of the Ohio river, proposed water supply of Cincinnati.

by Thomas J. Bell

REDUCTION OF URINE BY AERATION

Urine, in proportion of one gallon (imperial) to 3,077 gallons of water, exposed to the air and briskly agitated:

	PARTS IN 100,000 PARTS.
DATE.	ORGANIC CARBON.	ORGANIC NITROGEN.
Feb. 17, 1874,	.282	.243
“ 18, “	.298	.251
“ 19, “	.244	.255
“ 24, “	.225	.253
“ 25, “	.214	.259
“ 28, “	.214	.276

Results show that fresh urine with a large volume of water is, under atmospheric influences, more permanent and indestructible than sewage.

The agents of destruction of sewage are:

Infusorial animals.		Chemical Oxidation.
Aquatic plants.		Dilution.
Fish.		Deposition.

Sir Benjamin Brodie, in his evidence before a former River Pollution Commission, stated: “That it was simply impossible that the oxidizing power acting on sewage running in mixture with water over a distance of any length is sufficient to remove its noxious quality; that the oxygen in the water and on its surface does not exercise any rapidly oxidizing power on organic matter.” He believed “that an infinitesimally small quantity of decayed matter is able to produce an injurious effect upon health; that if a large proportion of organic matter were removed by oxidation, the quantity left might be sufficient to be injurious to health. To destroy organic matter the most powerful oxidizing agents are required. We must boil it with nitric acid and chloric acid and the most perfect chemical agents. To think to get rid of organic matter by exposure to the air for a short time is absurd.”

Prof. Frankland, one of the Rivers Pollution Commission of 1874, says:

“That I should rely upon dilution quite as much and more than upon the destruction of injurious matter; that the flow of a river has a most natural influence in the removal of subsidence of a large proportion of the suspended impurities both organic and mineral, especially if the flow be sluggish in places.”

Prof. Brodie stated:

“There are causes operating, as we all know, to destroy the sewage which, to a certain extent, will effect that end; but the question, as I understand it, is, whether those causes are really adequate to destroy the sewage, not partially but absolutely and entirely, during a given course of the river? I do not think, in the present state of our knowledge, to pronounce an absolute opinion upon that point. But if you ask whether it is wise to drink water into which you have put sewage, knowing that you have no means of getting that sewage out of it, that is a question which any one can answer for himself, assuming always the injurious character of sewage.”

The fifth annual report of the Board of Health of Massachusetts (1875), contains the following, on the effects of oxidation, dilution, and deposition:

“Oxidation.—Although it is not practical, in the case of a running stream like the Merrimack, to trace the progress of the destruction of the organic material by oxidation, yet there is no doubt that a certain amount is so destroyed. The presence of nitrogen in the form of nitrites and nitrates is mainly due to the oxidation of nitrogenous organic material. In the last report of the Board, the reasons are given which lead to the belief that the effects of oxidation have been overrated, although they are not, on the other hand, to be depreciated.

“Deposition.—Much waste material, thrown into rivers, is made up wholly or in part of substances insoluble in water. A portion, and a very considerable portion, even in a running stream is deposited upon the bottom or stranded upon the banks. At the time of spring freshets much that during the summer may have been deposited at one part of the stream, in the bed or on the banks, is washed up again, and mingling with the earthy materials, held in suspension, is swept onward to the sea or enveloped in the earthy matter, especially if this be of a clayey nature, is deposited lower down the stream. These spring freshets are relied upon for cleansing banks used for infiltration.

“Dilution.—By far the most important reason of the apparent disappearance of sewage and other waste material, is the fact that the amount of solid matter is so small compared with the volume of water into which it is thrown, that it is disseminated through the mass and thus lost to observation, and in many cases to chemical test.

“Analyses of water, below and above Lawrence and Lowell, showed no increase in chlorine. The substance can not escape from the water in gaseous form, nor does it deposit in insoluble combination, yet first inspection would lead to a conclusion that no real increase existed. The facts are that the reduction was due to dilution, and not to any destruction or decomposition. Much depends of course upon the size of the stream into which the refuse is thrown. Thus, while into the Merrimack at Lowell, even during the minimum summer flow of 2,100 cubic feet per second, it would be necessary to throw more than 100 tons of solid matter daily in order to increase the amount in the water by one grain to the gallon; another and smaller stream might be hopelessly fouled by a single factory.”

The effects of dilution are shown in the analysis of the Schuylkill River—there being less sewage at Fairmount Dam, the nearest to the outlet, than any point above. It is estimated that 300,000 inhabitants, exclusive of those in Philadelphia, live within the water-shed of this river, less than 150 miles above Philadelphia, the undiluted sewage from these persons amounting annually to 150,000 tons. In addition to this pollution 15,000,000 gallons daily flow from 115 establishments located on the banks, not considering the 57 collieries and 76 anthracite furnaces. Yet with all this contamination the water at Fairmount, chemically considered, is as pure as most sources. The chemists in their report say: “Having now shown that the Schuylkill water is about as good a water as we might wish to find for a large city in its mineral and organic content.

“Since the present water is good enough, we may keep it so, and even improve it by a system of sewage gradually extended up both sides of the river, especially the left bank, above the influence of Monayunk, and by procuring sufficient legislative power to control the escape of sewage or possibly injurious manufacturing residue. The long line of many miles would tend greatly to the purification of the water by aeration, deposition, or abstraction of possibly injurious substances from the water by the time it reached within using distance of the city.”

The increase of solid matter in the Schuylkill has been as follows:

1842,	4,421 grains in 1,000 gallons.
1854,	6,109 grains in 1,000 gallons.
1862,	7,040 grains in 1,000 gallons.
1875,	8,139 grains in 1,000 gallons.

The recent analysis by Prof. Stuntz of the Ohio River, also shows the effects of dilution. (The results express the number of pounds of sewage in one million gallons.)

	GENERAL CONDITION LBS.	WORST CONDITION LBS.	GENERAL AVERAGE LBS.
At pumping works,	1.81	11.39	4.18
At mouth Eggleston Avenue sewer,	4.41	17.91	11.16
At Storrs and Lower River,	1.96	10.00	5.94

Although increased by the whole sewage of the city in addition to Licking River, Covington, and steamboat contamination, the proportion of sewage at Storrs in its worst condition is chemically shown to be little better than at the pumping works.