Richard Healey & ODT: Alarm after night of pole failures

Don't you sometimes wonder whose side Mayors are on? There is concern about low turnout for elections, smaller and smaller proportion of people bothering to vote. Could it be because of growing impressions that politicians, local and central government, have agendas so far removed from what ordinary people without money & influence need, the only time we matter is when our votes can put them into positions of power. Look carefully at the record of basic integrity of candidates, not what they say before an election.

 

Richard Healey

For almost three years I've tried to talk to CODC mayor Tim Cadogen about the risk that Aurora Energy's incompetence poses to his community. He has refused to engage.
For almost three years I have predicted a doubling of line charges for the customers of Aurora Energy. More recently I have highlighted the fact that Tim Cadogen's constituents already pay around double the line charges of the people of Dunedin - and only slightly less than double the line charges of customers in the Wakatipu. Tim Cadogen refuses to engage.

A couple of nights ago this happens. Tim Cadogen refuses to engage.
Clearly I need to say this again. It should by now be obvious to everyone that Aurora Energy does not operate a safe and reliable network.
Under the leadership of Richard Fletcher and Steve Thompson, it's clear to me that it continues to demonstrate that it does not have the skills or understanding necessary to identify or remediate the most dangerous structures on its network. It continues to use pole testing systems which, clearly, do not work - and that doesn't just mean Deuar. It continues to "reinforce" poles without having a clue how that changes the ultimate limit state of those structures because it does not take into account the resultant foundation strength.
All of that will be gobbeldy gook to many of you, but it's important to state it in this way because when, as I believe it surely will, this appalling situation results in death or serious injury it will be necessary to show the pattern of behaviour followed by the board and it's managers.
You might have noticed in the past few months that I've backed off Aurora somewhat. That is not because I believe their performance has improved, in my view it certainly hasn't. I've been busy helping some very brave and determined people to try to get justice for 29 men killed in another workplace disaster.

God help me, I hope that I won't soon find myself in a similar position to the Pike families. If I do it will simply be because of the complete arrogance of the people involved in the Aurora debacle, but if I do - God help them too.

https://www.facebook.com/richard.healey.522/posts/10159278465719848 

____________________________ 

Thursday, 8 August 2019

Alarm after night of pole failures

By Pam Jones

A new power pole is put up outside Alexandra's netball courts on Tuesday morning. Photo: Supplied

 

Four power poles in Alexandra fell down on one night this week, prompting the local community board to again demand answers from lines company Aurora.

The Vincent Community Board this week approved an urgent, ''last-minute'' motion from board member Russell Garbutt for board chairwoman Sharleen Stirling-Lindsay to write to Aurora ''to express our concern and disgust'' about the pole failures....

...Electricity was cut to 1900 households in the Alexandra and Omakau areas about 7pm on Monday after a high-voltage pole near the Alexandra netball courts fell during high winds.

Crews worked through the night and power was restored at 4.27am on Tuesday.

Three low-voltage poles at the quarry end of Clutha St also fell during the high winds overnight on Monday, cutting power to 90 customers in that area.

Power was restored at about 11am on Tuesday....

...But Mr Garbutt said at Tuesday's board meeting he was alarmed by the pole failures.

Mr Garbutt has led other previous questioning of Aurora, after three poles fell down in Alexandra in just over three months in 2017, and one in Clyde about a year later.

An Aurora delegation headed by chief executive Richard Fletcher subsequently gave presentations to the board and Central Otago District Council, earlier this year, after Mr Garbutt challenged Aurora on its pole testing regime, under-investment in the Central Otago region, failing network and lack of accountability.

The delegation outlined Aurora's increasing investment in the Otago network........https://www.odt.co.nz/regions/central-otago/alarm-after-night-pole-failures#comments

Comments

Login or register to post comments.

Jorge Thu, 08/08/2019 - 9:06am #

Were is workplace or health and safety. It is just criminal to being putting the public in such danger.

Richard Healey Thu, 08/08/2019 - 9:24am #

Three years after this train wreck started we have the latest in a frightening series of asset failures in Alexandra and STILL Tim Cadogen takes no action on behalf of his community. Even more galling, the customers in Alexandra are paying twice level of line charges as those payed by a typical consumer in Dunedin for the privilege of having these dangerous structures litter their streets.

