From the director…
Welcome
to Pipes & Wires #95. This month has a wide geographical coverage including
New Zealand, Australia, South Africa, China, the US and Europe and also a wide
disciplinary coverage ranging from policy and politics to strategy and mergers.
Over
the years I’ve tried to keep Pipes & Wires as apolitical and non-partisan
as possible, but unfortunately the increasing politicisation of many segments
of the industry such as CO2 emissions, smart meters, and embedded
generation makes that difficult. Hopefully readers will appreciate the added
excitement and intrigue !!!
Get Pipes & Wires “white-listed”
To
avoid being intercepted by your server as spam, please arrange to have phil.caffyn@utilityconsultants.co.nz
“white-listed” by your IT people.
Pipes & Wires on the web
Pipes & Wires on Linked In
Pipes
& Wires now has an on-line
group for readers to keep in touch on a more regular basis, bounce ideas
around or raise issues and concerns. Pick here
to visit my Linked In profile and add me
to your connections.
Pipes & Wires on Facebook
Pipes
& Wires now also has its own Facebook page. Just go to Facebook’s home page and search for Pipes
& Wires.
Pipes & Wires on YouTube
To
see a short video clip explaining more about Pipes & Wires, pick here.
Pipes & Wires on the web
To
read more about Pipes & Wires, pick here.
About Utility Consultants
Utility
Consultants Ltd is a management consultancy specialising in pretty much all aspects
of energy and infrastructure networks – pick here to see more, or
to be sent a detailed profile of recent projects, pick
here.
Energy policy
NZ – the Electricity Industry Bill becomes
law
Introduction
In
December 2009 the Minister
of Energy, Hon Gerry Brownlee, introduced the Electricity
Industry Bill “to improve competition ... and improve security of supply
...”. This lengthy article examines the final shape of
the Bill and the granting of royal assent.
Background to the Bill
The Bill’s stated purpose is to “improve
competition in the electricity market and improve security of supply by making
changes to the Electricity
Act 1992 and the Electricity
Industry Reform Act 1998”. The Minister subsequently commented that the aim is to
introduce more stability into pricing, rather than promise a fall in prices. The significant features of the original Bill included...
·
Transferring ownership of Tekapo A and B hydro stations
from Meridian Energy to Genesis Energy.
·
Transferring the ownership of the Whirinaki gas
turbine station from direct government ownership to Meridian Energy.
·
Allowing Meridian, Genesis and Mighty River Power to undertake
virtual asset swaps over the next 15 years to provide more competition in the
island where each has little or no generation.
·
Requiring all major generators to put
in place an accessible hedge market.
·
Allowing lines businesses to re-enter
retailing.
·
Abolishing the Electricity Commission and
replacing it with a slimmed down Electricity Authority.
·
Establishing a Security &
Reliability Council to monitor Transpower’s
performance and advise on security of supply.
·
Transferring responsibility for
approving grid upgrade approvals to the Commerce
Commission.
The
Minister’s opening speech of the Bill’s 2nd reading noted the
following 3 improvements that were made by the Committee...
·
That the transfer of Tekapo A and B from Meridian Energy to Genesis Energy would include the
protection of existing uses and rights, and would not impact on the Waitaki
Catchment Water Allocation Regional Plan.
·
Amendments to ensure that lines
businesses cannot engage in anti-competitive behavior if they re-enter the
retailing business.
·
Improving the incentives for lines
businesses to offer remote customers alternatives to grid-connected supply.
Timeline of the Bill’s passage
Key
steps of the Bill’s passage through Parliament included...
·
Introduction to Parliament – 10th
December 2009.
·
First reading – 15th
December 2009.
·
Finance & Expenditure Committee
reported – 9th June 2010.
·
Second reading – 20th July
2010.
·
Third reading – 23rd
September 2010.
·
Royal assent – 5th October
2010.
Key implications of the new Act
The
original Bill foreshadowed some important structural changes to the industry,
although some of those foreshadowed changes altered along the way. The key features
of the Electricity
Industry Act 2010 include...
·
Establishment of the Electricity
Authority as a Crown Entity (s12).
·
The requirement for the Authority to
establish a Security and Reliability Council to provide independent advice on
system performance and reliability issues (s20).
·
The continuation of the Rulings Panel
established under the Electricity Governance Regulations 2003 (s23).
