The Press THURSDAY, JUNE 9, 1955. Cross-Purposes on Power

Press, Volume XCI, Issue 27680, 9 June 1955, Page 12

The Press THURSDAY, JUNE 9, 1955. Cross-Purposes on Power

The general manager of the State i Hydro-electric Department (Mr A. lE. Davenport) has made it clear in recent statements that peak-load difficulties rather than a shortage of units in storage now deters the (department from restoring the full power allocations to South Island 'supply authorities. Yet the ChristI church City Council has just removed in its large district all the . restrictions that directly and 'positively relieve peak demand and i has replaced them with a quota I rationing system virtually useless ’ for this purpose and of doubtful i value to save units. It is fair to i say that this particular piece of •stupidity is symptomatic as much of jthe deplorable lack of co-ordination (between the State department and i the local authorities as of the chronic ! mismanagement by the Christchurch | City Council of the business of keeping power consumption in its area within the allocations fixed by the department. The Christchurch City Council, with its inglorious record of consistently exceeding its allocations by anything from 10 to 20 per cent, in the recent weeks of shortage, still had the hardihood at its meeting on Tuesday to make a poor mouth about the last remaining cut of 5 per cent, in the State allocation—which it was even then exceeding by 4.2 per cent, for a full week and by 11.2 per cent, on one day of the second week since the allocation was increased. What is more, the Mayor seemed to find some injustice in the Dunedin City Council’s removing alLrestrictions in its area. Mr Macfarlane might not have been aware that this was for a trial period of a fortnight, in which Dunedin consumers responded so well to the appeal for voluntary savings that consumption exceeded the allocation by only 2.42 per cent. He should certainly have known that throughout the shortage Dunedin consumers have been so firmly disciplined by their supply authority that they have, unlike those of Christchurch, kept their consumption very close to the limits set by the State Hydro-electric Department. Even at this late stage there are some things the Christchurch City Council can do and should do to save its consumers from the consequences

of its mismanagement. It should scrap the individual quota rationing scheme, which it introduced far too late to be of any positive use in conserving power for the winter. (Even now some consumers have not been notified of their quotas and may not be notified of them for the better part of -two months; and it might need another two months beyond that to secure compliance.) It should reintroduce the former Restrictions on water-heaters, radiators, and display lighting, not necessarily over the same hours but certainly over the hours of peak demand. (Probably very few consumers expected these restrictions to be lifted when quota rationing was introduced; and many would have been quite happy to remain thus restricted and so secure their quota saving, without too much anxious watching of their meters.) The need now is for vigorous measures to cut peak loads—which means restrictions at hours of heavy demand and some reasonably effective system of inspection and enforcement at those hours. Mr Davenport has made it plain that only when there is an assurance of the generators not

being overloaded will the full allocation be restored to supply authorities. Even that, of course, will not warrant the unrestricted

use of power, least of all in Christchurch. For there is little to encourage the belief that Christchurch consumers will voluntarily keep within the full allocation any more faithfully than they have within the reduced allocations.