collection, and much experimenting has been done and is still commanding
attention. It is agreed that special attention must be given to ease in
loading and emptying, to provision against leakage, dust and unsightly
appearance, to noise when loading and in motion, to durability and to
cost of maintenance. As a considerable portion of the men employed in
collecting suffer strains and rupture caused by lifting heavy cans, it
is imperative that the wagon be as low as possible. Most of those now in
use are five feet or more from the sidewalk to the top of the sides. If
the bodies of these wagons hung low, as they do in some cities, and the
capacity were made up in length, there would be less strain on the men
and time would be saved in dumping.
The capacity of the wagon is influenced by the length of haul and
topography of the city. In its study of the collection and disposal of
waste in Ohio cities the Ohio State Board of Health says it is the
consensus of opinion that for best economic results the wagon capacity
should be from three to four cubic yards for the combined collection of
ashes and rubbish. The average weight of rubbish and ashes is from 800
to 1100 pounds per cubic yard, according to some reports. H. DeB.
Parsons, a sanitary expert, says the average weight of ashes per cubic
yard is 1350 pounds and rubbish 200 pounds. Generally the mixture in
summer is 35 per cent. ashes and 65 per cent. rubbish; in winter 75 per
cent. ashes and 25 per cent. rubbish.
Until recently practically all of New York City’s ash carts carried
approximately one ton. The point was made that with this type of vehicle
there is a great loss of time in carrying the load to the dump and
returning empty. William H. Edwards, former Commissioner of Street
Cleaning, claimed that there would be a greater saving if five-ton
vehicles drawn by three horses and operated by four men were used. Mr.
Edwards said that a test had proved that six cartloads could be
collected and dumped in just about twice the time it took for one
cartload under the conditions existing then. The city is now
experimenting with motor apparatus designed for dustless and odorless
collection of all kinds of refuse.
In a few cities one type of wagon is used for ashes and another type for
rubbish. One new type of wagon has the body swung low on running gear,
with dumping edges three feet, six inches above the pavement, and is
pivoted at one end to facilitate dumping. It holds nine cubic yards and
is divided by cross partitions into compartments, one for ashes and the
other for garbage. The relative capacity of the compartments can be
varied. Some of the types used in American cities are described in the
accompanying tables.
Some American and German cities are using, and others are considering
the purchase and use of, motor trucks for collection purposes. It is
generally agreed that motor trucks are economical only where the haul is
long. A discussion of the merits of motor vehicles as compared with
horse drawn carts will be found in the chapter on garbage collection. In
some cities where the haul to the loading stations is long, trucks with
detachable bodies are used for garbage, ashes and rubbish. The bodies
are lifted by derricks from the truck and placed either on the train or
on the trolley cars. In a few other cities horse-drawn wagons are taken
to a central point in a district and then as trailers are hauled by
tractors to the dumping grounds. The best system to be adopted depends
entirely upon local conditions.
Location of Receptacles
Where should the can be taken from by the collector and to what place
returned? The answer is important for it is one of the chief factors in
determining the cost of collection. The location seriously affects the
speed of collection. In Milwaukee it was found in 1911 that the average
collector could enter from fifty to one hundred houses in an eight-hour
day, and that the time consumed in cleaning one house was slightly over
three minutes. The Cleansing Superintendent of London reports that a
one-horse van of four cubic yards capacity, hauling to a dump two miles
away, under normal conditions could make from 240 to 260 calls and
collections each ten hours. If the can is placed on the edge of the
curb, he says, it is possible to make 500 collections a day.
Some cities require that the can be carried by the residents to the
curb. Others collect from rear yard, cellar, areaway or alley. In cities
which collect during the day and require the cans to be left at the curb
serious objections are reported because the array of cans and rubbish
along the street on the day of collection makes the thoroughfare
unsightly. To overcome this objection several plans have been carried
out:
(1) To collect at night.