·
Provision for the establishment of an
Electricity Industry Participation Code that will embody a number of previous
rules and regulations (s34).
·
Separation of distribution from certain
generation and retailing activities (ss 72 – 94).
·
Provision for reconfiguring ownership
of state-owned generation (ss 116 – 127).
·
Dissolution of the Electricity
Commission (s
133).
·
Transferring the role of approving Transpower’s investment plans to the Commerce Commission (s 54R).
·
Repealing of the Electricity Industry Reform Act 1998 (s 165).
So
... there we have it. That concludes Pipes & Wires coverage of the passage
of the Bill into law, but no doubt individual issues arising from the enactment
will be significant enough to discuss.
Global – a closer look at the trends in
feed-in tariffs
Introduction
Although
there is no doubt that solar energy is a hot topic (excuse the pun), the whole
area of feed-in tariffs
seems a bit murky and to many people, is completely out
of view. This article takes a closer look at feed-in tariffs, why they are so
important and what the latest trends are.
What exactly is a feed-in tariff ?
Feed-in
tariffs are payments made to electricity consumers who supply renewable
electricity back into the network they are connected to (in some areas the
feed-in tariff is also paid for the renewable energy
consumed on the consumers own premises). Usually a feed-in tariff is part
of wider policy mechanism to encourage renewables that may also include
guaranteed connection of renewable generation, and prices (paid to the
consumer) that reflect the capital cost of renewables. Feed-in tariffs also
avoid the very visible capital grants that many are becoming increasingly
uncomfortable with.
Why are feed-in tariffs so important ?
It
is generally accepted that renewable electricity is still more expensive than
grid-connected electricity, so feed-in tariffs effectively provide a subsidy to
those who adopt “greater-than-least-cost” generation.
Important features of feed-in tariffs
In a
world that is now increasingly uncomfortable with subsidies, feed-in tariffs
have the added advantage of disguising the subsidy vis-a-vis up-front capital
subsidies for installation. It’s also important to note that feed-in tariffs
must be subsidised by someone (generally other electricity users).
The trends in feed-in tariffs
Given
that feed-in tariffs and the wider renewable energy sector are riding high on
the green political surge, it shouldn’t come as any surprise that the associated
issues and concerns have a strong political twist to them that spreads broadly
across climate change, job creation, wealth distribution and even trade
barriers. The trends to date seem to have been...
·
A decline in up-front subsidies to
install solar panels, presumably driven by the increasing discomfort around
highly visible subsidies. One of the key effects of this policy shift was to
restrict uptake of solar panels to those rich enough to purchase and install
them (and a little thought would reveal that those who might install solar
panels for altruistic reasons probably don’t fall into this class).
·
The setting of feed-in tariffs in many
jurisdictions at a level high enough to attract cynical (but nonetheless smart)
investors who care little about saving the planet. This is now attracting media
criticism as simply further enriching the middle class.
·
Increasing
murmurs from governments about reducing the level of feed-in tariffs. This
has understandably been met with howls of protest from the industries that make
and supply solar panels and from the green political parties.
So
it’s going to be interesting to see how this final emerging trend really does
emerge and whether renewables are going to have to pay their own way.
US, UK – where to with the nuclear
option ?
Introduction
Readers
might remember Pipes & Wires examination of 2 deals involving Electricité de France (EDF) that seemed to
include wider government preferences for importing EDF’s nuclear expertise...
·
The bid for Constellation Energy (#78,
#84,
#88,
#92)
that included an agreement that Constellation would sell 49.99% of its nuclear
business to EDF for $4.5b.
·
The bid for British Energy (#75,
#76).
This
article examines recent movements in the political landscapes in both the US
and the UK that would seem to undermine the promise that nuclear generation
once seemed to hold.
Background
The
UK had recently pinned its energy and climate change hopes on a new generation
of nuclear power stations, and it seems many parts of the US also had. In
amongst it all it seemed to go unspoken that some sort of direct or indirect
subsidy would be required in both jurisdictions.
