Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

M. TURRETTINI IN REPLY.

TO THE EDITOR Of "THE mrSS."

Sir.—Your article in to-day c "Press criticising Monsieur Turrettini's hydroelectric installation at Chevree, Geneva, is a reason I have for asJving yon to insert a letter 1 received from him lately. , In your article on the Wainmkariri scheme on May Gth last you niado what I considered some inaccurate remarks, and I suspected you might have r!ono the same with regard to tho Chevres scheme, ■which was severely criticised therein. I, theiefuie, forwarded your article to M. Turrettini for his information, but did not nsk for n reply. He, nevertheless, sent one, which I enclose. Of course, without pl«nt> 1 -am unable to grasp correctly the position, but that is as he. Ib able to defend liiir.self.

Istit permit n;o to cay that in all tho ui't:ci£» you have published on the Waimakariri scheme—which havo been exceedingly pessimistic if not eondenuiutory—l give you credit for not being behind any one of us in wishing to promote tho advancement of Canterbury. I accept the view that your object is to prevent tho community taking v mistaken, couree which wiil ultimately lead to retardation and not to advancement.

If I make this admiasiou, you must allow mo to ask, Wliy go euch a roundabout way of accomplishing your object—by attacking .Monsieur Turrettini? Why not attack tho Waimakariri scheme direct J , You know tho vulnerable point. It its, can you or can you not, get sufficient water freo from sbinglo by Mr Dobson'e plan? I must sny I regret that there hae been no published statement as to tho eaid scheme having been confirmed by an engineer. It has been rumoured that .Mr Marchant has done # so, but there has been no positive announcement. Why thus secrecy? I admit it implies want of confidence. Well then, I ask you to use your influence to get the point satisfactorily settled. To make assuranco doubly cure, get the most cautious engineer that is obtainable to oonfirm Mr Marohant or point out difficulties. Let there bo no self deception. But let us attack the question directly, honestly, and energetically—Youre, etc.,

• JOSHUA LITTLE

[Exclosube.]

Sir> —I bog to acknowledge receipt of your letter of Juno Ist, covering an article concerning myself which appeared in "Tho Press." I thank you for having drawn my attention to it. I send you herewith tho two replies which. I made to tho experts' report, and I am now in a position to quote figures -which, will show you that the works carried out in accordance with their recommendations have not improved th 6 efficiency of the installation, as is alleged. The extra grating asked for by the experts cost, according to the annuaJ report of the Chevres Works Department for 1906, the sum of 562,542 franc 3, which, at 6 per cent, per annum for interest and sinking fund, represents an annuity of 33,750 france. The cest of maintenance of the grating in 1008 wee 10,993.50 france, and, tho annuity being 33,750 francs, tho expenditure for 190G was 44,743.50 francs, as against a cost of maintenance in 1004 of 18,336.70fran0e. , Tho increased expenditure resulting from the construction of the new gratinga was, therefore, 26,406.85 france.

In a general way the net return from the works declined from 1904 to 1906 as a result of tho works recommended by the'experts, from 6.54 per cent, to 5.26 iper cent, in spite of the face that the gross receipts from the sale of power increased from 896,439 francs to 972,955 franca.

These figures are more eloquent than all the re]x>rts of experts. As for the assertion of "The Press" that tho intake canal of tho Chevres works became obstructed with shingle, the assertion is absolutely incorrect; this canal has never had to be dredged of gravel, which could not get into it owing to the difference in lovela between the bed of the Rhone at tho dam and the bed of the intake channel, which is three metres higher. After tho floods of tho Arve, extremely fine silt (Unions) was deposited in the intake channel, hut this disappeared in a few days, drawn away by the force of the current, of water running to the turbine.

On the other hand, since the completion of tho new grating, -which ie much too long, the current of water behind it is too slow to carry away the silt which is deposited there,, and aa a result a bank of silt has formed which obstructs a part of the grating and remains there permanently. This is precisely what I had anticipated.

As for giving you an opinion upon Mr Dobson's Waimakaiiri scheme, I cannot do so in view of my ignorance of local conditions.

I am at your service to supply you with any other information you may require regarding the Chevres works. I may add that the steam plant completed eighteen months ago has so far only been used on two days, which shows how slight is its value in the Chevrea works. The report of tho experts with which you are familiar hod an essentially political object. That object was to provo tliat wlfot 1 had done for twenty years to provide the city of Geneva, over which I presided, with hydraulic power, had been badly done. Happily, financial result* are there to prove the contrary. Acoording to the report of 1000, the net return from tho industrial services of the city of Geneva (water, gas, electricity) was 12.56 per cent., or 3,552,000 franca on a capital sunk of 27,000,000 francs.— I am. etc.. (Signed) TH. TUIIRETTIM, Engineer.

Genera, Julj 29th

"NVo have dealt -with these lottcre at length in our leading colunine. It may not be out of place, however, to print hero tho following translation of a letter which the Editor of "The Press" lias received from the Director of the Electric Service at Genera, deted July 30th :—

"In reply U> your letter of the 15th June, addressed to the Town Clerk, we hnve the honour to inform that the various modifications and improvements recommended by the expert commission appointed to report on tho Chevrcs work* have been carried out, and Are giving good result*.

"A protective grating has been conetructod «t the mouth cf the canal, so that the rubbish carried along by the waters in times of flood, oen no longer penetrate into it, and thus on* of the coupes of the irregular aervice his boon removed.

"The turbine* themselves havo undergone certain improvements of a happy character, and a floating watergato permit* of their being oasily got ut, to that rcpaire can bo easily effected, »nd the old eight of several turbines nt one time undergoing repuirs is a thing of tho pant. "Tho result Is that tho installation supplies much more power then formerly, as may be easily gathered from tho constant increase in receipt*, which inoreised from 704,708 francs in 1901 to 072,955 fra.no* In lOOfl.^

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19071016.2.39

Bibliographic details

Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 12936, 16 October 1907, Page 7

Word Count
1,158

M. TURRETTINI IN REPLY. Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 12936, 16 October 1907, Page 7

M. TURRETTINI IN REPLY. Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 12936, 16 October 1907, Page 7