(2) To require that cans cannot remain on the street more than one hour
after being emptied.
(3) To require collectors to go into basements and back yards and to
return the cans to these places.
(4) To collect in rear alleys.
Experience has shown that it is very difficult to enforce a regulation
by which cans should be taken from the curb by householders at any
particular time after they have been emptied. In many homes the husband
is the only person who does this kind of work. The can has to be taken
in the morning to the curb. The empty, therefore, must remain in the
street until noon and if the collection is not made until afternoon or
the husband does not go home to his midday meal, it remains there until
night. Many cities report that to eliminate the unsightliness of
miscellaneous boxes, pails, cans and barrels which line the curb on
collection day the citizens are willing to pay the extra cost of having
the collectors take the cans from the basements or rear yards and return
them to the same place. It has also been found that rear yard collection
facilitates and somewhat reduces the cost of street cleaning.
It is generally agreed that the best plan is to collect from rear
alleys, but these do not exist in many cities. In a few places which
have alleys the officials say their experience has not been
satisfactory; but in nearly every instance there has not been found to
exist any cooperation between the collection force and the public, due
to the failure of the officials to educate the people.
Time of Collection
Usually ashes and rubbish are collected during the working hours of the
day, but often it is customary to collect them in the early hours of the
morning, especially in the business section.
Night collection has been satisfactory in some cities. A few having this
system require cans to be placed at the curb the night before. These are
collected early in the morning and the empty ones taken to the back
yard. The principal objection to night collections is the noise of the
wagons and the dropping of the empty metal cans.
William H. Edwards, former Commissioner of Street Cleaning in New York,
gives the following advantages and disadvantages of day and night
collection:
Unsightliness of cans in front of buildings much less evident at night.
Retention of cover on receptacle easier in day time. When covers are
removed day work has its disadvantages by the spreading of the dust by
the wind.
Interference with sidewalk and roadway traffic less at night.
When receptacle is placed in areaway it is more difficult for the
collector to see at night whether or not there is material to remove.
Intense heat in summer is a drawback both to men and animals in the day
collections.
Spilling of material is of less importance at night.
Night collection necessitates the extra charge of lighting the dump.
Supervision of night collection is considerably more difficult.
Night collection was tried in New York, but was abandoned after the
strike in 1911.
Frequency of Collection
The number of collections that should be made in a given period depends
upon the amount of ashes, the density of population, the season of the
year, the climate and the degree of cleanliness desired. Most cities
collect more frequently in winter than in summer and some collect more
often in the business districts than they do in residential and outlying
districts.
Samuel A. Greeley, sanitary engineer, believes that ashes and rubbish
should be collected at least twice monthly even in summer. Most cities
do better than that, some collecting daily and many collecting more than
once a week.
Enforcement of Collection Regulations
In cities in England and on the Continent, where the ashes, garbage and
rubbish are collected together, collections are in general made three
times a week; when collected separately, one collection a week is
regarded as sufficient.
Detailed regulations should be made and distributed on cards among
householders. They should include the kind of receptacle to be used, how
the waste should be prepared to facilitate collection and where the cans
should be placed. For example, Richmond, Virginia, provides by ordinance
that the occupant of any house shall cause all ashes and other non-
combustible refuse matter to be put in receptacles of not less than five
or more than twenty-four gallons capacity. Ashes and other non-
combustible matter is construed to mean ashes from coal and other fuel
and such material substances as may collect in connection with the
ordinary conduct of a household, but not such as may result from
building operations or repairs. Any person violating any of these
provisions must pay a fine of not less than $1 or more than $20.
The enforcement of regulations is facilitated by and grows easier with
the growth and development of the collection system and with the
regularity of collection. It is always difficult at first. The rules and
regulations, a description of the collection system and the aims of the
collecting department should be printed on cards and hung in every
household. Annual clean-up campaigns have been found useful by officials
who desire to educate the public.
