GAS V. ELECTRICITY.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1036, 27 January 1911, Page 6

GAS V. ELECTRICITY.

LIGHT ON A RECENT CONTROVERSYDISCUSSION AT THE CITY COUNCIL; EECIPROCITY BETWEEN LOCAL '•'■ "■'••' ■'-' BODIES. ' ■ As was only to be expected, Tuesday's i debate at the monthly meeting of tho Hospital Board on the subject of the gas v. electricity controversy, led to an important discussion at the meeting of the Wellington City Council last evening, when tho Tramways Committee submitted tho following recommendation:— ."That the council approve the action taken by the Electrical Engineer and Lighting Superintendent in clearly demonstrating to tho public that electricity for lighting purposes is cheaper than gas." "is that true?" asked Councillor- Car- ' wichael, innocently, amid laughter. .: > The Mayor Explains. • Mr. Wilford said the price at which the council had ofl'ered-lo supply current to the hospital was a price at which it could bo'done satisfactorily to the city. The cost of generating . power w"as : lid. per unit, and the capital cost Id., a total cost of 2sd. per unit. The council had offered-to suppiy tho hospital at 3d. .'per unit. Tho cost of generation, etc., last year was 3.052 d., but this year, on account of the Parson's turbine now in use/ the cost was very much less. On' account of the turbine a hdge saving had been effected. They were •'able''to '.supply -light' to the Town Hall at 3d. per unit. -Current"could be supplied for heating at lid. per unit. The council was supplying current for motive purposes .at the piesont' time atvs. 3d. per unit. During "the'day it.'could, perhaps; be supplied at an even lower price because power was the-n goingto\ waste that they-wanted some market for:.-' The' hospital;belonged as-much to the publio as this city. Of-the Hospital Board's total annual revenue of .£13,810, the city ratepayers contributed ,£8782. "We also say," said tho.- Mayor, "that if'we have light to sell we'should give-it to'our partners (the. Hospital-Board)-.at as cheap, a' price 'as we can; so long as we do it honestly and fairly." In supplyingtho ' Hospital Board,: thc-i'item -of capital'charge would involve a very small" increase indeed'upon the cost of generation, ljd. per | uniti'-'. I have. no. more'to fay upon this controversy," said'Mr.-Wil-ford. "It is a business proposition we offer. ; We ask .the board to. give us fair consideration in deciding as to whether they will take gas or electricity. As, chairman- of. the Lighting Committee.. and..Mayor of tho.Jcity, I desire to'state thatWo have mada'a; proper proposition.' I will ask the' Electrical • Engineer. (Mr. Eichardson) to tell us if it is. true' that current: can bo supplied, at the, price at which - We.have tendered. with.out-.105S to' the city,' which means with- profit/ and whether it. is ■ not a fact that the cost of generation is 11(1. per unit, -and that the capital charges Will'be merely nominal." ..;-.

Mr. Richardson ' said .the Slavor had stated the position correctly.' The city cou'd not suffer by supplying- electricity to the Hospital Board at 3d. per unit. Councillor Fletcher,asked if the Mayor . had not stated in • Parliament that, the cost.of generation to tho city was sd. • per -.'unit. V;The ; Mayor said! ho could' not ■recall •i having n'lade the.statement. Hansard- ■' would shqw that he' had stated the cost of .generation, at lid. 'per unit, and the - capital charge at Id. ■ ■ . .'. -*,

' ; ' f !-: '■':'•_ A Plea foKfhe Public. ■ Councillor.'Cohen:'"If.that'is' so,' don't, you think it would'be advisable to lower' the cost to all' ratepayers? Why should ratepayers pay 7d. per unit, and the board 3d.? (surely it.wouid pay to.let ratepayers' , have, it cheaper?" .'•' ■',■'. , . Councillor Fletcher contended' that the case stated by. Councillor Cohen did not apply, at nil. It should be recognised'that one-'local- body in:trading with'.'another -.' should give it preferential' treatment. Cbhsuniers in Wellington were doing very well in obtaining current,at 7d. per unit, considering that a little while ago they had to pay Is. ■ per : unit. : - "■;'■' The Mayor described tho reduction in' the cost of generating-current since the ■ installation of the Parson's turbine as being phenomenal.; With.the installation of an additional turbine, which he hoped would be done in tho future, the cost would be still further reduced, with a corresponding ■ reduction in the' rates charged to the public. Referring to' Councillor Cohen's statement regarding the 7d. - rate .for current, the .Mayor ,said that it was. inevitable in;this, as.in other trading concerns, that the small consumers should have to carry the higher rate. . Big establishments using a .large, supply, of current were charged at'the od. rate, which wast only, right. The council's, tender at a 3d. rate for the Hospital.was'a good proportion, and could bb'.. done,, without..: a - 1055... It would actually pay '. them better, to supply tho hospital at 3d. than the' big city establishments at'sd., as' could bo very easily demonstrated. .AVith regard. to/the newspaper controversy, it was necessary that'the council's officers should step in and reply to certain statements which had been made by tho.Gas .Company, All that ..was now asked'was that the council should endorse their '. sction. -Councillor Barber' said .that that was all right so long as it really': was a fact ' that electricity was cheaner ~ than gas: He did not think.the public should bo misled in.tho matter. If the fact could be clearly demonstrated, well and good. He-believed in the-principlo of reciprocity between local bodies. .. Councillor Smith said that the corporation should certainly endeavour to sell current to large institutions, like tho hospital, which used the supplies at a time when the ordinary city demand was less.

