Ban on open fires

Press, 23 August 1984, Page 20

Ban on open fires

Sir,—We made inquiries for J. M. Hyde. If the open fire was banned within the M.E.D. area the estimated peak demand increase would be 58,000 kW, a 16.5 per cent increase over the 352,411 kW estimated for 1984-85. There would be an approximate increase in consumption of 3.3 per cent (46 million units) over the 1984-85 estimated consumption. For the average household the use of electricity, with proper thermostatic control, is one of the cheapest, pollutionfree, convenient forms of heating available in the area. Over 90 per cent of households already use electricity for part of their heating. We believe that the Christchurch clean air zone should have a cheaper peak demand charge in keeping with the Government’s moral responsibility under the 1972 Clean Air Act. Christchurch was not enabled to build its own hydro station to “lop off’ peak demand, as is done in Dunedin.—Yours, etc., P. V. NEARY. Hon. Secretary, N.Z. Clean Air Society. August 21, 1984.

Sir, — Congratulations to the City Council for at long last taking a firm stand on pollution caused by household fires. One hopes the

council will have the commitment to see this course of action through to its conclusion. For too long the health of our citizens has been threatened by a selfish minority insisting on retaining open fires. With the establishment of the new rubbish transfer stations, the time is ripe for an enlightened move to encourage disposal of garden rubbish through this means instead of the backyard bonfire. — Yours, etc. LINDA SARGISON (Mrs). August 21, 1984. Sir,—lt is good to hear that the Christchurch City Council has approved the banning of open fires in principle; but why on earth wait five to seven years? The decision has been made, so let us see some real action now. The health of us all can only be improved. Let’s do it now.—Yours, etc., JOHN HARRIS. August 21, 1984.