The UK situation
The
Coalition’s “our
program for government” clearly notes the divergent views of the Lib Dems (opposing any new
nuclear construction) and the Tories
(committed to allowing replacement of existing nuclear stations as long as all
usual planning criteria are met and there is no public subsidy). However a
subsequent comment from the Lib Dem’s energy
secretary Chris Huhne commented that “nuclear will play a key part in the
UK’s energy mix” and that investors will come forward with commercially viable
proposals (and EDF seemed to take a lot of
comfort from Huhne’s remark).
The US situation
In
the US, Constellation’s
relationship with EDF has become increasingly strained as Constellation concluded
that the terms of a federal loan guarantee to support its planned Calvert
Cliffs #3 nuclear station were unacceptable. As in the UK, nuclear was
going to be Maryland’s answer to reducing CO2 emissions and
improving air quality. The situation in the US seems to have an interesting
dual nature that is likely to be played out in coming months after the mid-term
elections....
·
The Democrats have tended to oppose
nuclear power, but are likely to embrace legislation that promotes CO2
emission reduction which by implication is likely to advocate and possibly even
subsidise nuclear.
·
The Republicans have tended to embrace
nuclear power per se, but are
unlikely to accept the emission-reduction policies that could advocate and
possibly subsidise nuclear.
Looking forward
Looking
forward over the next few months it will be interesting to see how investors
respond to the signal in the UK that public subsidies are unlikely and the
seemingly wide gap in the US that could go anywhere depending on the mid-term
elections.
Industry reform
South Africa – consolidating
electricity distribution
Introduction
Long-time
readers may recall that years ago Pipes & Wires looked at the consolidation
of electricity distribution in South Africa and noted that after consideration
of some apparently sound commercial principles, things ground to a halt. This
article briefly re-examines that grinding to a halt and investigates what, if
anything, has happened since.
The consolidation proposal
The
original proposal (Pipes
& Wires #28) was for Eskom’s
distribution activity and 187 municipal distributors to be consolidated into
between 5 and 15 Regional Electricity Distributors (RED’s). RED1 was to be the
pilot for the other RED’s, and was intended to be the distributor in the
Western Cape. The City
Of Cape Town’s distribution business was expected to be the starting point
for establishing RED1 over the period 1st July 2005 to 30th
June 2006 whereupon it would be granted an interim supply license by the National Electricity Regulator and then
work would start on rolling Eskom’s Western Region distribution into RED1 (an
added pressure was that the City was consolidating its offices into a single
location and needed the electricity department to get out).
The proposal unravels
It
was initially proposed that RED1 would be controlled by a board appointed by the
City Of Cape Town, however the other municipalities that stood to lose the
profits from their own electricity businesses were not so keen. In October 2006
the government then announced that all 6 RED’s would be owned by a government
corporation (EDI Holdings), so
understandably Cape Town’s interest vanished on the presumption that the
electricity profits would go to the government (which the government
subsequently denied would occur).
In
the end the NER withdrew RED1’s supply license that had initially been issued
on an interim basis on 1st July 2006 because RED1 had failed to meet
the conditions of the license. That left Cape Town’s distribution system back
in the hands of the City, which is about where we left the story in March 2007.
Recent events
Probably
the most significant and indeed controversial recent event in the establishment
of RED’s was the Constitution
17th Amendment Bill 2009. In summary, the Bill would allow for
an Act of Parliament to (further) regulate municipal authority where...
· It is necessary to achieve regional efficiencies and
economies of scale in respect of a specific municipal function.
· Municipal boundaries and executive authority negatively
impede those efficiencies and economies of scale.
It
appears that the 17th Amendment was drafted specifically with
electricity in mind, although it could foreseeably also be used to rationalise
water and other municipal activities. The Amendment has understandably
attracted widespread criticism ranging from concerns around an unconstitutional
transfer of municipal oversight from provincial level to a national level, to claims
that it is simply a means for the ANC to usurp authority in municipalities that
it doesn’t already control.
Looking
back on all the political ruminations in mid-2009 it was clear that there was a
widening gap between opponents on one hand and on the other hand officials who
claimed that agreement was near. Meanwhile the estimated R28b nation-wide
back-log of maintenance is creeping upwards at about R2.5b per year.
As
of late August 2010, it appears that the Bill was still being processed by
Parliament, but it also appears that the lack of reinvestment in distribution
is also high amongst Cabinet’s concerns. Pipes & Wires will follow this
issue as progress emerges.