Disposal of Ashes and Rubbish
The following methods of disposal are used by cities:
(1) Dumping.
(2) Burning combustible rubbish that is not salable and using the ashes
to fill in low land, or for road or sidewalk making, or selling part for
use in partitions for fireproof buildings or for laying cellar floors.
(3) Incinerating with garbage.
When the dumping method is used cities either own their own dumps or
secure the privilege for or without a fee for disposing of the waste
upon land privately owned. In most cases the waste is used for fill and
no fee is paid by the city. A few seacoast cities dump their combined
refuse at sea, but this practise is condemned. Where only ashes and
rubbish are used the most common practise is to place the rubbish and
light material near the bottom and to surface the dump to a depth of
several feet with ashes. This makes a neat and finished appearance.
Where ashes, rubbish and garbage are collected and dumped together, many
cities have found that the so-called sanitary fill method, described in
the chapter on garbage, is the most satisfactory. It is becoming more
and more difficult for cities to maintain dumps on account of the
congestion of population, which forces the municipality to seek disposal
places far away from the centers, thus increasing the length of haul. If
paper, garbage and combustibles are allowed on the dump, fires are apt
to result and these make odors and smoke which are unpleasant and
unhealthful. These fires are often very difficult to extinguish,
especially if the dump is a deep one. Iron cages are sometimes used at
the dump for burning the valueless combustible rubbish.
Some cities are successfully operating incinerating plants for the
destruction of garbage and combustible rubbish; others have plants which
burn the garbage and rubbish and a part of the ashes. Where ashes are
burned they are collected with the rubbish and garbage in those
districts nearest to the incinerating plant in order to reduce the
length of haul.
Revenue from By-Products
Many cities as yet make no effort to secure and dispose of the by-
products, which consist of metal, rags, paper, tin cans, bottles, and
ashes; in others the problem is being studied seriously. In
comparatively few considerable revenue is derived. Generally junk
dealers are allowed to overrun the dump and select what they want. A few
cities charge for this privilege, the price being determined by bidding.
The cities which derive the most revenue are those which do the sorting
and selling themselves.
The St. Paul Sanitation Committee came to the conclusion that 33 per
cent. of rubbish has value and that of this salable material 80 per
cent. is paper, 10 per cent. rags, 5 per cent. tin cans, 3 per cent.
bottles and 2 per cent. is miscellaneous. It says further: “The best
authorities agree that in cities of 500,000 or over the recovery and
utilization of wastes may result in some profit, but in cities of less
population the amount recovered will not warrant the construction of
expensive plants to make the separation and recovery.” In the smaller
places some revenue can usually be secured by letting out to junk
dealers the privilege of picking over the dump.
It has been estimated that in New York City 48 per cent. of a ton of
rubbish is worth $1.44 to the picking contractor and the remaining 52
per cent. is worth at least $1.25 when burned and transformed into
electrical energy.
It has been suggested in one or two large cities that the unskilled and
handicapped labor out of employment and seeking city aid be employed on
dumps to pick out the unconsumed coal from the ashes screened
automatically. Besides furnishing employment at any season of the year,
it is claimed that coal in paying quantities could be secured for
municipal consumption. This claim is based on the reports of experts who
have analyzed ashes and found the amount of unburned coal to run as high
as 24½ per cent.
