1. The principle of separation in works of sewerage and drainage; and

2. The fact that the suspended matters in town sewage can be very

effectually removed from its liquid by _simple deposition_ without the

aid of any chemical reagent.

[Sidenote: 1887. The chemist Dibdin discards chemical reagents in

favour of M. Pasteur’s aerobic organisms.]

And Mr. Dibdin three years later began to demonstrate the mistaken

policy of adding lime or any other precipitating agent in any quantity

likely to arrest the natural agency of abundant bacterial life, which

ultimately disposes of all dead and effete organic matter by forming

gases or natural compounds, with more or less offence to human senses,

according to the supply of oxygen and rate at which these bacteria can

carry out their work.

[Sidenote: Leeds and Exeter.]

It was soon found that the bacteria of two classes, aerobe and

anaerobe, abound in sewage, and the latest Leeds experiment with the

continuous or trickling filter show the marvellous rapidity with which

the _aerobic_ microbes at any rate, can accomplish their task where

air and liquid sewage are sufficiently diffused in the pores of a

filter; while Mr. Cameron, C.E., at Exeter has shown rapid evolution

of gases and considerable solution of organic solids by _anaerobic_

microbes in a septic tank.

But the enthusiasm of inventors and their converts has made too much

of the benefit to the human race supposed to be conferred by the

bacterial discovery of M. Pasteur as applied by them to sewage

treatment.

Without detracting from the credit due to the great French savant and

other bacteriologists who have followed up his interesting studies of

ferments for the last fifteen years, the practical man may well ask

how much forwarder have we got in the main and pressing business of

purifying our rivers—as a consequence of clearer knowledge of minute

forms of life?

[Sidenote: Intermittent filtration.]

The late civil engineer Bailey-Denton demonstrated, thirty years ago

at Merthyr Tydvil, the best conditions of intermittent downward

filtration, and his filters there and at Kendal, Abingdon, etc., are

still doing their work efficiently to this day, while the coke, coal,

clinker, burnt ballast, etc., beds, so popular of late, are clogging

up after a few years of more careful treatment than was ever accorded

to an acre of land under sewage.

Anaerobic action has also been proceeding in the old sewers of most

towns and, as it has now been proved that there is no advantage in the

exclusion of air, upon which Mr. Cameron laid so much stress when he

brought his Exeter tank to public notice in 1897, there can be no

novelty except its name attaching to the anaerobic or _septic_ system,

which has thrown many sanitary authorities off their balance of late

years.

The whole modern system of self-cleansing sewers having been only

rendered possible by public recognition of the horrible nuisance

arising from middens, cesspools, and irregularly built sewers of

deposit, it is hard for those concerned in the cleanly disposal of

sewage to be told that because sewage works are usually remote from

populous districts they must there put up with the cesspool nuisance

and fancy its old smell changed by the new name, because a preliminary

stage in the transmutation of sewage has not taken place, as was

formerly the case in the sewerage system of some modern towns, before

arrival at the works.

But in this as in other affairs there is force in the old maxim,

_Medio tutissimus ibis_, and a properly constructed open tank, for

simple deposition of the solids (frequently washed out), arrests most

of the solids and allows fresh liquid sewage, after slight anaerobic

action, to pass on to land or filter bed in a perfectly inoffensive

condition.

[Sidenote: The cleanly and dirty processes for sludge removal.]

As an example of this I have, at Aldershot, a pair of tanks close to a

public high road, one of which fills with sludge and is emptied every

fortnight or so, and as a contrast there is another pair of larger

tanks in a remote quarter of the same farm in use for years as septic

tanks, from which some sludge is drawn off at long intervals,

anaerobic action being allowed its full course as in the Exeter

experiments.

It is interesting to compare the results of these preliminary clean,

and dirty, processes respectively on similar _very fresh_ domestic

sewage which enters the clean depositing, and the septic tanks alike,

and my observations are as follows:—

1. The manurial result in growth of crop _slightly_ greater with the

septic liquid.

2. Labour increased by the greater deposit carried on to the land

under septic liquid.

3. The removal of sludge and washing out the clean tank gives an

hour’s work with very little smell ten yards to leeward of the site,

but drawing off sludge from the septic tank is a very unpleasant

operation, and, at all times, the vicinity of tank and carriers is

malodorous for a radius of at least fifty yards from the septic tanks.

[Sidenote: Loam on sand and gravel the best medium for aerobic

organisms to work in.]

Passing now to the aerobic stage of sewage purification we find it

universally admitted, that a good loam resting on very porous sand or

gravel, affords the best medium for work by the oxygen-loving

nitrifying organisms when they are supplied with constantly moving

liquid sewage, and given intermittent periods for the aeration of the

pores of the soil.

The proportion of sewage to land is of course as variable as the

quality of the land itself, and the best sort of land is rarely

available, while the improvement of natural land is not understood by

the engineer or chemist, who are usually appealed to by sanitary

authorities in their sewage difficulties.

Hence the variety of artificial substitutes of contact beds, costing

from 5000_l._ to 12,000_l._ per acre, which have been proposed of late

years, with the object of purifying a large volume of sewage on a

small area.

[Sidenote: Leeds experiments.]

Mr. Dibdin first startled the world with the formula 1,000,000 gallons

per acre, but that has long been cut down to 200,000 gallons, and the

life of the contact bed has become the subject of serious concern, as

shown in the annexed table of experiment at Leeds.

Others have sought to increase the proportion of sewage to area by

arranging for _continuous_ instead of _intermittent_ application; but

the difficulty of sprinkling so that every part of a bed may be kept

just moist, in order that aeration may be continuous as well as the

dropping sewage, is very great, and increases with every gallon and

foot from the scale of a laboratory experiment to that of a practical

working for a town’s sewage.

There was an article published a few years ago in the Journal Royal

Agricultural Society (England) on “The Making of the Land,” showing

how nearly all the value of agricultural land in England has been

stored up in it by the exertions of our forefathers, through a process

of successive improvements from, in many cases, worthless sand and

clay, to a condition of the greatest fertility; and I often think that

the 12,000_l._ spent at Birmingham or elsewhere on an acre of contact

bed could be expended to better purpose in preparing 100 acres of the

worst land to deal, for any number of years, with as much sewage as

the contact bed may do for a few years. In the one case we know no

limit to the life of the purifier, and that it must be a very short

one in the other case.

Natural & Artificial Sewage Treatment · 第 22 / 55 题