THE GASWORKS.

Evening Star, Issue 3914, 9 September 1875, Page 2

THE GASWORKS.

The following is the substance of Mr Genever s report on the capabilities of the present Gasworks :

Remarking on Mr Courtis’s remarks in regard to the retort house, he considers it premature to calculate upon its extension, as the heaviest night’s supply only requires 120,000 cubic feet of gas, and it is capable, without alteration or addition, of producing :! 10,000 feet per clay. This ho estimates will meet the prospective demand for five years.

With regard to the purifiers he reports that they are doing their work well, and that having erected them with a view to their extension, he has the valves and connections requisite for ten years to come.

The small gas holder, by new sheeting, at a small cest, will be a most desirable.auxiliary to the works, and equal to new. In reference to the large gasholder condemned by Mr Courtis he “cannot find the slightest foundation” for the statement that the tank plates are beiug|destructively acted upon, and gives it as his opinion that Dunedin must have its present population multiplied many times before it becomes unlitted for its works. He has watched the holder many times during heavy gales, but did not discover anything dangerous. His original intention on seeing the elevation of the holding on the drawings was to stay the tops and middles of each column, and to put diagonal stays between each, and this design he purposes completing this summer. He has in possession drawings of recently-erected gas-holders in London stayed in a similar manner. He also states that one of the most celebrated engineers in Lngland, at the meeting of the British Association last year, said he was content with eight points of support for a holder 200 ft in diameter, while the Dunedin holder of 80ft in diameter has twelve columns, only 20ft apart. His opinion is that, stayed as he proposes, the holder is perfectly secure. One of the Christchurch holders, tnough half the elevation of the Dunedin one, is similarly stayed. Mr Hankey’s policy has been always to lay a main where there was a prospect of profit, and Mr Genever thinks the present mains sufficient.

In reply to Mr Courtis’s strictures on the quality of the gas, Mr Genever asserts that it contains G per cent, more condensible hydrocarbon than the ordinary gas supplied to the city of London. Mr Courtis erroneously said lie was told by Mr Genever he was supplying thirteen to fourteen candle gas. Wnat he was told was it was fifteen to seventeen. An Argand burner is not constructed to burn poor gas, but to secure perfect combustion of the carbon constituents. It is used as the standard of Great Britain for testing gas supplied by companies or corporations under legislative restrictions. It is nonsense to state that consumers are entitled to thirteen to fifteen candle-power whan burned through an ordinary No, 4 fish tail. The light of the Argand burner exceeds the other by 150 per cent. The fish-tail has been condemned in England, because the gas cannot be burned economically through it. It is unsuited for lighting purposes, as it does not develop

utnlnosity, is subject to alteration in form, and gas bums with a singing noise. Notwithstanding the talent and money expended in endeavors to perfect them they are most uneconomical and unsatisfactory for illuminating purposes. In support of this opinion Mr Genever quotes from the ‘ Daily News ’ and * Spectator.’ In reply to Mr Courtis’s remark “It is somewhat difficult to decide as to the exact cause of the gas being so poor, &c. Good coal will yield good gas if subsequently purified ” —Mr Genover maintains that he has entirely failed to prove that the gas is poor, and admits on page 4 of his report that .the purifiers are ample, and evidently do their work well. Mr Genever replies to the causes alleged for making the gas poor First, the charges are not allowed to remain in too long. Second and third, I have not undue exhaustion. As regards the fourth, the process of revivication without removal of the materials from the purifiers, by means of the air blow pipe, is well known, as it is patented in 1872 by the ; engineer of the Hornsey Gasworks; but how this process can possibly affect the illuminating power of the gas any more than the method of charging a lime or oxide purifyer, and putting in fresh material, I am at a loss to know. Whether a fresh purifier is put on at my works, the greatest care is excercised to expel the atmospheric air before the air valves are closed. He challenges Mr Courtis to prove that there is more than average rf carbonic acid in tho gas supplied. Speaking of the public lamps Mr Genever remarks : —As Mi* Courtis says, there is plenty of gas in the town ; so that if an inferior light is obtained the cause is purely local. The lamps selected for experiment were undoubtedly some of the worst lights in the town, and it would perhaps have been better, or say, fairer, to have tested also a few of the gas lamps on the bills. However, seeing that our offer for lighting on the meter system was rejected by the City Council, Ido not think the existing gasworks should bear all the blame. With regard to the question of a site for new works, it is scarcely in my province to reply to Mr Courtis; but my opinion is that the present site cannot be equalled, for we have unlimited room for extension, and the wind seldom blows in the direction of the City. Mr Genever declines to comment on Mr Courtis’s balance-sheet, but says no one can make 30,000,000 cubic feet with three stokers on a shift and one yardman.