Famous power struggles
The
electrical history of many cities and countries includes bitter struggles
either between public and private interests seeking exclusive rights to
distribute and sell electricity, or between competing private interests. This
historical interest series examines some of those struggles.
Battle of the currents (London 1880’s -
1920’s)
Introduction
Most
of us have a vague awareness that AC battled DC sometime around
1890 and that AC quickly won the battle for technical reasons. What is
perhaps less well known is the battle between various voltages and frequencies
that continued on. This historical interest article examines the multitude of
voltages and frequencies that emerged in London from the 1880’s to the 1920’s
and how industry consolidation was required to eventually settle on 230V, 50Hz.
The early days
Electricity
supplies tended to be very localised due to the low
voltages used until about 1891 when Sebastian
Ferranti opened his huge 800kW power
station at Deptford that distributed at 10kV. Within 3 years, high voltage
supply from steam turbine driven stations became the norm. Many of these
emerging electricity companies had strong legacy connections with public
lighting and tramways rather than domestic and commercial supply.
Fragmented supplies proliferate
A
major component of the original legislative framework (the Electric
Lighting Act 1882) granted powers to local councils to firstly install
poles and cables in streets, and secondly to raise
loans for public lighting. Not surprisingly the emerging electricity system was
a hotch-potch of small, isolated networks that followed each council’s geographical
boundaries, and by 1921 there 80 separate electricity undertakings in the
Greater London area that included 24 different voltages and 10 different
frequencies.
It
appears that some consolidation of small isolated boroughs occurred in 1900,
but it is not clear whether this resulted in any consolidation of the
associated electricity undertakings.
Attempts to coordinate voltage and frequency
Attempts
to consolidate London’s electricity supplies appear to have had an indirect,
informal component as well as a direct, formal component...
·
The adoption of high voltage supply
around 1900 appears to have indirectly and informally led to larger supply
authorities, although as noted above there were still 80 separate undertakings
in 1921. Presumably there would have been a lot more if high voltage supply
hadn’t been adopted.
·
History records several attempts to directly and formally consolidate
supply through legislative means, however it appears that the resulting
institutions lacked strong powers to force consolidation. The London
& Home Counties Joint Electricity Authority of 1925 did have more
extensive powers and eventually saw the consolidation of supply in such areas as
Hammersmith, Islington, Finchley and Wimbledon by about 1933.
The national grid emerges
Slow
progress with consolidation led to the establishment of a Central
Electricity Board in 1926 following a report by Lord Weir. The
purpose of the Board was to buy electricity from the most efficient power
stations and sell it to which ever authorities were willing to buy it. This
included the development of a 132kV grid encircling London between 1928 and
1933 to interconnect about 160 power stations (with a further 440 older,
inefficient stations being closed down) which included the 480MW station at Battersea.
Voltage and frequency finally
consolidates
The
consolidation at high voltage level obviously required adoption of a standard
low voltage and a common frequency, which eventually settled on 230V, 50Hz
(probably because 50Hz is sufficiently high enough to avoid annoying light
flicker). However, even as late as 1969, several London boroughs were still
distributing non-standard voltages and in some cases DC.
All
this seems a far cry from the now consolidated London
Electricity (soon to belong to Cheung Kong
Infrastructure).
Mergers & acquisitions
US - First Energy’s bid for Allegheny
gets shareholder approval
Introduction
Pipes
& Wires #90 examined First Energy Corp’s
all-stock and debt bid for Allegheny Energy
which would create the largest electric utility in the US with about 6,000,000
customers and annual revenues of about $16b. This article notes the approval of
both company’s shareholders and makes a quick progress check on the necessary
regulatory approvals.
Shareholders give approval
In
mid-September Allegheny’s shareholders voted to approve the merger, following
on from the previous approval of First Energy’s shareholders.
Required regulatory approvals
The
regulatory approvals by the FERC and the
state regulators in Ohio, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, West Virginia, Virginia and Maryland seem to be
progressing well enough. Not surprisingly, the loss of professional jobs from
Allegheny’s corporate and regional offices has been a prominent theme at the
regulatory hearings. Pipes & Wires will make further comment hopefully in
late November or early December as each decision emerges.
