4 ms·
Honest question here: I'm from Italy and here we have problems with fires as well. However, here power lines and district transformers are placed underground ex
by marcyb5st 7y ago
Honest question here: I'm from Italy and here we have problems with fires as well. However, here power lines and district transformers are placed underground except high voltage and ultra high voltage ones, but those are above tree height and rely on much sturdier metal structures.
My understanding is that burying power lines is cheaper in the long run and less prone to failures (trees falling, cars smashing the utility poles, ...). Therefore, why can't this be done in the US and especially California? Or is it already done for new developments? If no, is it because of regulations?
- e40 7y agoI believe it's solely a cost issue, as California is very large.
- generalpass 7y agoBecause PG&E funds campaigns so politicians who get elected will craft legislation that makes it impossible to start a competitor to PG&E. Since PG&E has no competitors, and new competitors cannot form, PG&E has no reason to invest further in its infrastructure.
- l_t 7y agoMany new developments in the US do use buried wires. But a lot also still use poles. It's hit and miss. From what I remember, PG&E is notorious for "procrastinating" on maintenance of its wires, as well. Wires need to be regularly checked and have nearby foliage trimmed to a safe distance. Keeping up on this maintenance would reduce the risk of fires, but California is big and the utility has decided it doesn't want to do that. So the poles are more dangerous than they should be.