The Sanitary City: Environmental Services in Urban America from Colonial Times to the Present by Martin V. Melosi

The Sanitary City: Environmental Services in Urban America from Colonial Times to the Present Reviews

• 
  Frank Stein

  
  After I finished this book, I was surprised to see that it got many good reviews and not a few awards. It is, after all, mainly a sprawling collection of statistics, facts, and dates with little story or organization. An abridged edition, however, might be worthwhile (and one was released recently), because this book it does contain truly interesting facts from America's checkered history of water works, sewage, and garbage disposal. These services are called "the invisible city" for a reason, and this book certainly helps make the invisible more visible.
  
  For instance, I didn't know that European street cleaning basically started in Paris in the 12th century because the King was sick of the dung-heaps outside his palace, or that the now ubiquitous aerated sewer plants were concocted in a Massachusetts state sanitary lab in 1912, or that the famed Memphis "separated sewer system" was pretty much a bust in its earlier years and required millions in upgrades.
  
  Sure, most of these facts or stories could only warm the heart of a dedicated public works nerd, but I'm glad I have them collected in this book. I only wish someone could make something better out of them.
• 
  Samuel

  I like this book. I think Melosi does a great job chronicling how sanitary services were developed in the United States: moving from private hands to public works. What follows is a summary of its highlights that are delivered in the full text.
  
  Delivering services (infrastructure) is the primary function of municipal government. “I have chosen sanitary (or environmental) services—water supply, sewerage, and solid-waste disposal—because they have been and remain indispensable for the functioning and growth of cities.” Water and waste disposal as global dictators (1).
  
  Comprehensive history of water supply, wastewater, and solid-waste disposal systems in American cities from colonial times to the year 2000. Development, assessment of their influence on urban growth, and evaluation of their impact on the environment. National perspective rather than case studies. The long timeline allows for “a more thorough examination of changes, among other things, in technology, in the evolution of regulatory authority, and in patterns of urban growth” (2).
  
  Chronothematic organization: change over time but also —the influence of public health and ecological theory on implementation of sanitary services; the role of key decision-makers (sanitarians, engineers, physicians, and political leaders) in selecting what services to provide and how to; and the environmental implications of those choices. CONTEMPORARY PERIODICALS, GOVT REPORTS, CITY PUBLICATIONS, PROCEEDINGS OF SEVERAL ENGINEERING AND PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOCIATIONS. Social sciences: ecological theory, systems theory, and path dependence theory (2).
  
  City as human body—metaphor. Flaws, but it also had its uses. Systems not just networks. Path dependence theory—long-term impact of technologies of sanitation: (1) to want degree did the quest for permanence produce technologies of sanitation resistant to change? (2) did the early focus on project design limit attention to long-range planning of the systems? (12).
  
  Part I: The Age of Miasmas From Colonial Times to 1880
  
  Cities faced poor sanitary conditions and suffered the crippling effects of epidemic diseases with only a vague understanding of their cause (12).
  
  a few larger cities developed community-wide water-supply systems with rudimentary distribution networks, but continued to regard waste disposal as an individual responsibility. The powerful, worldwide influence of the the English “sanitary idea” in mid-19th c. linked filth with disease sparked interest in sanitation systems for community waste disposal (12).
  
  miasmas—filth or foul smells—were blamed for epidemics/keep wastes from accumulating in city centers
  
  Part II: The Bacteriological Revolution 1880-1945
  
  development of modern sanitary services 1880-1920—dynamic urban growth in US. Biological revolution of late 19th c. good impetus: inoculation and immunization. Interwar years saw more solid waste disposal and better services in suburban and rural (gradual catch up to urban services) (13).
  
  Part III: The New Ecology 1945-2000
  
  External forces were central to influencing sanitary services after WWII. Urban sprawl and decay of urban core—permanence of sanitary systems—presented challenges. Added to biological forms of pollution were chemical/industrial pollutants. The emergence of New Ecology and the modern environmental movement caused a reevaluation of sanitary systems. So too with the “garbage crisis” on the horizon—solid-waste and landfills and tougher environmental legislation (14).
  
  EPILOGUE: The environmental paradigm shift from miasmas to bacteria did not radically disrupt or change the old system of collection—which were generally successful in distancing humans from their wastes and discards. In fact the “front of pipe” components in these technologies remained largely the same while it did inform some innovations in confronting “end of pipe” problems—-i.e. water treatment and refining did not call into question the basic precept of permanent, citywide sanitary systems (424).
  
  Because waste and water systems were built to be permanent rather than resilient, future generations could not easily choose to abandon these systems but instead had to maintain and expand them. Though built with permanence in mind to justify initial costs to their community, the lack of flexibility came at a cost to future decision-makers. Runoff and non-point pollution were not anticipated from the initial designs of these systems and are thus difficult late 20th century pollutant problems. “Modular flexibility” is the goal of new designs of infrastructure. “To function effectively the American city has to be a sanitary city”(426).
  
• 
  Aura

  What is the author's point? His narrative was so dull that it was almost impossible to grasp. I had to skim through the second half because even reading throughly didn't make me take anything out it.
• 
  Rebecca Bratspies

  Very informative. Melosi is truly an expert. I frequently rely on his work in my own scholarship
• 
  Adina

  The conclusion of the book is that the basic concepts and infrastructure of waste disposal have incrementally evolved over time - from miasmas, to bacterial contamination, to industrial pollution - but remain in place. The basic assumption is that waste should and can be moved "away" from human and natural habitat. Meanwhile, San Francisco is making substantial progress toward a "zero waste" goal; Seattle seems to be making progress toward reducing stormwater runoff at the source. I wonder about the book's core assumption; is it possible to migrate away from the basic concept of "away."
  
  Although the book gets crashingly dull, particularly in the coverage of PostWar US as a long litany of changing laws and shifting political administrations, it has a lot of good information about the origin and evolution of systems of waste disposal and treatment, for those interested in the social history of technology.
  
  
  http://www.sfenvironment.org/zero-waste
  
  
• 
  Carl

  A magnificent account of how American cities developed systems to free their populations of the dangers of epidemic disease even as the cities grew in size and density. This edition is abridged from the 2000 edition, omitting many detailed examples yet retaining the ambitious national setting and period. It provides an excellent introduction to the history of the urban built environment; if it whets your appetite, seek out the unabridged version, as well as Joel A. Tarr's The Search for the Ultimate Sink.