Regulatory policy
NZ – regulating the new ultra-fast
broadband
Introduction
The
government’s ultra-fast
broadband (UFB) initiative has taken the electricity distribution industry
by storm, with many distribution businesses submitting proposals to roll out
fiber. This thought piece examines the recently announced 10
year “regulatory holiday” for the planned fiber networks and considers
whether fiber needs to be regulated at all.
Should fiber be regulated at all ?
Most
of us accept the need for pipes & wires businesses to be regulated to
off-set the lack of consumer choice, but I can’t help wondering whether what
appears to be a simple linear extension of that thinking overlooks the
following issues....
·
The competition (admittedly, lower
speed offerings) that fiber is likely to face from existing ADSL, wireless and the
next
generation of 100MB over existing networks.
·
That the fiber roll out (and therefore
presumably the capital costs that access charges will need to reflect) has been
done competitively.
·
That the third-party access charges
will be set by agreement with a government agency (Crown Fiber Holdings).
The proposed regulatory holiday
The
recently announced 10 year “regulatory holiday” from the provisions of the Telecommunications
Act 2001 is based on the government’s view that investors need certainty,
which is certainly commendable. It has become very well established that
infrastructure investors are very sensitive to the heightened uncertainty that
regulatory coverage brings, so it is good to see government responding
positively to that. Not surprisingly, the opposition party have lashed out at
the proposal and marked it for priority if they win the next election.
The parallel issue of intellectual
property protection
I
guess we could draw the parallel that if the potential profits from “good
ideas” were not able to be protected from competition for an initial period by
various classes of intellectual property protection, people wouldn’t bother to
have those good ideas (eg. software, drugs, electronic components etc).
Similarly, if invested capital is not protected from competition for at least
an initial period, investors are unlikely to commit and then we all miss out.
So
... interesting stuff, and a bit of a new twist to regulation. Although this is
outside of Pipes & Wires usual emphasis on pipes & wires I think it is
significant enough to merit further examination.
Energy markets
China – meeting demand for gas
Introduction
China
seems to be a country that most of us either know little about or lots about,
although most of us are keenly aware that China’s demand for energy seems
insatiable even in the midst of the global recession. This article examines
some recent gas supply deals with China.
China’s demand for energy
A
good starting point would be to put some firm numbers around China’s demand for
gas. According to the US Department of Energy,
China produces about 2,930 PJ per year and consumes about 3,075 PJ per year which
requires imports of about 145 PJ per year. China has estimated reserves of
about 80,000 PJ (the DOE figures are in BCF, which I’ve converted to PJ at an
approximation of 1:1). Perhaps even more mind-boggling, gas represents only a
small percentage of China’s primary energy consumption (about 3% in 2006).
The deals
Earlier
in October 2010 China’s National Petroleum
Corporation (CNPC) concluded a deal with GDF
Suez to supply 2,600,000 tons of LNG over a 4 year period from 2013. This
corresponds to about 145 PJ or 44 ship-loads of LNG and is thought to be worth
about US$1b. This deal represents both a strategic positioning in the Chinese
gas market for GDF Suez and also a welcome relief to reduced gas sales in
Europe.
Meanwhile
Russian gas utility OAO Gazprom has
agreed to the terms (including volumes and cut-off points) for continued gas
supply to CNPC, but has yet to finalise the price. Gazprom expects to be able
to supply China with about 35 PJ per year from 2015 onwards
It
would appear that these 2 deals will (eventually) make up about half of China’s
(current) annual shortfall so presumably there is room for either more imports
or increased local production. Fortunately the quantities involved in these
deals are only about 1% of globally traded volumes, so it shouldn’t upset the
market.
Corporate strategy
Global – examining E.On’s “On Top”
strategy
Introduction
E.On’s many and various acquisition bids are
never far away from the pages of Pipes & Wires, however the long trend of
apparently sound deals seems to have unraveled as news emerges that the actual earnings
have been less than what was forecast. This lengthy article revisits E.On’s “On
Top” strategy that was discussed in Pipes
& Wires #23 and again in #48
and takes a look at how some of the resulting deals have eventuated.
The “On Top” Strategy
The
“On Top” strategy aimed to generate double-digit percentage growth in dividend
payout over the 2003 to 2006 period by growing in 5 well defined markets
principally through acquisition. These 5 areas which may involve up to €28b of
acquisitions by the end of 2005 were…
· Pan-European gas transport and storage which will be
overseen by Ruhr Gas, and will focus
strongly on privatisation of gas transmission utilities in the former Soviet
bloc.
