Report on the sanitary condition of the Hackney District for the year 1898 page 48

Hackney 1898

Report on the sanitary condition of the Hackney District for the year 1898

This page requires JavaScript

Table: Table comparing the constant and intermittent systems of water supply.

Download table as:

Table comparing the constant and intermittent systems of water supply.

Intermittent System of Water Supply. Disadvantages.	Constant System of Water Supply. Advantages.
1. It favours corrosion of the pipes.	1. Does not favour corrosion of the pipes so much as the intermittent service.
2. Which causes turbidity of the water and complaints from customers.
	2. And consequently does net cause turbidity and complaints.
3. The service mains, when shut off, become depleted of water, which tends to create a vacuum into which foul air or water may be drawn.
	3. Does not tend to create a vacuum and to draw foul matters into the mains.
4. In the event of fire water cannot be drawn without the help of a turncock.	4. Water to an unlimited amount always available in the event of fire and exceptional requirements.
5. Causes inconvenience to customers while the water is shut off if an exceptional demand for water arises.	5. Does not require means of storage of water on the premises with its attendant risks.
6. Is more wasteful.	6. Is less wasteful.
7. Requires means of storage of water on the premises for the period during which the water is shut off with the following risks:—
(a) Cisterns being frequently fixed where the water is liable to pollution, or where it is impossible for tenants to periodically clean them.
(b) Cisterns being allowed to get into a bad state of repair, admitting of pollution.
(c) Neglect of tenants in cleaning cisterns regularly.
(d) Danger of special pollutions from ignorance or idleness of tenants.