Council Examining Industrial Power Charges

Press, Volume CII, Issue 30269, 23 October 1963, Page 15

Council Examining Industrial Power Charges

The whole question of industrial power charges was being investigated, the electricity commit" ee reported to the City Council. It made this comment on a complaint by a company that power charges for its

Christchurch fact try were co.«sidecably higher than those in Auckland

“Compairisen with charges in other centres is extremely difficult, as in all cases the scales are based cn completely different factors, many of which are not available to us.“ the report said. Some authorities charged the lighting load separately, but Christchurch did not.

The diverse sys'em of charging resulted in the costs for a factory being quite different in the various supply authority areas, and while one factory might pay more in Christchurch and less in Auckland or Wellington. the reverse might be the case for a factory with slightly different operating conditions. One of the most important factors in the ost of distributing power was the load factor. In areas where there were extremes of weather, the load factor would be poor compared with that for areas with a more even temperature throughout the year. It would, therefore, be expected that the Christchurch load factor would be considerably lower than that for Auckland, and this was the case. Development Another important factor was the rate of development of the town. A town developing quickly was a much more expensive place to live in than a town which was static. If the load growth in Christchurch was stationary the Municipal Electricity Depart t| ment would be saved something like £500.000 a year Until further investigations had been made, the only prac-

ticable way of comparing the various authorities was by the latest average revenue figures, the report said. These dud not separate industrial and commercial, as many authorities sold power a< the same ra'e to both types of consumers. The figures showed that while Auckland's average revenue was lower than Christchurch's by a small . amount, its revenue a kilowatt of maximum demand I was higher This illustrated the effect of Auckland's better load factor.

“Hoiwever, in spite of this very good load factor and higher revenue a kilowatt of demand, it is curious that the Auckland Electric Power Board, being the centre of ! great development, can under- ■ sell all of the larger centres.” the report said. “The fact that last year it made a considerable deficit may have same bearing on the matter” Examining the particular company, the report said the charges under the MED system were 54 per cent dearer than under the Auckland system. Using a wellknown formula for cost of supplying power at consum-1 ers' premises, it would seem

that if the factory wa* in Auckland it would result in a loss to the power board of something more titan £6OO a year. Investigations on selected industries showed others which would be cheaper under the Christchurch system.

Domestic Rate Although the Auckland board’s domestic rate on the average was Lower than Christchurch's, the general effect bore quite differently and only consumers using fewer than 950 units a month were cheaper in Auckland. When investigations had been completed a report on the whole question would be submitted, together with any recommendations for adjustments. the report concluded.

“What we want to know is why power costs more in Christchurch than in Auckland." said Cr. T. D Flint. "This is the very reason why industry is going to the north."

He was sure that a full report would show some glaring anomalies, said Cr. H. G Hay. “And I am sure it is time our consumers knew how they are being fleeced or otherwise."

As the report dealt with a particular case, the council agreed to refer the report back to the committee for a full general report.