· Consolidation of the central European distribution &
retail energy markets that will be overseen by E.On Energie.
· Strengthening of the Scandinavian market position primarily
through Sydkraft which was then already in
the process of acquiring Graninge.
· Strengthening of the
· Expansion in the
A guiding
principle of “On Top” is to systematically capture the synergies implicit in
all acquisitions and ensure those synergies are returned to shareholders.
So has E.On come out “On Top” ?
A
few years ago it seemed that E.On was coming out “On Top” as it focused clearly
on deals with apparently strong synergies, potential efficiency gains and good
market growth prospects. This discipline seemed to be further vindicated when
E.On’s stock rose 2.65% on the announcement that the ScottishPower bid had been abandoned.
So has E.On come out “On Top” ?
Pipes
& Wires #92 noted that Louisville Gas
& Electric took an impairment charge of about €2.4b soon after E.On
acquired it in 2002 (even for a company the size of E.On that’s still a big
hit), and that more recently E.On’s earnings growth has begun to really lag
rivals such as RWE and EDF. It appears that E.On’s long-term growth
strategy is now being rapidly replaced with a “slash costs and improve
efficiencies” strategy. It wouldn’t be completely surprising if E.On announced
some major asset sales, with the UK
distribution business being prominent in the wake of the keen interest in EDF Energy’s distribution business.
E.On deals featured in Pipes &
Wires
Just
for curiosity’s sake, the following E.On deals have featured in Pipes &
Wires since March 2001....
·
E.On’s takeover of EDASZ is approved (#15).
·
E.On sells stake in Bayerngas (#19).
·
E.On consolidates its’ position in
Czech Republic (#20).
·
E.On launches gas expansion strategy (#20).
·
E.On extends its’ reach (#20).
·
E.On gets “On Top” of Aquila Networks (#23).
·
E.On eyes ScottishPower (#45).
·
E.On’s bid for Endesa ( #49,
#52,
#53,
#54,
#56,
#57,
#58).
·
E.On refocuses on industry
consolidation (#59).
·
E.On plays out the end game (#62).
·
E.On creates acquisition opportunities
(#81).
·
E.On sells EHV grid to TenneT (#88).
·
E.On sells stake in BKW FMB Energie (#93).
·
E.On sells E.On US to PPL (#92,
#93,
#94).
A
bit of a look down here suggests a number of eras in E.On’s activities....
·
Acquisitions of assorted stakes in the
former Soviet-block countries, along with a bit of associated horse-trading of
other small stakes.
·
Major expansion strategy into gas
transmission through the Ruhr Gas acquisition.
·
Promulgation of the refined “On Top”
strategy.
·
Various cautious bids for controlling
or total stakes in continental Europe as the industry consolidated.
·
An apparent pre-empting of the Third
Package by selling the EHV grid and possibly signaling a migration of
capital away from lines to energy.
·
What appears to a trickle turning into
a torrent as various underperforming stakes are sold (and E.On foregoes the
opportunity to catch EDF Energy’s UK distribution business).
·
An era of rapid cost cutting to restore
earnings.
People in power
A
couple of years ago Pipes & Wires featured the life stories of some blokes
born in the late 1800’s who shaped the electric power industry as we now know
it. Researching and writing those articles was a lot of fun, so I’m going to
write a few more (and if anyone wants an electrical pioneer to be researched
and included, pick here
to contact me).
John Butters wires up Tasmania
Birth and education
John
Henry Butters was born at Alverstoke,
England on 23rd December 1885. His trade and technical education
spanned 1898 to 1904 and culminated in a B.Sc (Eng) from London University and a Certificate in
Electrical Engineering from Hartley College.
Early work experience in the electrical
industry
Around
1904 John joined Thorneycroft’s
in Southampton, but a year later moved on to Siemens
dynamo works in Stafford. In 1908 Siemens moved John to London as a design
engineer and project estimator, and then in 1909 moved him to Melbourne.
For
the next 3 years John advised on a range of electricity, transportation and
mining projects including the Hora Hora Power Station in New Zealand and the Adelaide municipal
tramways. It was whilst working on a project for the Complex Ores Company
Ltd in Tasmania that John resigned from Siemens to design the Great Lake dam,
power station and transmission lines. When Complex Ores ran into financial
difficulty and was taken over by the Tasmanian government as the Hydro-Electric
Department, John was appointed general manager at the salary of £1,000 per
year.
