Rakaia plan might go ahead

Press, 15 August 1978, Page 1

Rakaia plan might go ahead

By

OLIVER RIDDELL

The proposed hydroelectric development of the Rakaia River and the associated irrigation are getting another hard look in Wellington. The reason is the I changed criteria now it • has been realised that I New Zealand's future electricity needs may have I been over-estimated. j However. the same I changes may spell the death of another embrvo Canterbury scheme — the planned small dam on the Hurunui River. A Rakaia scheme would have a big impact on employment opportunities in the short term, and lead to an immeasurable increase in the productivity of the land between the Rakaia and Waimakariri rivers between the foothills ana the sea. The scheme has been promoted for many years: Two years ago, a report

from the Southern Energy Group outlined detailed proposals for it.

However, the Rakaia doe not figure prominently in the 20-year national power plan, even though a combined scheme incorporating a series of power stations has a power potential of 500 megawatts.

The reasons for this low priority were many, but the total cost of a combined scheme, and the urgent need to concentrate on providing electricity, to the exclusion of other forms of investment in capital works, were the main ones.

Circumstances have now changed. It may well be that New Zealand has overestimated its electricity needs for the next 20 years by as much as 30 per cent. Planned works are being postponed. Even the big works now beginning on

the Clutha River at Clyde will probably be scaled down considerably, while other, lesser schemes will not be needed until later. Altered needs and emphases are in turn leading to a review of prior-

ities. And schemes with multiple benefits — irrigation as well as power — may now get a higher priority. Multi-purpose schemes have always been theoretically attractive, but they have had problems in securing the financial input needed for prelimi* nary study where there was not the lure of early electricity. Rakaia has been erne such scheme. Government officials are now beginning to look

again to their priorities, but a 20-year plan will take a bit of shifting. Also, there is the problem of scaling down hydro development without causing short-term unemployment, Or the long-term loss of skilled staff over-

■ The speed with which attention is transferred to the Rakaia and similar multi-purpose schemes may now depend on political influence. In the months leading up to the General Election in November, supporters of the Rakaia and similar multi-purpose schemes will be increasingly energetic in support of their schemes.

On the Other hand, prospects for a small, locallybuilt, hydro power scheme on the Hurunui River are starting to dim. Along with other local power schemes, it had the blessing of the Government and until recently

had looked very promising indeed. But its fate may have been sealed by the same apparent overestimate of New Zealand’s power needs.

Local cower schemes are not well equippe.l to survive in this new context because of their cost per unit of producing electricity.

The Government has a broad principle that if power will cost more than 3c per unit (kilowatt-hour) to produce, then, except in exceptional circumstances, the scheme will not proceed. The Government is expected to reduce this benchmark of 3c to 2.5 c.

Only a few small schemes would have met the 3c criterion, and hardly any will meet a 2.5 c criterion.

The Government has made no commitment to build any small scheme, such as the Hurunui one; it has merely provided study finance.