Residents’ Decision On Ilam Smoke-Stack

Press, Volume XCVIII, Issue 28825, 20 February 1959, Page 12

Residents’ Decision On Ilam Smoke-Stack

In their efforts to prevent the construction of a coal or oil-fired boiler at the new site at Ham, nearby residents are prepared, if necessary, to seek an injunction in the Supreme Court,

They took this decision last evening, at a meeting attended by about 250 persons, when they resolved to protest most strongly “against the construction of a solid or liquid fired boiler . . . with its attendant smoke, dust and obnoxious fumes." In furtherance of this course, they will seek a hearing with the Minister of Works (Mr Watt), and the Prime Minister (Mr Nash). If they then obtain no satisfaction they will seek an injunction restraining the Ministry of Works from constructing such a boiler on the proposed site in its proposed form. About half those present subscribed—at the rate of 10s a household—towards the establishment of a voluntary fighting fund. Mr R. H. Bell, a member of the action committee, reported afterwards that £5O in cash had been collected and promises for about a further £2O received. Much of the meeting's time was spent in listening to the Member of Parliament for Riccarton (Mr M. A. Connelly), who read a letter from the Minister of Works, and two appended technical reports, supporting the Government’s decision to build a. coalfired plant. This information had been sought by the protest committee. It was only in November last year that it became known that coal had been chosen to fuel the boilers, said Mr Bell, when the meeting opened. MID. Offer

Mr G. H. Battersby, secretarymanager of the Municipal Electricity Department, writing as a resident, gave his support to the protest committee in a letter read to the meeting. Either gas or electricity would be suitable, and the Christchurch City Council had offered a supply of electricity during restricted hours at id a unit. There was no sound reason for not using electricity “because there ,is now, and always should be, ample electricity in the South Island." Electricity would be little more expensive than coal in the firing of the boilers- on the day-to-day charges, said Mr W. G. Johnstone. electrical engineer of the MID., and also a resident But in the use of coal there were greater capital charges and higher maintenance costs. In addition, there would be a saving in overseas funds in using electric power from already established sources. As well. In the use of coal, there were other hidden costs—including the greater upkeep charges to nearby householders in maintaining properties. By using electricity, said Mr Johnstone, the university would be making no demands upon New Zealand's expendable resources. The M.ED's offer of. power at

id a unit during off-peak hours—from 10.30 p.m. to 6.30 a.m.— would not mean that the university would be subsidised by .other consumers in the city. "It would be possible to supply the load from cables which will be required in any case to supply the developing toad to west of Fendalton and Riccarton." This would have the effect of reducing the rates to other consumers rathe? than otherwise. Government’s The decision to install a coalfired boiler Was made and announced. in May, 1957, said Mr Connelly, and the meeting’s protest might have been more effective if made at that time. A woman's voice: We didn’t live here. then. There would be no saving in overseas funds by changing to electricity now as the coal plant had not only been ordered, but much of it was now on the site and some of the reticulation system had been installed. A voice: Take it away, -we don’t want it. If any change was made now, -there would be a likelihood that the opening of the university would be delayed. That, of course, was a matter tor the university Mr Connelly read a letter from the. Minister of Works which restated arguments which have already been put forward in recent statements of the Government decision was made partly on economic ’grounds, .said the Minister. The over-all running costs for a. gas plant would be considerably higher than tor a coal plant, and the design of the School of Engineering was deter-

mined when Government policy precluded - the use of electricity and “this decision is re-affirmed." Any alteration to the heating system now would prejudice the completion of the school. The Minister repeated earlier assurances that “every care has been taken during the design to obviate a nuisance and to use the latest equipment.” Might it not be reasonable for the university to proceed with the installation of a coal-fired boiler for the first stage, suggested Mr Connelly. If, after this reasonable trial, the coal plant was' found to be a nuisance, the committee could then take steps to seek the installation of an alternative plant for the second stage. “Your motion of protest admits of no compromise." he said, in a final appeal to the meeting. After the meeting adopted its resolutions of protest and action Mr Connelly offered his services in any further approaches to the Government.