Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The cost would be enormous, the environmental impact would be huge, every time they had to dig it up for repairs the same people bleating about the trees would bleat about that, too.
Pole based power lines are the norm throughout the world, cities like Manhattan went underground over 100 years ago when the number of wires quickly exceeded the available pole space. But you question what you see on LI; it was the norm up until about the 90's when utilities started looking at underground placement. Realize underground options may vary depending on the water table, ground conditions and how the legal easements were established, if you want underground utilities then move to a locality where there is new construction and the wires are placed underground. Based on the expense and legal hassles can you imagine the uproar if they tried to bury the lines, just read the comments on the tree trimming and magnify that by 200....
Most northern European countries have them underground. All third world countries have them above ground. The rest are in between.
There are quite a few places (in the minority of course) in America besides Manhattan where they are underground - its about as hard as putting gas lines and water lines underground.....
And deaths and injury from downed power lines = zero.
Realize underground options may vary depending on the water table, ground conditions and how the legal easements were established, if you want underground utilities then move to a locality where there is new construction and the wires are placed underground. Based on the expense and legal hassles can you imagine the uproar if they tried to bury the lines, just read the comments on the tree trimming and magnify that by 200....
Interesting. I did just that - moved to a new development where all the power lines are underground. The problem is that at the end of the street they all connect to overhead lines. Every time the wind blows or some idiot crashes into a pole (happens more often than you might think) power would still go out. As the utility has expanded underground slightly beyond my area over the past 20 years, reliability has improved considerably. We are all still at the mercy of the weakest link.
Easments? Utility companies already have those. In most cases, there shouldn't be any serious legal impediment to moving lines underground.
Uproar? I think you overstate the case. I see new/replacement sewer and other underground services installed quite often. It's an inconvenience for the duration of the work and then back to normal. Those projects can usually involve a bit more hassle than power lines. No mass protests in the street.
Cost? That is the real problem. On the other hand, we pay among the highest electric rates in the country. Surely some of that extra cost could go into upgrading the infrastructure? Compared to the constant maintenance and repair work to overhead lines, underground lines would result in a long-term savings. The upfront investment could also be mitigated by coordinating with other utilities (i.e. cable/phone/sewer/gas/water) to share the cost where possible (such as a project the other utility is already planning).
A smart long-term plan would include an upgrade to underground whenever and wherever possible. Our power company du jour has never seemed interested in a long-term investment. Or maybe the repair crew union just likes the extra work all those overhead lines generate every time it rains or the wind blows.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zen88
The cost would be enormous, the environmental impact would be huge, every time they had to dig it up for repairs the same people bleating about the trees would bleat about that, too.
With conduit and pull boxes, there is no "digging up" for repairs (which are needed less often).
Status:
"Let this year be over..."
(set 23 days ago)
Location: Where my bills arrive
19,219 posts, read 17,095,590 times
Reputation: 15538
Quote:
Originally Posted by bg7
Most northern European countries have them underground. All third world countries have them above ground. The rest are in between.
There are quite a few places (in the minority of course) in America besides Manhattan where they are underground - its about as hard as putting gas lines and water lines underground.....
And deaths and injury from downed power lines = zero.
Haven't been to Northern Europe yet, those countries bordering the Mediterranean all have traditional poles as does other countries that aren't third world. Plenty of places in the US have below grade power not just Manhattan but you won't find it suburban areas unless you are looking at the newer areas. Ground water levels and access to the property to run new lines does come into play when you look at retrofitting established areas. You can't tell me LI homeowners wouldn't be up in arms over what that equipment did to their lawn as they run the wires or that unsightly box they placed on the lawn....
With conduit and pull boxes, there is no "digging up" for repairs (which are needed less often).
Underground lines do fail, conduit fails, anyone digging without first having the area marked out causes cable failures and conduit cooling system leaks. Even if it were a panacea, do you want to pay for it? Do you know that the substations and all their equipment are above ground? The power plants are above ground. It's a little more complicated than a water main.
Underground lines do fail, conduit fails, anyone digging without first having the area marked out causes cable failures and conduit cooling system leaks. Even if it were a panacea, do you want to pay for it? Do you know that the substations and all their equipment are above ground? The power plants are above ground. It's a little more complicated than a water main.
