View report page

38
The advantages claimed for the system may be summarised as—
(a.) Large saving in cables as compared with low tension
system.
(b.) Suitability for large districts where demand for light
may be scattered
(c.) District can be supplied from one central station which
can be erected either within or without the area to be
lighted.
The disadvantages of the system are mainly—
(a.) Dependence on running machinery, as it is not yet
adapted to charging accumulators.
(6.) Not commercially successful for working motors.
(c.) Slightly higher cost in working.
The third system mentioned above, viz., the high tension direct
current with motor transformers, is used at Oxford, Chelsea and
Sydenham. Direct or continuous currents of high pressure, up to about
1,500 volts, are generated at a central station and distributed to substations
situate in different parts of the area to be supplied, and at
these sub-stations transformed to a low pressure. The system does not
appear to be one which is generally acceptable, although it apparently
combines many advantages of both the low tension continuous and the
high tension alternating systems.
Your Committee has very carefully weighed the advantages and
disadvantages of the relative systems of supply which have been
brought under its notice. The claims and opinions of the advocates
of different systems are so diverse and contradictory that your Committee
has had no easy task in forming an opinion as to the system
best adapted for the Parish of Islington. Your Committee deems it
important to point out that Major Marindin in his report to the Board
of Trade on the inquiry held by him, in 1888, states that "of the
scientific witnesses called as to the relative merits of the two systems
of supply, the great majority were in favour of the alternating transformer
system for large areas." It is evident therefore, to your