In Passaic, New Jersey, the papers, rags, etc., are picked out at the
dump by junk dealers. In Cincinnati, Ohio, the revenue from salable
rubbish has been over $2,000 a year. Evanston, Illinois, which dumps its
ashes on the river front, was compelled to find some way of disposing of
its waste paper so that it would not scatter through the neighborhood. A
baling press was put into service and it is reported by the city that
excellent results followed. The city collects and bales the paper in
both business and residential districts. The paper is placed in gunny
sacks and these are hung just inside the alley gate, or barn or stable
on the morning of the designated day. It is said this system (1) takes a
day’s work each week from the routes of each of six men who collect
rubbish on the east side of the city; (2) prevents the blowing of loose
paper about the street and alley and in the neighborhood of the dump;
(3) pays for the operation of the press and leaves a balance to aid the
rest of the service. A man, employed eight hours a day, drives the wagon
and presses the paper. Camden, New Jersey, which keeps its ashes
separate, collects its rubbish and paper, and takes them to a sorting
place. Prisoners in the city jail for minor offenses are kept busy
sorting and baling the rags and paper. Nearly a million pounds of paper
were baled and sold in one year. Cleveland in one year spent $230,000
for removal of its ashes and rubbish, and received $30,000 from the sale
of the material sorted from its rubbish. The paper was sold for $5.60 a
ton in bags at the plant of a boxboard company. Tin cans were sold for
$5 a ton loaded on cars and delivered to a company making silk skirts.
The metal, bottles, rags, etc., were sold to local dealers under
competitive bidding. The rubbish not valuable was used for fill. The
caretakers of dumps are expected to recover the salable portions of the
rubbish. One of the small New York cities gives the privilege of sorting
the dump to a man who in payment therefor acts as caretaker of the dump.
A few cities sell their ashes to contractors for cellar floors and
partitions in fireproof building.
The high prices paid for reclaimable rubbish since the war began and the
demand of the Federal Government that nothing be wasted have caused many
cities to give much attention to the matter of rescuing salable rubbish.
Cleveland’s specifications for picking the scrap materials from the
various city dumps contain among other provisions the following:
“The successful bidder and his employees shall have free access to the
dumps and shall have the exclusive right to gather and sell or remove
the salable refuse, scrap and other waste material, except the soil,
earth and ashes, for the period of one year; but nothing herein
contained shall be construed to give the successful bidder the right to
charge either the cities or other parties for dumping on such dumps.
“The Superintendent of the Division of Street Cleaning shall have
complete supervision of the dumps and shall designate what material and
refuse shall be deposited on the dumps and the manner and the places
where such deposits shall be made; and should he deem it necessary shall
have the right to place Street Cleaning Department employees on the
dumps to supervise such dumping.
“The successful bidder shall shovel and level all refuse or materials
and shall keep the dumps clean and free from nuisance of all kinds. He
shall be responsible for all damages caused by the dumps and shall
extinguish all fires which shall arise thereon.
“The successful bidder if he desires to store or pile upon the dumps any
refuse, scrap or waste material, which he may gather shall pile or store
it at places designated by the Superintendent of the Division of Street
Cleaning or his employees and any material or stores so piled shall be
removed within ten days (10) after the expiration of the contract, and
if not removed within that time shall be the property of the city.
“The City reserves the rights to use the dumps for any purpose
whatsoever in such manner as not to interfere with the picking,
gathering and carting away of waste material by the successful bidder.
“The contractor shall pay to the city on or before the 15th day of each
month, the amount due for the use of the dumps during the previous
months. On failure of the contractor to make payment to the city within
the specified time, The Director of Public Service may declare the
contract forfeited and refuse the contractor the further use of the
dumps and may hold the contractor and his surety for the full amount due
the city.
“In case the contract is forfeited the city reserves the right and the
bidder agrees that the city shall have the right to let out in the open
market or otherwise, the use of such dumps, and if the price thereon
realized is less than that specified in the contract with the successful
bidder, the difference in price, together with any additional expense
incurred in arranging for the letting out to other parties, will be
charged to the contractor and his surety.
“Should it become necessary for the city to abandon dumping on any or
all of the dumps herein specified, the city shall notify the contractor
in writing that dumping is to be discontinued on such dump or dumps, and
in such case the contract covering such dump or dumps is to be
terminated with the closing of the dumps, and the contractor shall pay
the city for any fraction of the month which he may have picked from
such dump or dumps.
“The city reserves the right to reject any or all bids or part of any
bid.”
