Coal-burner subsidy suggested

Press, Volume CXIV, Issue 33493, 26 March 1974, Page 12

Coal-burner subsidy suggested

A Government subsidy to reduce the price of efficient domestic coal-fired heaters was suggested last evening by Dr N. J. Peet, a senior lecturer in chemical engineering at the University of Canterbury.

Dr Peet, speaking to a meeting of the Economic Society of Australia and New Zealand, said subsidies would make “sound economic sense,” but so far the Ministry of Energy Resources, which had been told of the idea, had given no hint of its thinking on the matter.

It could cost up to $lOOO to produce a kilowatt-hour of electricity and get it to a home electric heater; efficient coal heaters retailed up to $4OO. Dr. Peet, who spoke on

“possible conflicts between dir pollution and fuel policies,” said there should be no conflict between the two since good policy aimed at the most efficient use of fuel, which produced no pollution. “Where - you see smoke coming from a chimney it means that the fuel is not being used efficiently.” At present, however, there did not appear to be any Government energy policy. Half of New Zealand’s electricity was used domestically.

“If the Government does not discourage the use of coal in open fires it will be greatly to our disadvantage.”

However, coal burnt in proper appliances was three

or four times more efficient and would greatly improve the air quality. Since only two reasonably efficient appliances were available and the manufacturers of them could supply only half the market the Government should import them, said Dr Peet, and subsidise the cost. Dr A. G. Williamson, another one of six speakers from the university department of chemical engineering, said nuclear power should be used to generate electricity only as a last resort.

Acknowledging that others disagreed with him,. Dr Williamson, a reader in chemical engineering, said the dangers from waste and “low emission leakage” of radiation were too great, or not sufficiently known about, to warrant the risk. ENERGY WASTE I Talking about the waste-: ful use of energy, he said generally it was more efficient to ship fuel than electricity, so generators should be close to where the electricity is going to be used. ■ This was not true of hydroelectricity so- a philosophy had grown up in New Zealand of building generating stations far from where the power was to be used and feeding it into the national grid. “We must not have too many more New Plymouthtype gas-fired stations a long way from where the electricity is to be used.” Dr J. Abrahamson, a lecturer in chemical engineering, outlined a study he and Dr J. B. Stott had undertaken which showed that New Zealand could save sl2m a year in overseas funds by manufacturing P.V.C. from .coal.

The total overseas cost in his scheme would be s3m to produce 30,000 tons -of P.V.C. which at present was imported at $5OO a ton. Dr Abrahamson said a number of local firms had shown a firm interest in the possibilities of producing petrochemicals from coal.