PLANNING AND SMOKE
StR,—Your contributor Mr. E. J. Davies, in your issue of August 4th, is surely overcautious in assessing the value of the returns on district heating as not particularly attractive. If a 6 per cent. return on a method that would give more and very necessary warmth while abolishing smoke, what would be attractive? It is more than most other public utility services can obtain, while the benefit in health and amenities to our cities can scarcely be overstressed. What is the return .on drainage and sanitation systems, on water or police? Are these assessed on an economic or an amenity and otherwise very necessary basis? The fact that district heating systems can pay their way and give an economic return of at least 6 per cent is surely an excellent reason for their wider
Previous page