In
1922 John also visited New Zealand to advise the Auckland Electric Power Board
on options for supply.
John’s other activities
Before,
during and after John’s intensive electricity industry involvement he was also
involved in the following (and there was much more than what’s listed below)....
·
Military service from 1909 to 1921
(although he was denied active service during WW1, presumably because of his
critical role with the HED).
·
Membership of the Commonwealth Advisory
Council of Science and Industry in 1916.
·
Membership of a royal commission on the
wheat industry in 1917.
·
President of the Tasmanian Institute Of
Engineers in 1918.
·
Chairman of the Tasmanian division of
the Institute of Engineers
in 1920.
·
Chairman of the faculty of engineering
at the University of Tasmania in 1921.
Establishing the capital city of Canberra
In
1924 John was the successful applicant to chair the Federal Capital Commission
at the unheard of salary of £3,000 per year. The key task was to expedite the
development of Canberra as a capital city, which John achieved in about 30
months following the government’s decision to base the entire public service in
Canberra, and not just a small secretariat.
Life after Canberra
As
the Commission’s activities were due to wind up, John pre-empted redundancy by resigning
in 1929 and moved to Sydney where his practice as a consulting engineer was
interspersed with various directorships and commission roles until ill health
forced his retirement in 1967. John died on 29th July 1969 and was
survived by his wife Lillian and 4 children. John achievements are commemorated
in the John
Butters Power Station in Tasmania and Butters Drive in suburban Canberra.
A bit of light reading…
Book review – “Switching On The King
Country”
Helen Reilly’s latest
book examines electricity in the King Country area of New Zealand’s north
island from the beginnings of electric light in 1911 through to the present era
(2008). In 220 pages jammed packed with stories, anecdotes, interviews,
photo’s, maps and drawings the book chronicles the development of the Waitomo,
Wairere and King Country Electric Power Boards and the Taumarunui, Ohakune and
Raetihi Borough electricity departments and the eventual formation of The Lines Company and King Country Energy. The chapter headings
include....
·
From candlelight to electric light 1911
– 1924.
·
Power in the borough is in short supply
1924 – 1939.
·
Rural communities are eventually
electrified 1939 – 1958.
·
Consolidation and expansion 1959 –
1969.
·
Upgrades, amalgamations and reforms
1970 – 1989.
·
A decade of government reforms and
company development 1989 – 1999.
·
Coming to grips with separation 1999 –
2007.
·
New challenges for rural electricity
companies 2008 -
For
those (like me) that enjoy history this book is a must have. Order yours for
the exceptionally low price of $39.95 (includes NZ postage and packaging) from
the King Country Electric Power Trust by picking here.
Wanted – old electricity history books
If
anyone has an old copy of the following books (or any similar books) they no
longer want I’d be happy to give them a good home…
·
White Diamonds North.
·
Northwards March The Pylons.
·
Marlborough Will Shine Through.
·
Two Per Mile.
·
Live Lines (the old ESAA journal)
Conferences & events
The following
training courses will be run by Conferenz...
·
Fundamentals
of the NZ electricity industry – Auckland, 24th – 25th
November 2010.
·
Offshore
safety & risk management for the oil industry – New Plymouth, 21st
– 22nd February 2011.
·
Marine
drilling for the oil & gas industry – New Plymouth, 23rd –
25th February 2011.
The
following conference will be run by Conferenz...
·
2nd
New Zealand Smart Grids Conference – Wellington, 17th – 18th
November 2010.
Opt out from Pipes & Wires
Pick
this link
to opt out from Pipes & Wires. Please ensure that you send from the email
address we send Pipes & Wires to.
Disclaimer
These articles
are of a general nature and are not intended as specific legal, consulting or
investment advice, and are correct at the time of writing. In particular Pipes
& Wires may make forward looking or speculative statements, projections or
estimates of such matters as industry structural changes, merger outcomes or
regulatory determinations.
Utility
Consultants Ltd accepts no liability for action or inaction based on the
contents of Pipes & Wires including any loss, damage or exposure to
offensive material from linking to any websites contained herein.