Unnecessary situations like the long period of power outages in Oklahoma last week could be easily mitigated. Auto deaths due to car/utility pole collisions could be reduced. Billions spent on annual tree-trimming could be used to pay for the burying of utilities. Why are we so backward on this?
2007-12-21 17:09:55 · 13 answers · asked by Michael R 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
If it's not economical to bury them, why do all the other developed countries do so? I'm not talking about burying them in shallw conduit like they do in residential applications. I'm pretty sure that the Germans run theirs through tunnels under the streets/roads which are large enouigh to be easily accessible for maintenance. Fiber, coaxial cable, and water/wastwater plumming are all routed through this tunnel. Finding any infrequent "problem" wouldn't take long or be expensive. I think the one-time investment would pay off in the long-term.
2007-12-21 17:38:13 · update #1
the usa has the oldest electrical distribution infrastructure in the world. thats because the usa was the first to widely distribute electricity (along w/ great britian). countries that developed their electrical grid system later naturally would have a more modern system simply because its not as old. in essence learning from the mistakes made by the US. another factor is the vast distances that the electrical grid must cover in the US as compared to countries like UK etc. the time and cost associated with modernizing such an extensive network at present is really huge, and therefore is done primarily in urban centers and new developments.
2007-12-21 17:51:25 · answer #1 · answered by mikedelta 3 · 4⤊ 1⤋
This is a great question and I wish I Knew the answer. One possibility is that the existing infrastructure is so vast and extends over such a large distance that it appears in the short run not to be cost effective. I agree though that there would be longer term benefits not the least of which would be to guard against terrorist attacks. A couple poles went down in Ohio and knocked out almost a quarter of the country's grid a couple years ago. The power lines are also unsightly people have always lived with them and tend not even to see them because they are such a part of our existence but I think if they were buried it would make for a more pleasant landscape. There are also adverse health effects from living around power transformers, it has been shown to contribute to the cancer rate. I hope we will someday address this issue but unfortunately the baby boomers in charge right now have under invested in the infrastructure and I don't see them stepping up anytime soon
2007-12-21 17:23:15 · answer #2 · answered by D C 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
What's even more amazing is that they will spend the money to open the ground up for gas lines and then bury it without placing the power lines down there as well! When people are receiving diminished service they have the audacity to request and expect a rate increase all the while they are causing rolling black outs and power surges and dips creating failures of electronics and expensive appliances! It's not up to them who is to receive service and for how long it is the responsibility of the executive branch of each state to regulate all utilities!
2007-12-22 01:55:03 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I often think the same thing specially after a lot of rain and wind storms. I bought a piece of property with an 1,800 foot driveway and had the power lines, cable and telephone wires all put underground. It cost $12,000 to have it done, so maybe that's why they don't do it. Also, if there's an earthquake, it must be a lot harder to find and fix if there is a break in the line, and of course more expensive.
2007-12-21 17:18:51 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
They do, but not all at once. Most new construction has underground utilities. To start tearing down poles and burying existing lines would be very expensive to the utility company, who would pass this on to the customer. Most dont want to see their utility bills double. So...tree trimming is the least costly solution.
2007-12-21 17:18:32 · answer #5 · answered by TNguy 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Money!
There is a town near Dallas, Texas that put the power lines underground. The distance was less than a mile. It cost more than a million dollars.
Money!
2007-12-22 04:11:02 · answer #6 · answered by Albannach 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because out in the boondocks where the population is sparse it's easier to find where the wire's been cut/damaged above ground than it is to find it underground.
It's also cheaper to string wires above ground from pole to pole than rent a boring machine to tunnel a cable under ground which involces pipes, drainage, etc.
A man with a van and a cable splicer is lot cheaper than a whole crew of diggers and workmen.
2007-12-21 23:49:44 · answer #7 · answered by Parsley 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
The answer is easy. It would be TOO expensive to do ALL the power lines in the country. But they are putting all the utilities underground in new developments.
The Infrastructure in this country is in terrible condition. The government does not have the money to fix it. ALL of our money is going to the war.
2007-12-21 17:57:52 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
How about we nix socialized enrgy production and distribution altogether? First start with the residential sectors, leave existing utilities in place for commercial/ inner city and govt use. To start with. Get off the grid. It can be done. Power to the people.
2007-12-21 17:21:43 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Newer communities build their utility lines underground in the US.
Older areas still have them above ground.
2007-12-21 20:45:49 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