At first sight this figure seems so startling as to be received with incredulity, but analysis suffices to demonstrate that it does not err upon the side of exaggeration. Rather is it conservative. It is based upon an allowance of 1,680 lb. a day for each 1,000 members of the total population during 300 days of the year. An allowance of 1·68 lb. per head per day wastage cannot be construed as excessive. How many households of six persons can show a weekly dust-bin collection weighing less than 60 lb. especially when the extremely varied contents of the receptacle are born in mind?
Now, of what is the heterogeneous collection of the dust-bin composed, and what is the proportion of each to the aggregate? The following table, based upon the data collected by the official department already mentioned, shows—
| Material. | Average Percentage. | Total per Year. | Estimated Value. | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tons. | £ | $ | ||
| Fine dust | 50·98 | 4,800,000 | 240,000 | 1,200,000 |
| Cinders | 39·63 | 3,700,000 | 1,850,000 | 9,250,000 |
| Bricks, pots, shales, etc. | 5·35 | 500,000 | 25,000 | 125,000 |
| Tins | 0·98 | 90,000 | 360,000 | 1,800,000 |
| Rags | 0·40 | 37,000 | 555,000 | 2,775,000 |
| Glass | 0·61 | 50,000 | 100,000 | 500,000 |
| Bones | 0·05 | 4,000 | — | — |
| Vegetable matter | 0·72 | 68,000 | — | — |
| Scrap iron | 0·06 | 5,000 | 15,000 | 75,000 |
| Shells (oyster, etc.) | 0·08 | 7,000 | — | — |
| Paper | 0·62 | 58,000 | 400,000 | 2,000,000 |
From these figures it is evident that the dust-bin is a veritable treasure ground. Of course the values are subject to market fluctuations, but it is apparent that a round £3,000,000—$15,000,000—more or less, a year, is being allowed to fly up the chimney to vanish in smoke and gases, and to extend very meagre return for its combustion.
Let us consider the despised homely cinders as an illustration of how we permit wicked waste to reign in the household circle. According to the table they represent approximately two-fifths of the total contents of the dust-bin, and make up the respectable aggregate of 3,700,000 tons a year for the whole country. As a straight fuel the cinder is but slightly inferior to coal. When washed its calorific value is about 10,000 British Thermal Units. Good steam coal only averages 14,000 British Thermal Units. Accordingly the spurned cinder, from the heat-raising point of view, is worth about five-sevenths of coal drawn fresh from the mines. The householders of Britain have been content to throw away 37,000,000,000 British Thermal Units every year in ignorance. Translated into terms of coal this is equivalent to 2,642,857 tons. In other words we have wasted what is tantamount to two-and-a-half millions of high-grade coal every year, and have spent money on fuel which we might just as well have kept in our pockets or have turned to other beneficial purposes. Obviously, if every house undertook to turn its cinders to full account, the domestic call upon the mines might be materially reduced, while there would be an appreciable contribution to the conservation of our coal resources from such a practice.
Paper is another commodity which, in the past, we have handled along woefully improvident lines, as related in the previous chapter. We have not even taken the trouble to burn it, but have permitted it to drift and flutter hither and thither to find a final repository, grievously soiled and dirty, in the dust-bin. But even when so marred and deteriorated it was worth, during the war period, no less than £7—$35—a ton!
The wastage of rags, both cotton and woollen, has been even more deplorable. In this instance, however, possibly a reasonable excuse for the prompt consignment of such material to the dust-bin and the dust-destructor can be advanced. Popular opinion regards textile odds and ends as an ideal vehicle for the transmission of the germs of disease. Yet such does not justify the indiscriminate committal of material worth £15—$75—per ton to incineration. Infected rags should be burned forthwith in the household fire. But are they? Investigation would probably reveal the disconcerting fact that they are thrown into the dust-bin, as offering the most convenient means of disposal. Even if they should be above suspicion when discarded, the chances are that they become contaminated in the ash-barrel. Consequently upon recovery such materials should be subjected to preliminary inexpensive sterilization to ensure the public safety.
When the necessity to practise household salvage upon a comprehensive scale became imperative, a few discreet inquiries were made to secure reliable statistics as to what wealth is ignored or thrown away by the community of these islands. The results were somewhat surprising.
In Sheffield, a city of some 500,000 persons, 56,000 jam-jars were recovered in one week through a special collection conducted by school children. They realized 6 shillings—$1.50—a gross, and so brought in £120—$600. In Leicester the practice is, or was, to dispose of certain articles to the local marine store dealers after collection, and to divide the profit arising from the transaction among the employees engaged in the refuse-gathering task. One quarter’s waste, exclusive of old tins and waste-paper, netted £343—$1,715—of which £249—$1,245—was obtained from rags alone. There were 264 dozen jam-jars collected. They cost 15s.—$3.75—a gross new, and the trade expressed its readiness to take over the reclaimed vessels at 7s. 6d.—$1.87—a gross. Kensington made £1,000—$5,000—from the sale of one year’s collection of waste-paper. The Southport authorities recovered £2,000—$10,000—over a similar transaction. The metropolitan boroughs of Finsbury and Marylebone each swelled its local treasury to the extent of £500—$2,500—in a similar manner. The City of London garners 30 tons of this commodity every week. The ink-bottles recovered from the garbage barrels of the metropolis would provide a person with a comfortable income, averaging as they do several gross a day. Liverpool derives £300—$1,500—from house-swill alone, which it collects, dries, and turns into poultry-meal to sell at £15—$75—a ton. Aberdeen, as the result of one day’s organized collection, secured sufficient bottles to realize £567—$2,835.
It is obvious that, no matter from what point of view the question is regarded, systematic organized salvage of the contents of the household dust-bin can be rendered a highly profitable enterprise. Certainly it opens up a promisingly rich and legitimate field for municipal trading, though it is equally accessible to private initiative. It is only requisite to survey the whole situation of the disposal of house garbage from the new angle of scientific application. It is not refuse in the generally accepted interpretation of the term. Such material should rightly be regarded as by-products of the private domestic kitchen.