Underselling the Gas Company. _ Councillor Carmichael contended that if.the council could undersell the Gas Company.and still.make, a nrofit, the city ■would ultimately bo abIo : to acquire the company's business at a substantiaL reduction. At the same time, if the council could sell current, at 3d. Ncr unit, without loss, tho gerieraKpnblic should havo tho benefit of a reduction.' ■ "• ' Fitzgerald said that tho blectrical Department's officers had done A great work in placing.the facts for the council s side of the case so convincingly before tbo public. , Councillor Hindmarsh complained that the council s offer of 3d. per unit savoured too t much of summer sales." They were making the position of the Hospital Board very complicated and difficult. Sides had been taken. Ho was of opinion that the Hospital Board should not bo actuated by any question of reciprocity. It had p endeavour to r do tho best it could in the interests of those for whom it was elected a trustee,.and the city councillors who sat on tho board should not bo mado 'barrackers" for tho corpora-' tion. -

Councillor Trevor agreed with tho previous speaker, and moved as an amendment: - "That the council approve the action taken by tho electrical engineer and lighting superintendent' in offering to supply current to. the Welling- • ton Hospital •' Board at 3d. per unit for lighting, and lid. for heating." This was seconded by Councillor Frost, who remarked that thero had been considerable diversity, of opinion in-the city as to whether the council could supply at 3d. per ! unit without loss. Their expert officers, however, had demonstrated that. Councillor Shirtcliffe said'that the.application of tho principle of . reciprocity was perfectly justifiable when no loss was involved. As ono of the chief contributors to the revenue of tho Hospital Board, he considered that the council had a right to ask for reciprocity. Personally he could quite understand how,.it was that the. city could 'supply- at' the 3d. rate' and clear itself, but it was due to the public that the basis should be clearly demonstrated, j Would his Worship do tiiat? ■ More Light on the Subject, According to this request tho Mayor stated that if any critic of the council disenssed its tender on tho figures presented in last year's balance-sheet the tender must be condemned. But later figures' supplied by the engineer showed that there had been a large decrease in working expenses. Pressed for more definite details as' to the basis of the tender hi* Worship a statement which

■was, handed .to. him. by .the City- Electrical Engineer. In this it was shown with regard to the hospital' supply that the estimated revenue from a -consumption of 22,11U0 units, the maximum demand being 26 kilowatts, would, bo .£275, at 3d. per unit. ■ The cost of generating current (at .Slid, per unit) was set'down at iSli lis. ■id., and 10 per cent, interest sinking fund and depreciation on tho capital cost of the station plant (,£1550), required to generate tho supply worked out at- .£155, brought tho cost to .£2-41 3s. fdi, leaving a credit balance of .£33 16s. Bd., a retrun of .£ll 3s. 2d. per cent, on the outlay on the station plant. Contrasting this estimate with the revenue and cost of production in connection with tho supply of current to certain largo establishments in the city, at 5.52 d. per unit, it was shown, on the figures for last year, that with'respect to oiie of these establish-ments,-that on a- consumption of S2so' units, with a maximum demand of 32 kilowatts, (he actual revenue was ,£2OO 7s. Id. ■ Tho cost of production was tho same, .Old. per unit, but tho 10 per cent, interest, depreciation, and sinking'fund allowance on tho, capital Cost of tho 32 kilowatt station plant (cBIOS-I)—tho plant for the hospital' being 25 kilowatts—was .£l9B Bs., and this added' to the cost of generating 8250 units, os. 3d., brought the gross cost up to A'iMO Us. 3d., leaving a .debit balance of 7s. 2d.

After some further discussion, Councillor Trevor's ■ amendment was put and carried. ■'"''■ ; , .■.,'" '