Everything mechanical eventually fails. The point is that the failure rate of underground electrical service is far less than overhead. Underground is inherently more stable and requires less maintenance. It may not be a pancea, but it is certainly a smarter option for Long Island, which is subject to frequent storms and hurricanes.
As far as paying for it, my point is that we have already been paying for it. Our electric rates are much higher than they should be. On Long Island, our electric rates are about 33% higher than the U.S. average. (Bureau of Labor statistics, May 2016 - http://www.bls.gov/regions/new-york-...ewyorkarea.htm) The other side is that we are also "paying for it" in increased maintenance costs for overhead lines.
In some ways it is more complicated than a water line. In many other ways it is much LESS complicated than water or gas service. How do water and gas mains survive with all the people digging? My area has had ALL utility service underground for 20+ years... never had a pole go down in a hurricane. Never had anyone dig into the gas, cable, water or electric. I HAVE seen several poles in nearby areas get knocked down by cars crashing into them. Nothing is 100%, but underground trumps overhead any day of the week.
Of course some of the equipment is above ground. Same is true for gas, water and cable. Not sure what your point is. Putting overhead lines underground puts those lines at less risk of damage from the elements. There are other means of protection for other equipment.
I'm not suggesting they start ripping up the Island to convert everything to underground today. I DO suggest taking a longer term approach to the situation. There are plenty of areas which could benefit immediately. There are other areas where underground would provide little to no benefit.
When a big storm hits, why not take that opportunity to improve service in an especially hard hit area, as opposed to rebuilding the same overhead problem which will come down in the next storm? Why not identify areas which require constant maintenance and rebuilding to target them for underground? They keep throwing away money into areas where overhead is a bad idea. We are all paying for those mistakes over and over.
The cost is not "enormous" - especially in comparison the rebuilding an entire area after a storm and the constant upkeep. The "environmental impact" is non-existent. Over the long-term, cost would be likely less than overhead. There is no "digging up for repairs" with a properly designed system. You are certainly entitled to your opinion in opposition to underground service., but your stated reasons aren't very strong or valid.
You've no idea what's involved with burying cable. You've no idea what goes on in an electric utility. You've no idea how much people, businesses and local governments and organizations would complain when streets are being dug up. Or when other utilities are disturbed and have to be repaired. Imagine the traffic problems on main roads? I've seen it, and I've been involved in it. Imagine having to dig up beautiful landscaping or protected lands when the lines underground fail or need upgrading? This debate has raged for years. People want what they want, but as soon as they're told the down side, they start jumping up and down in frustration. New developments are being built with the low voltage distribution cable underground, I live in such a development. The Cable originates at the nearby substation, runs underground until it's across the main road, then it's above ground because there's a switch that needs to be readily accessible. Then it's above ground until it reaches the development, about two miles away. There is a switch and maybe other ties to other lines, then it goes underground, there's underground transformers, and the line to each home branches off. The home next to me had one of those lines fail, and alas, the line had to be dug up. Whenever any of the underground transformers fail, and they do fail, they will need to be dug up, too. The above ground transformers are easier to change out. There's a lot of things left out of the above explanation, our electric utility is tremendously complex, this explains a lot of the costs involved. There's also the Shoreham debt, I believe it's around $8 BILLION, which will never get paid off. Poor decisions by past management has lead to the current situation, and there's no easy way out. Whoever can afford it, I suggest buying your own generator for extended outages.
Why can't they do it like the railway? Basically at ground level with a cover. It's been done for decades.
It seems to be cheap and safe.
It could be done on sidewalk borders.
Why can't they do it like the railway? Basically at ground level with a cover. It's been done for decades.
It seems to be cheap and safe.
It could be done on sidewalk borders.
Yes, lets put live powerlines on the ground right next to where people, who are known to have the highest level of common sense, walk, run, bike ride, etc. That will certainly end well. Ha, "safe".
Yes, lets put live powerlines on the ground right next to where people, who are known to have the highest level of common sense, walk, run, bike ride, etc. That will certainly end well. Ha, "safe".
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
