HEATING APPLIANCES.

Press, Volume LIV, Issue 16254, 3 July 1918, Page 9

HEATING APPLIANCES.

EFFICACY AND HEALTHFULXESS OF GAS STOVES. INTERESTING APPEAL CASE. Recently the Drapery Importing Company was called upon by the Inspector of Factories to have "alKgas, coke, or oil stoves" on the company's premises connected with flue pipes, "which shall lys constructed in such a manner that the fumes generated shall be carried direct to the outer air, the work to be completed 28 days." Against this requisition the company appealed, and the hearing began before Mr T. A. B. Bailey, S.M., at the Magistrate's Court yesterday afternoon. For the appellant company Mr 0. T. J. Alpers appeared, and for the respondent tho Inspector of Factories, Mr S. G. Raymond, K.C., appeared. Mr Alpers, in opening, set forth the statutory provisions regarding the heating of shops, offices, and factories, and tho procedure for appeal against the Inspector's requisition. He said that he must make some apology for the time that tho matter would engaae tno attention of tho Court, as it affected not only shops, offices, warehouses, and factories in Christchurch, but in the whole Dominion. At present there was no standard in respect to the heat-, mg requirements under tho Shops and Offices and tho Factories Act, but thero was just now some suggested regulations under consideration which had been approved by Dr. J. P. Frengley, Acting Chief Health Officer, and by the Secretary for Labour.

Air Raymond objected to counsel opening in respect of contemplated regulations, which might, or might not, bo adopted. His Worship said that he difl not think that he could enquire into these contemplated regulations. Mr Alpers said ho did not wish them to be enquired into, but the present investigation would assist tho Department in deciding upon regulations. He referred to tho contemplated regulations in connexion with the question of the reasonableness of the Inspector's requisition. Mr Raymond contended that the present investigation must proceed on the state of the law at the time the requisition was made.

Continuing, Mr Alpers stated that tho grounds of the appeal "were r (1) that tho company's heating ap-' plainces wero, from a hygienic point of view, freo from objection; (2) that the -requisition was unreasonable, in if the heating appliances fell short'of perfection, compliance with the requisition would dis-improve and not improve them; and (3) that the requisition was inopportune in view of the contemplated regulations. Tho objections to heating by gas stoves were the survival of ideas which, he submitted, wero wrong, and were founded on the state of gas heating 10 or 15 years ago. Since then great improvements had been effected and, as a matter of fact, flueless gas stoves were being used in hospital wards in England, and if there was a place where pure air was essential it was in a hospital ward. The present gas stoves attained their object by radiation in the same manner as the sun and as coal nree conveyed heat. They had to fight the carbon-dioxide (CO2) bogey. It was thought that CO2 vitiated the atmosphere; well, it did not. Atmospheric air contained a certain quantity of it; the average was three parts in 10,000, and occasionally as high as 4 parts; in London fog it was 14 paj-ts. In rooms occupied by human beings and heated by j?as stoves there Was, in addition to CO2, a certain amount of" deleterious organic matter—exhalations trom the human beings; there was' also 002 produced by the combustion of gas. Experiments by Dr. Haldane and Dr. Leonard Hill showed that as much as 300 to 400 parts in 10,000, parts 6f CO2 had no effect except to deepen the breathing; and that it was onlv when the proportion i was COO parts of CO2 to 10,000 thatheadache, palpitation, and other injurious results were noticed. The hygienic quality of the air in a room depended on (1) the temperature of the room, (2) the humidity of the atmosphere, and (3) the movement and the number of changes; so that the hygienic effect of a heat producer was entirely a question of ventilation and not of the chemical content of the atmosphere. Tho trouble in New -Zealand was that there was no standard, the whole matter being left to the judgment of the inspector. In England, < for the past sixteen years a standard i had been used, on the recommendation of Dr. Haldane; it was not more than 12 parts of CO2 in 10,000 parts during daylight, and not more,/than k 2O parts at night: and Dr. Frengley had given his consent to the same standard being used in New Zealand. Some time ago, Dr. Toogflod. medical superintendent of the Lewisham Infirmary (England), conducted experiments, and came to the conclusion that in rooms adequately ventilated flueless gas stores could be used for heating without any hygienic disadvantage. Counsel then gave particulars of the regulations proposed to be adopted in New Zealand.

Mr Rajmond again objected, contending that evidence on this. matter was inadmissible.

His Worship suggested that after the company nad complied'with the requisition, thev might find that the expense was unnecessarv under the regulations. Mr Raymond submitted that they had to .take the law as it stood. He suggested that if the Court dismissed the appeal it could be made subject to any regulations that came into effect after his "Worship's determination. Replying to a statement bv Mr Alpers, counsel said that similar proceedings against Bcath and Co. had not been discontinued, but had not been proceeded with because, up to a certain point, Beath and Co. had complied with the requisition. Mr Alpers galled evidence.

L. P. Symes, Fellow of the Chemical Society, stated that on June 29th, 1918. lie made a chemical examination of the atmosphere in the company's premises. In tho fancy department at 11 a.m., the temperature was f >4F. and the 002 was 9.3 parts per 10,000 parte; show room, at noon, a number of pas-lieaters were burning, and the temperature was 04F., tho CO2 content being 7.2 parts in 10.000; the workroom (top floor) at 12.30, there were no heaters burnincr. the ' temperature was 56F. and the (JO2 content was i 0 parts per 10.000. He made a further test on Monday last, when the weather conditions were very bad. At 5.H5 p.m.. on the top floor the CO2 content was IS parts out of 10 000: in the lower floors it was between 12 and 15 parte • the humidity was between 67 and 68.

To Mr Raymond: He expected that under similar conditions he would set the same results, though, ordinarilv. the conditions in the two places would be exceedingly different. He had no knowledge of the percentage of sulphur in the products of combustion in London. He made the tests at the D.I.C. with the portable CO2 apparatus, The difference between tests so taken and a laboratory test would be, probably. as fine a§ $ part in 10,000. S. Hurst Seagcr, architect, stated that he was examiner in New Zealand for the Sanitary Institute of Great Britain, and had given much attention to the questions of heating and rentilatiou. He agreed that tho CO2 standard was not a scientific test of the purity of atmosphere—movement, temperature. and humidity were of greater Importance. There were no poisonous

emanations from 002 produced by gas, bat there were human emauutious wiiich, combined with CO2, were poisonous. The CO2 standard was used, ns far as he knew, throughout the world as a reliable test. The modern gas heating stove gave an incandescent glow and an efficiency of 60 per cent, of radiant heat. , At this juncture the further hearing va6 adjourned till 2 p.m. to-daj