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.
I'll never understand why they don't bury the power lines. Granted, it would be more expensive up front. But surely it would be far cheaper over the long run, not to mention far less disruptive, then having to repeatedly rebuild the above-ground grid after every hurricane.
I used to work for FPL including in some heavy hurricane years. People would ask this question all the time. Simple answer was cost. Electric Companies dont have the money to do so it would require Government funds. For instance to bury all the lines FPL had would cost more than the profits the company had made for decades. They would have to double the rates and nobody wants to pay it.
Buried lines can also cause more problems than people think if the lines are damaged, and even buried they do get damaged, it requires specialized equipment to repair the lines and if all the lines were buried there simply would not be enough equipment. Finally many people dont actually lose power long because of the lines going down. Often it is substation damage which cause the greatest amount of outages and these cannot be buried. Ill give my own example i think it was 2005 i was without power in West Palm Beach five out of six weeks. First Hurricane came in knocked power out for three weeks, next storm hit one week after power back on and it went out for two more weeks. The lines were repaired in a couple of days but the transformer which was right next to my house blew out both times. And it took that long for it to be replaced. In fact i was returning home from work and saw it being carried in and was like YES.
I used to work for FPL including in some heavy hurricane years. People would ask this question all the time. Simple answer was cost. Electric Companies dont have the money to do so it would require Government funds. For instance to bury all the lines FPL had would cost more than the profits the company had made for decades. They would have to double the rates and nobody wants to pay it.
Buried lines can also cause more problems than people think if the lines are damaged, and even buried they do get damaged, it requires specialized equipment to repair the lines and if all the lines were buried there simply would not be enough equipment. Finally many people dont actually lose power long because of the lines going down. Often it is substation damage which cause the greatest amount of outages and these cannot be buried. Ill give my own example i think it was 2005 i was without power in West Palm Beach five out of six weeks. First Hurricane came in knocked power out for three weeks, next storm hit one week after power back on and it went out for two more weeks. The lines were repaired in a couple of days but the transformer which was right next to my house blew out both times. And it took that long for it to be replaced. In fact i was returning home from work and saw it being carried in and was like YES.
Thank you for this explanation. In my opinion, government subsidies would be worth it in this case. I'd rather spend more money now, but save more money over the longer term, than vice versa. If it takes a dose of governmental funding to make it happen, I'd be all for it.
Thank you for this explanation. In my opinion, government subsidies would be worth it in this case. I'd rather spend more money now, but save more money over the longer term, than vice versa. If it takes a dose of governmental funding to make it happen, I'd be all for it.
Yup...called infrastructure investment. One was passed under Obama and another one passed under Biden.
Insurance may become nearly impossible to get in high risk areas (and not just in FL). Florida is plagued by lawsuits from, primarily, roofing companies that are running scams. The reinsurance market is all but non-existent forcing companies to leave the market (insurers resell policies to investors to lower and spread their risk allowing them to continue to write more). The avg premium is about $4K and it will be going much higher. In other words, it is getting prohibitively expensive for retirees of limited means to live in the state because of high home prices and soaring insurance costs. While many will rebuild, expect a large exodus to Georgia, SC, NC, and that old standby, TX.
I bought my condo 11 years ago. Did the math on insurance, and chose not to buy any. The condo association covers the outside, and I figured the inside I could do myself. It meant that after 10 years, I would break even. I sold the condo a few months ago (thank you sky high prices).
A retiree who pays cash will not be required to get insurance. What shocks me is how many retirees actually DO mortgage their homes. Why? If you don't have the cash, don't buy. But that's me. Everyone else makes their choices.
Thank you for this explanation. In my opinion, government subsidies would be worth it in this case. I'd rather spend more money now, but save more money over the longer term, than vice versa. If it takes a dose of governmental funding to make it happen, I'd be all for it.
Not me. Let Florida pay for their own issues. FEMA costs us more than enough as it is and Florida is a primary recipient. If Florida wants to bury their power lines, they can pay for it. Hurricane Ian should NOT be a blank check for them. And they would say the exact same thing about other states including denying federal aid to the Northeast after Sandy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seacove View Post
DeSantis is already saying the standard "we all need to work together, regardless of party lines" BUT:
"Just a reminder to New York...Marco Rubio and Ron DeSantis (who was in Congress at the time) voted against aid for Hurricane Sandy," New York State Assembly member Yuh-Line Niou tweeted on Wednesday. https://www.newsweek.com/hurricane-i...sponse-1747322
The northeast pays taxes too and DeSantis and Rubio didn't care then. Waiting for reporters to ask DeSantis and Rubio directly on that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by take57
Apparently socialism is OK if it's your backyard that is under water...
It isn't true that they voted against aid for Hurricane Sandy. They voted against an overinflated bill for aid.
For example if $20,000,000,000 in aid was needed for NY after Sandy but the bill contains $40,000,000,000 does it mean that person is against aid for Sandy or are they against wasteful spending.
This is coming from a Long Island resident where some of my neighbors and friends lost homes and/or were without power for a couple of weeks. There was a lot of waste and pork in the bill plus i topened the door to a lot of fraud.
It isn't true that they voted against aid for Hurricane Sandy. They voted against an overinflated bill for aid.
For example if $20,000,000,000 in aid was needed for NY after Sandy but the bill contains $40,000,000,000 does it mean that person is against aid for Sandy or are they against wasteful spending.
This is coming from a Long Island resident where some of my neighbors and friends lost homes and/or were without power for a couple of weeks. There was a lot of waste and pork in the bill plus i topened the door to a lot of fraud.
Look, im guessing you are a republican, but its weird how yall try to rewrite history on the Sandy relief bill.
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.
