THE CITY ELECTRIC LIGHTING.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 898, 17 May 1889, Page 12

THE CITY ELECTRIC LIGHTING.

NOTES. j The City Council have de- j cided not to grant the to- j quest of the . Gtilcher Company for a lOin water main for the turbine at the

Featherston-street station. The contract j provides that the Company shall be supplied with water, free of charge, for a 30 horse-power turbine at each of two stations —one in Featherston-street and one in Manners-street, and the water power for working turbines of I hat capacity would be given by 3in mains. The j Council decided to give 6iu mains, but this ' theCompanyobjectto. They imported some j time ago (before the water question • cropped up) a turbine capable of develop- j ing 60 horse-power, with which they pur- j pose to do all the work at one station j instead of having two stations, and as the wheel of this turbine has a 10-inch inlet they ask for a 10-inch main. In reference to this the Corporation is advised that the required pressure even for a 50 horse-power turbine would be given by a 6-inch main, and that the size of the inlet is no real difficulty. Moreover, the Council itself is indisposed to gojbeyond a 6-inch service, feeling that it would be unwise to do anything which might reduce the available pressure of water in case' of fire ; and in this view they are supported by their engineer. Having given the Company what they consider an ample service, the Council are resolved to have the provisions of the contract carried out, and to have dynamos at two stations instead of at one—at any rate until a trial has been made. The Gtilcher Company have pointed out that, if there are two stations, a break-down at either may result in one-half the town being left in darkness, which difficulty would be almost if not entirely obviated by having the two turbines at one station. The City Engineer is of opinion that such a contingency may never occur, and that if it does the chances are in favour of it affecting the one station seriously, whereas it could only affect one of two stations if the contract is carried out. The reasons of the City Council for rejecting the Company’s proposals may, in short, be crystallised into these two objections : that the contract, being made, should be carried out ; and that they are unwilling to do that which may interfere with the city water supply and which, in their opinion, is unnecessary. When the light is in working order and a fair trial has been made, they will be prepared to consider any proposition that may seem reasonable to them.