Philadelphia’s Water Supply
The expected report of the commission appointed by Mayor Moore of Philadelphia to consider the water situation of that city has been made and in spite of its rather broad recommendations has evoked no surprise from those who have knowledge of water conditions in the Quaker City. The rather desperate situation that the city finds itself in respect to its water supply is not a matter of sudden discovery. Rather it has been a slow deterioration covering years, resulting from a mistaken policy of false economy where the expenditure of a small amount yearly with proper foresight would have saved the city millions. Furthermore, this policy has not been the result of ignorance on the part of the powers that be, for one who should know better than any one else the necessary steps to be taken—Carlton E. Davis, chief of the Water Bureau—has not ceased to raise his voice in warning and pleading for broader and more sensible action before it was too late. The commission—composed of some of the country’s most prominent engineers—now has confirmed Chief Davis’ predictions as regards the results of fatal delay in moving for an improved water supply and has recommended the steps imperatively necessary to relieve a very dangerous situation and to put the city on a basis of ample supply of pure and wholesome water. While the sum of $134,900,000 looms large as a lump sum to spend for a city water supply, it will probably be eventually an economy as the longer the move to place the city’s water system upon a solid foundation is delayed the more the cost will be, owing to deterioration. The recommendations of the commission for the half-century period of improvement are based upon an estimated population of 3,250,000 at the expiration of that time. Referring to the source of supply the commission says in part:
“Water from the distant mountains always appeals to the sentiment of the general public. This is seldom, if ever, so, and in the present case it is a highly idealized sentiment and far from the facts, although the mountain sources have many points of excellence, and they are admittedly superior to the supply recommended when both are considered in an untreated condition. The upper Lehigh and its branches and the Delaware river tributaries above the Water Gap could furnish a very soft, generally clear and hygienically safe water, which would, however, at times be turbid, have a high color or vegetable stain, and would be subject to occcasional dangerous pollution. To make it as satisfactory as the water which Philadelphia now is using would require treatment to remove the color, turbidity and disease germs. We go so far as to express the opinion that with rare exceptions no surface water should be consumed without filtration or other treatment. The cost of a water supply of a given quantity is roughly proportionate to the distance between source and point of use, other things being equal. Therefore, for economical and business reasons, a city should seek successively, as it outgrows its supply, the available source nearest at hand and reduce to a minimum the abandonment of its existing useful plant. Cities rarely discard on a wholesale basis their existing water supply facilities, but from time to time reach out and make additions to their supplies.”
