The admission of further evidence on New Zealand's
electricity industry was approved during the Project Hayes
wind farm hearing on Thursday - and the evidence was then
withdrawn.
Appellant Roch Sullivan interrupted proceedings to make an
application for an "Electricity Commission" report to be
considered by the court, and used in cross-examination of a
witness.
Mr Sullivan said the 59-page report had been released by the
Electricity Commission this week, and related to evidence
being given by London professor Goran Strbac, on the
logistics of integrating wind-generated electricity into the
country's transmission network.
"The report is on how New Zealand can cope with dry years. It
included eight recommendations, not one of which suggest wind
is the answer. Prof Strbac and the parties should be given
time to read the report and any parties should be able to
cross-examine the professor on the report and any comments he
may have on it," Mr Sullivan said.
In his written evidence, Prof Strbac said wind-generated
electricity would be relatively cheap to integrate into New
Zealand's transmission system, and would be complemented by
the flexibility of existing hydro generation. He had taken
dry years into account, when less water was available for
hydro generation.
Appellant Ewan Carr supported Mr Sullivan's application, and
appellant counsel Mike Holm said if relevant, the report
should be considered.
Meridian counsel Hugh Rennie QC said Mr Sullivan had not
given any notice of his intention to make the application,
and therefore Meridian was not prepared.
"Mr Sullivan's assumptions of the report may or may not be
correct, I have not had a chance to read it. It's entirely
premature to presume that there's anything in the report that
should be put to the professor," he said.
Judge Jon Jackson said the report may not be relevant,
although he granted the application on a limited basis by
asking Prof Strbac to read the report and inform the court
whether it had any bearing on his evidence.
"My gut feeling is it's highly likely to be irrelevant,"
Judge Jackson said.
Less than one hour later, Mr Sullivan told the court he had
reviewed the report, and did not have any questions to put to
Prof Strbac. "I apologise, this morning I came straight from
the photo-copiers to the court . . . without reading the
entire document."
After seeing the report, Mr Rennie said it was not produced
by the Electricity Commission, but was instead an "external
review which did not represent the views of the commission".
Judge Jackson gave back his copy of the report to indicate it
had not formally been produced as evidence.
A name, residential address, and (preferably residential) telephone number is required from readers who comment on ODT Online. These details will not be visible to site visitors.