HOT WATER SERVICE

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LIII, Issue 16506, 25 November 1927, Page 11

HOT WATER SERVICE

POWER BOARD'S SYSTEM CRITICISED

That the present system in vogue under the .Poverty Bay Power Board's administration in connection with household water-heating services is inefficient and ti'iuikely to appeal to prospective consumers was the gist of criticism offered at the board's meeting this morning'by Mr. C. 11. Williams, Mr." Williams explained that when the system was adopted, involving the use of current for water-heating while a stove installation in the same household is being used, the consumers were given to understand that the water-heaters Would be securing' current for practically 20' hows but of 24. This supposition was based on, the estimate that household stoves would not be nsed for moro than four hours a day, but that estimate was not borne out by the experiences of people who had largo families to cook for. By actual test, Mr. WiUiams said, in ono household it had been found that the water-heater did not get the current for mwe than 15 hours a day, and he contended that this would not permit of an efficient service such as the consumer was entitled to expect. In other parts of New Zealand, he pointed out, power boards were using time switches to ensure that the waterheating demand did not affect the peak load, and it was his intention to movo that the Poverty Bay Power Board abandon the present system of using changeover switches and substitute the use of time switches. If that step were taken, water-beating could be going on even though the stoves were in use, outside of the hours in which the peak load was experienced. He was aware. that the board was already selling current for water heating at less than it cost to prodnco, and the course ho suggested might result in further loss, j but he maintained that the board would retrieve tho loss by securing a bigger and more satisfied range of consumers by giving tho additional service, lie understood that when the Waikaremoana power -became available, it would 1 cost tho board nothing for the current employed in water heating, and this would limit any loss to a year, at any rate. Unless tho board changed its policy if would have trouble with itsconsumers, and they would have to face a loss, if necessary, to preserve the goodwill of the people who would be using the current; a loss might not be necessary, however, for there would be additional revenue from the owners of cooking ranges if the water-heating system could be mado efficient and attractive.

Mr. H. F. Toogood, consulting ento the boai'd, stated in reply to Mr. Williams that if the board were to have the water-heating demand at the peak load hours it would mean a big outlay in capital to bring the equipment up to the new standard. The use of the change-over switches, in his experience, had offered the best means of avoiding the additional costs, for the change-over switch enabled them to reduce equipment to the lowest possihlo capacity, thereby making great savings. This switch kept the water-heating demand off the maximum of the consumer's individual transformer, and also eliminated'' tho demand from the peak load at the powerhouse. It would cost from £5 to £6 per house to install time switches. However, he appreciated Mr. 'Williams' arguments, and though there were difficulties on the technical side as well as those he had presented to them he was prepared to go so far a.s to recommend the board to make a trial of time switches. Tho change-over switch was the best arrangement he could suggest, hut the trial of the time switch would be a valuable experiment. He was quite prepared to believe that eventually the board would have to go in for time switches on a comprehensive basis. On the motion of the chairman, seconded by Mr. Williams, it was decided to permit the installation of time switches by individual consumers, where, that was desired, at a rental to be fixed by the board.