4 ms·

> Things don't get better once you consider their power lines, at $285,000 per mile you are looking at $95,000 just to run power to their home and all adjacent

> Things don't get better once you consider their power lines, at $285,000 per mile you are looking at $95,000 just to run power to their home and all adjacent homes. Recently looked into this. New rural developments have to paid to get power lines run to the corner of their property (in western states, anyway). If your immediate neighbor has power (which they paid to run) this will cost the resident tens of thousands of dollars, depending on the distance. If you don't have an immediate neighbor with power, you're SOL. > Then add in water + sewage, at $25.18 per foot, lets say to all the same houses getting power, that is an additional $86,619. Rural areas are predominantly septic tanks and well water. Paid for by residents. The only utility most rural residents get is power. > You also probably want modern internet connectivity (cable, fiber) you are looking at another $10,000 per household. Give me a break. This doesn't happen in rural areas. Hel, go 15 mins/miles outside a densely populated area and your internet/cable options drop below third world standards. > Assuming there is 5% maintenance per year for all this infrastructure, that is $16,230.95 a year. Considering rural developments pay to have power run to them, this strikes me as a pretty good deal for power companies. Meanwhile, there is a trade-off here. In densely populated areas you're looking at complex/dense in-ground sewer, gas and electrical lines that likely cost a magnitude more than the rural equivalent. Sure at a certain population density this becomes economical, but many urban areas don't meet this standard. Take SF for example. For example, a residential well can be drilled for ~$15k in my area. A septic tank large enough for a home would be ~$10k. When the well runs dry or the septic is full it's the resident that pays.

oasisbob 7y ago
> go 5 mins outside a densely populated area and your internet/cable options drop below third world standards. You mention Western states - which ones are you familiar with? In NW Washington, there are counties with functioning fiber co-ops. It's very possible to get fiber to your property in some areas, economically, with functioning latecomers agreements. I can't say how common it is elsewhere, but you're painting with a VERY broad brush in describing the rural US internet experience.
- kolanos 7y ago
  I meant to say 15 minutes (or miles). But what you're describing is the exception, not the rule. The western states I was looking at recently were CA, OR, NV, WY. But I also am familiar with WA and know that if you live outside King County your internet/cable options are sparse in most areas. Check out Broadband Now [0] for examples. Although I find their reported coverage for ISPs to not reflect reality on the ground in many cases. [0]: https://broadbandnow.com https://broadbandnow.com
- ryanmercer 7y ago
  >It's very possible to get fiber to your property in some areas, economically, with functioning latecomers agreements. You can't even get fiber in MOST of Indianapolis proper and there are still many, many, many addresses in Indianapolis on wells/septic, with 2000-era DSL speeds.
zrobotics 7y ago
This is why my dad installed battery-backed solar in 2008. The power lines would have been 18k, whereas the solar system was 22k IIRC. Note that this quickly stops being a viable option for an actual farmer/rancher, it only provides enough power for a small hobby farm. Regardless, it's entirely feasible for the only utility to be wireless internet via RE, pripane/wood heat, well & septic. None of this is cheap though. OH, and the reason the power lines were so expensive is his neighbor had paid 30k to run the line, which was within 1/4 mile of my dad's place. There was a period of maybe 10 years where any new customers connecting to the line would pay a portion, which would be refunded to the neighbor who originally paid.
bearjaws 7y ago
So basically you can forego all modern infrastructure and not pay anything, who knew? I explicitly brought up wells and septic as an example of having to source your own resources, why is it any different for electricity?
- kolanos 7y ago
  > I explicitly brought up wells and septic as an example of having to source your own resources, why is it any different for electricity? Well rural residents pay to have power run to them and it's only feasible if they develop next to a property that is already wired for power. This means that you can't go move into the middle of nowhere and expect the power company to come to you. Your rural utility options will be limited to what your neighbors already have and any future expansion of the grid will be incremental and paid for by developers. So the claim that urban residents are incurring unjust costs at the hand of rual residens is largely a fiction. But yes, considering rural residents have largely sourced their own resources, it is likely only a matter of time before rural residents are going off the grid as well. I've certainly seen this trend in many rural areas and as long as the price of solar/propane continues to go down I expect it to continue. But it won't be due to the supposed undue burden they place on society.
- imgabe 7y ago
  > why is it any different for electricity? Is it really not clear why electricity is different? You can pump water out of the ground pretty much anywhere using very simple and stable technology. Running and maintaining your own power plant is an order of magnitude more difficult and expensive. That's why it's different.
notatoad 7y ago
>Sure at a certain population density this becomes economical, but many urban areas don't meet this standard can you point me to any data behind this claim?

oasisbob 7y ago

> go 5 mins outside a densely populated area and your internet/cable options drop below third world standards. You mention Western states - which ones are you familiar with? In NW Washington, there are counties with functioning fiber co-ops. It's very possible to get fiber to your property in some areas, economically, with functioning latecomers agreements. I can't say how common it is elsewhere, but you're painting with a VERY broad brush in describing the rural US internet experience.

kolanos 7y ago
I meant to say 15 minutes (or miles). But what you're describing is the exception, not the rule. The western states I was looking at recently were CA, OR, NV, WY. But I also am familiar with WA and know that if you live outside King County your internet/cable options are sparse in most areas. Check out Broadband Now [0] for examples. Although I find their reported coverage for ISPs to not reflect reality on the ground in many cases. [0]: https://broadbandnow.com https://broadbandnow.com
ryanmercer 7y ago
>It's very possible to get fiber to your property in some areas, economically, with functioning latecomers agreements. You can't even get fiber in MOST of Indianapolis proper and there are still many, many, many addresses in Indianapolis on wells/septic, with 2000-era DSL speeds.

zrobotics 7y ago

This is why my dad installed battery-backed solar in 2008. The power lines would have been 18k, whereas the solar system was 22k IIRC. Note that this quickly stops being a viable option for an actual farmer/rancher, it only provides enough power for a small hobby farm. Regardless, it's entirely feasible for the only utility to be wireless internet via RE, pripane/wood heat, well & septic. None of this is cheap though. OH, and the reason the power lines were so expensive is his neighbor had paid 30k to run the line, which was within 1/4 mile of my dad's place. There was a period of maybe 10 years where any new customers connecting to the line would pay a portion, which would be refunded to the neighbor who originally paid.

bearjaws 7y ago

So basically you can forego all modern infrastructure and not pay anything, who knew? I explicitly brought up wells and septic as an example of having to source your own resources, why is it any different for electricity?

kolanos 7y ago
> I explicitly brought up wells and septic as an example of having to source your own resources, why is it any different for electricity? Well rural residents pay to have power run to them and it's only feasible if they develop next to a property that is already wired for power. This means that you can't go move into the middle of nowhere and expect the power company to come to you. Your rural utility options will be limited to what your neighbors already have and any future expansion of the grid will be incremental and paid for by developers. So the claim that urban residents are incurring unjust costs at the hand of rual residens is largely a fiction. But yes, considering rural residents have largely sourced their own resources, it is likely only a matter of time before rural residents are going off the grid as well. I've certainly seen this trend in many rural areas and as long as the price of solar/propane continues to go down I expect it to continue. But it won't be due to the supposed undue burden they place on society.
imgabe 7y ago
> why is it any different for electricity? Is it really not clear why electricity is different? You can pump water out of the ground pretty much anywhere using very simple and stable technology. Running and maintaining your own power plant is an order of magnitude more difficult and expensive. That's why it's different.

notatoad 7y ago

>Sure at a certain population density this becomes economical, but many urban areas don't meet this standard can you point me to any data behind this claim?