THE PANAMA CANAL.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20318, 28 January 1928, Page 13

THE PANAMA CANAL.

A PROFITABLE ENTERPRISE. Will the Panama canal soon prove inadequate for the rapidly increasing traffic? The question has caused some alarm among those interested in Atlantic-Pacific sea transport (writes Anthony Clyne, in the Sydney Morning Herald), and there are sporadic attempts to create a scare. A proposal has been mooted for_ another transcontinental canal through Nicaragua. The idea seems <o be that as the Panama canal is so very profitable this would also be a paying enterprise. Profitable the canal certainly is. Last year 5650 ships passed through, and the tolls collected aggregated 24,289,605d01. The total expenditure of the United States on the canal was 8,373,905d01, which included all operating expenses, fixed . charges, the annual pament to the Republic of Panama and amounts required for amortisation. The United States will not contem. ' ite any reduction of tolls. “ The Panan.a canal is an obligation of the present generation, and must not be a burden on posterity. If it is not self-supporting, then the taxpayers will be called upon to pay.” Selfsupporting, forsooth, when the tolls amount to three times the expenditure, a great part paid by British ships! HALF-CAPACITY WORKING. Any anticipation of congestion causing a rise in the rate of toll per ton, as fixed by the Act of 1912, or causing delays and difficulties, might well cause uneasiness. But the fact is that at present the canal is working at less than half its capacity. It is operated only during the daytime, and there is no reason why it should not, if the need arises, work through the night. A portion of the renewals and repairs may at present be carried out at night, while traffic is stationary, but if necessary they could be effected without interference to the passage of ships except for slight delays. Dredging operations are now carried out at night, but apparatus could be manoeuvred and operated while traffic was passing. The canal is well lighted throughout its length. Continuous operation, with additional employees to furnish another shift and additional towing locomotives ana so on, would increase the capacity of the canal by about 40 per ctnt. . Moreover, the canal was planned in such a way to allow for an expansion of 50 per cent, in the capacity. All me locks are in duplicate. Thcre are six pairs, each of the same capacity, 1000 ft by 110 ft. This a double stream ot traffic to be dealt with. . Two ship? can be passed through a pair of gether. In the construction of the canal Ore possibility of adding a series °j locks was borne in mind, and each existing pair of locks was so located and planned that another could be built at the swe without interfering with the present twins. The cost of this would be only a £®iau fraction of the expenditure on the canal, since great excavation would not bereauired* The channel is adequate for a vastly-increased traffic, if the locks could deal with it. No radical alterations would be necessary as regards power generataon and the huge dams, while the supply ol water taking* into account the new reservoir in the Chagres Valley, would be ample. Some engineers who have studied fee problem advocate, not a ries of new locks of the same size parallel with thosa in existence, but an entirely new set of much larger dimensions. Now that a big Tv, boom is likely in the States, the protect of enlarging the canal will probably be brought up at the next Congress,, for the • i,_a iv, a nresent width of tho Jocks, iruiw limits the size of battleships. that the dimensions o! these fixed without reference to the canal, wnere as this is a limiting factor. THE NICARAGUA PROPOSAL. The original plans provided for locks qnoft bv 100 ft. In 1906 it was decided to increase the Pngth by 100 ft. and in 1908 the width by 10ft. General Goethals, then in supreme charge, obtained a consensus of expert opinion that the extreme economical size of the lock 2 a te 125 ft. Since then immense improvements in steel manufacture have taken place, enabling engineers to solve the problems of the greater strength required in larger gates, and the methods of operating gates, water supply, and so on. would present no further difficulties. The construction of much larger locks, the present ones being used meanwhile, would entail a nign expenditure compared with the cost ot a aeries of locks parallel with and similar to the present. . All fear of inadequacy during any reasonable future time is unjustifiable, but if this were not so a canal through Nicaragua would not be feasible. The cost would be enormous. John b. btevens. who was in charge at. Panama betore Goethals, estimated that it would reach at least 500,000,000 dollars, compared with the Panama Canal cost of 375,000,000 An estimate to-day would considerably raise the figure. The Panama Canal is a waterbridge, the water-line being for the greater part of its length 85ft above sea level. It is this which renders necessary the elaborate and massive arrangement of locks for raising and lowering vessels. But a canal through Nicaragua would need to he 115 ft above sea level, and this lift would entail, far greater expense. The passage of a ship would require at least 40 hours, compared with the eight to ten hours in the Panama. The provision of sufficient water would be very expensive, as there is not available such a convenient reservoir as the Chagres Valley. The culminating objection is that the canal would be subject to earth tremors, being within an earthquake zone, and undoubtedly would need constant repairs, if it were not put out °f action for long periods. One slight tremor would scotch the mechanism of the locks,