This is not, and never had been, a simple story of . This is, and always has been, a story of chronic mismanagement.

Diane Yeldon Thu, 08/08/2019 - 11:00am #

How Aurora identifies which of its power poles are not up to standard regarding resistance to an acceptable wind speed. Waits for them to fall over. They need more than a SMACK for this!

Waterfront vision, costs scrutinised - Rob Hamlin - ODT

Tuesday, 2 April 2019

Waterfront idea simply fails to stack up

 78 3 

1. Opinion

When it comes to Dunedin’s proposed waterfront vision, Robert Hamlin urges everyone to think carefully.

In a recent opinion article Angus Mackay (25.3.19) suggested that the ratepayer contribution to the new waterfront development would be: "linking the cycleways together, inclusion of green spaces, shrubbery, parking, lighting, seating and stormwater flow, but this will likely be a relatively minor cost''.

Indeed? When Forsyth Barr Stadium was proposed, business was to pay all its costs and that consequently no ratepayer funding would be required. Eventually, nearly all of the stadium's costs were funded by ratepayers or taxpayers. Business was just not interested.

The reasons for this are easy to calculate. Assuming a cost of $200million and repayments span of 20 years, the required debt repayment comes to $16.9million a year at 5.9%. Actually, the bill would have been a lot higher because the banks would charge a higher interest rate for risky business proposals. A more realistic commercial interest figure would be 12% - which gives a repayment figure of $26.5million a year.

Then there are the running costs of the stadium, which the DCC is careful to disguise within the workings of DCHL, but which appear (optimistically) to be in the order of $8million a year. This gives us an annual "business'' cost for the stadium of $34.5million a year. Thus a business simply to break even with its "private'' stadium would have required an act to come to Dunedin and pay it a $665,000 fee every week, without fail, for 20 years.

Predictably, businesses did the sums, found this scenario to be wholly incredible and sensibly kept their wallets well out of harm's way. Regrettably, the Dunedin City Council at the time did not do so, as this process came to life.

The current annual cost of the stadium to the ratepayers (assuming the lower interest rate) appears to be around $25million a year. This is a straight loss, as it appears that this is not in any way offset by revenue as it seems DVML pays its occasional acts to use the stadium rather than the other way around.

One has to rely on indirect analysis, as the nature and direction of any stadium-related fees paid are "confidential'', to put it mildly. Most of this loss goes straight out of the city as debt repayments, which are not included in any economic impact assessments of the stadium.

All this being said, the stadium is a "sunk cost'' that is powerfully backed by its proponents. However, we should heed the lessons of it, in order to avoid a repetition. This community, now approaching a billion dollars in debt and with a catastrophically and strategically neglected infrastructure, simply cannot take another ``hit'' of this magnitude.

This is why we need to carefully examine this latest "whizz-bang'' proposal that will apparently cost us a few cents. One look at these designs would suggest that no private onshore developer would construct this design given the extravagant nature of the structures and the terrain on which they are to be built. The hydraulically deposited mud in this location is hundreds of feet deep, and new land will have to be created in this hostile environment before these ferro-concrete extravaganzas can be placed upon it.

The business case is also weak to non-existent. Mr MacKay describes what will be there as: "... five-star hotel, a cultural (convention) centre, a science (climate-change) innovation centre, apartments and cafes''.

We need to know exactly how much this development will cost to construct, and how the direct revenue streams for each of the activities listed by Mr MacKay will use the facilities of it and combine to create a direct revenue stream that will exceed that amount.

If we start to hear the predictable rubbish about "economic impact'' then you may be sure that this direct revenue will not be forthcoming, and that you, the ratepayer, will end up footing the bill. That bill may eventually include your water supply, your power supply and the port - so think carefully.

Finally, much has been made about the need for a "managed retreat'' from South Dunedin. If so, then why on earth would anybody make a massive investment at the same height above sea level in the same place? Recent events in Wellington indicate the global insurance industry is getting selective about what it will insure in this country. A massive mud-based development a few inches above sea level is unlikely to impress it. An uninsurable asset (building and contents) is a worthless one, and this complex would be a stroke of a reinsurer's pen from being exactly that. Given this, Mr Mackay's inclusion of a "science (climate-change) innovation centre'' has a certain droll humour to it!

• Dr Robert Hamlin is a senior lecturer in the marketing department at the University of Otago