My remarks on this subject I trust will be more to the have been point
than they upon the questions already discussed. Certainly my ideas are
more decided, so far at least as supplying water motors is concerned.
In many respects I believe water motors furnish as nearly perfect power
as it is possible to attain. A motor, for instance, properly connected
and supplied by the even pressure from a reservoir is probably the most
reliable and steady power known, not excepting the most improved and
costly steam engines. The convenience and little attendance necessary in
operating make them especially desirable for many purposes. Where only
small power is required, or even where considerable power for only
occasional use is desired, they are particularly well adapted, and
can be driven at small expense. Even for greater power they possess
advantages over steam engines which, to a considerable extent,
compensate for the large water rates that ought to be paid for their
supply. These advantages are in the first cost of a motor, as compared
with a steam engine, the saving in attendance and fuel, the convenience
and cleanliness, and in some cases a saving in insurance by reason of
their being no fire risks attendant upon its use. At just what point
steam becomes preferable, however, is a question depending considerably
upon water rates, but to some extent on other circumstances, leaving
it largely a question of judgment. As with elevators, there are
difficulties involved in their supply that unless carefully guarded make
water motors anything but a desirable source of revenue. How often is
the argument advanced: "Why, I only use water for a quarter of an inch
jet!" Showing how little people who use motors or elevators or fountains
realize the quantity of water they consume. This class of consumers may
be placed on one footing, to wit, a class who, in spite of the fact that
they are supplied with water for much less than any other, feel that
they are imposed upon, and cannot be made to think otherwise.
Though not as large as for elevator supply, water motors require liberal
openings in the mains, and frequently the fault of having too small
supply pipes is sought to be remedied by openings in the water mains
much larger than needful. A table prepared by an engineer who had given
the matter study, or by some motor manufacturer, showing the size of
taps, or openings, for the proper supply of motors, with the various
jets, under different pressures, would be of general use to water-works
people. In order to use water to the best advantage, the full pressure
in the main, so far as practicable, should be had at the jet, but in
order to accomplish this it is not necessary to use as large taps as are
ordinarily demanded, but to provide supply pipes of sufficient capacity
to deliver the water to the point of discharge with the least possible
friction. Lately this theory has been put in practice to some extent by
us, and the result has shown that in this manner we are able to supply
motors through smaller taps than beforehand with as satisfactory
results.
It is a general practice throughout the country to make annual or
monthly rates for water motors, and from my observation I believe I can
safely venture the assertion that in three-quarters of the cases the
rates charged will not equal 50 per cent. of the lowest meter rates in
force in these places. Although the Kansas City Water-Works has not
perhaps been generally accorded the reputation of being the most liberal
"monopoly" in the country, still I have had occasion at times to make
some such claims as an inducement to its generous support. But with all
its liberality, I am free to say that we cannot begin to meet the rates
for motors that parties claim to have paid almost everywhere else.
The St. Louis Water-Works, where the rates are substantially the same as
in Kansas City, have been quoted as having the following motor rates,
but whether correct or not my inquiries have failed to determine:
"On the supposition that motors are to be used ten hours per day for 300
days per year, motors are assessed for--
___________________________________
1/4 inch jets | $120 per annum. |
3/8 " | 198 " " |
1/2 " | 300 " " |
----------------+-----------------+