OUR READERS SAY:

Waikato Independent, Volume XL, Issue 3678, 9 March 1940, Page 2

OUR READERS SAY:

(The Editor will welcome letters on subjects of public interest. The Waikato Independent, however, does not hold itself responsible for opinions expressed by correspondents). SAFETY FIRST (To the Editor). Sir, In the interests of public safety I would endeavour to draw attention, through your paper, to what, jn the writer's opinion, constitutes a real potential danger. I refer to the operating gear erected by the Power Board controlling an airbreak switch at the intersection of Grosvenor and Williams Streets. This is placed a few feet above ground level, within reach of pedestrians, and it is possible for it to become alive with a dangerous potential, due either to accidental contact, or during a heavy storm deluge. Why look for trouble? (The potential difference between phases on lines here is, I believe, 11,000), when standard line practice indicates its only safe position, and operable from the transformer jaflatform alone. Yours, etc., "INSULATION." FUEL ALTERNATIVES FOR TRANSPORT (To the Editor). Sir, Facing the probability of much jnore severe restrictions relative to .supplies of liquid fuel which, in the existing circumstances, is.definitely

the Nation's lifeblood, little or nothing has been done by those who should be expected to point a way that would ensure something approaching continuity of our various land transport services. Town gas as a fuel for road transport and the advantages of the low pressure system and the method of its application is holding out both hands for recognition, and if our war measures are to count for anything at all, this is essentially one of the major problems, and in municipally owned gasworks, some effort should be directed to enable its product, to release for war purposes the liquid fuel.

With gas of a calorific value of 500 B.Th.U. which is the accepted standard, 250 cubic feet will give results approximately equal to one gallon of petrol. Conversion of the average truck up to two tons is a simple matter, calling for a fabric gas bag and gas carburettor, no structural alterations being required, and the cost complete including fitting under £2O. Taking as a basis 250 cubic feet of gas as being equal to one gallon of petrol; it is not difficult to see that in most districts this system will show a considerable saving in fuel costs. With the adoption of a standard two-inch 8.0. P. fitting for gas container this with stand-pipes at points on Ihe reticulation, there is nothing to prevent a motor lorry operating over considerable distances, and with a ton load up should 15 miles before re-fuelling was necessary. There are drawbacks, including a reduction in engine power of 20 per cent, but in operation it will be found to give improved acceleration and take full throttle

from cold, and show a lower lubricating oil consumption. I think it will be seen that in spite of the apparent inconvenience this system at the present time is the cheapest and simplest way of providing an alternative fuel for motor vehicles that may in the near future have to cease functioning for the lack of fuel supplies. For extended radius of operation the portable gas producer, using as a fuel either gas coke or anthracite has the field to itself. The fuel cost per mile, with fuel at GO/- per ton, is under one penny, roughly .7d., compared with petrol at 1.93 d and Deisel oil at one penny. If our transport services are to benefit the engineer has now his opportunity, which shoujd be free from restrictions, many of which today are strangling industry.

Yours, etc., 'CALORIC."