The following specifications explain how Los Angeles, California, cares
for its rubbish dumps and obtains a revenue:
“The service required by these specifications is to furnish facilities
for disposing of the non-combustible rubbish collected from that portion
of the city south of the summit of the Cahuenga Pass, north of
Manchester Avenue, and east of a line parallel to and three hundred
(300) feet distant westerly from Beechwood Avenue, in that portion of
the city known as the Palms Annex, for a period of four years from April
20, 1917.
“The contractor shall maintain a dumping ground for the rubbish, which
said dumping ground shall be accessible at all seasons of the year by
one or more suitable graded and surfaced streets or roads. The location
of the dumping ground must be such that in the opinion of the Board of
Public Works it will not be unduly objectionable to the public.
“The unloading points within the grounds must be convenient of access
for all vehicles used by the city for rubbish transportation.
“The rubbish will be brought to the dumping ground by the city, will be
unloaded by the city at such readily accessible points as the contractor
shall designate, and will, after unloading, become the property of the
contractor.
“The contractor shall keep the dumping grounds in an orderly condition
and shall so direct the dumping as to avoid congestion of vehicles or
delay to same on the dump. He shall not use the dump for storing
material in a manner which will interfere with the passage of the city’s
vehicles.
“In case accidents or conditions beyond the control of the contractor
temporarily deprive him of the use of his facilities for disposing of
the rubbish the city will, upon notification by the contractor of his
inability to receive it, dispose of it elsewhere, and charge the
contractor twenty-five (25) cents per load of ten cubic yards for the
disposal of same.
“In case the contractor fails to pay the city for the disposal of such
rubbish from the hereinabove described district as the contractor is
unable to receive the contract may be declared forfeited.
“Bidders shall name a price per month which they will pay for the
privilege of having the entire output of non-combustible rubbish from
the above described territory dumped on their ground.”
Efficiency Tests and Suggestions
A simple and effective plan for keeping accurate records is a great help
in checking up the efficiency of a collecting force. In fact, records
are imperative if any attempt is made to operate economically, for the
cost is influenced by the many and small details of the work. A
systematic record of all complaints should be kept and the activity of
each collector should be definitely checked up. Some suggest that
complaints should be recorded in a loose leaf ledger and a slip handed
to the driver of the particular district from which the complaint comes.
As an offset to the citizens’ complaints the ledger should have leaves
adjoining giving the reports of the driver. By referring to the ledger
the complaint clerk can explain to the citizen why he is not receiving
service. Others suggest that records should be kept of the daily, weekly
and monthly work of each collector so that work of the various
collectors may be equalized. They also suggest that there be recorded
for each district the number of loads collected, miles traveled and
complaints made. Some suggest a card system with cross index as more
convenient than a ledger.
The following scheme has been suggested to check up the amount of work
done: W, number of collection wagons; V, capacity of one wagon in cubic
feet; F, interval between collection in days; T, time required to
collect from one house expressed as part of an hour; C, percentage of
working time spent by collectors in the actual time of collecting as
distinguished from hauling to and from the point of disposal; D, length
of working day in hours; S, number of trips to point of disposal per
wagon per day; P, total population; N, average number of people per
house; R, daily quantity of refuse per capita-cubic foot; g, daily
quantity of garbage per capita-cubic foot; d, daily quantity of rubbish
per capita-cubic foot:
_Equation No. 1_
D × C 1
S = ————— × F × N × R × V
T
_Equation No. 2_
P × R
W × —————
S × V
The person making this suggestion says it is frequently easy for a
superintendent to determine how much time his collectors are spending
unproductively in going to and from the dump. He should also be able, he
says, to determine quite accurately the frequency of collection, total
refuse, capacity of wagon and average number of trips per wagon per day.
With this data he can estimate from Equation No. 1 the time required to
collect from one house. If excessive he may find it advisable to secure
better cooperation between the collector and the housewife.
Per Capita Production