4 ms·

My good friend is an engineer whose job has been to work on transmission line construction projects for several utilities including our local one. He just finis

by jgon 7y ago

My good friend is an engineer whose job has been to work on transmission line construction projects for several utilities including our local one. He just finished testifying at a court case because the utility was being sued by a group of homeowners for running the lines above ground rather than burying them. His testimony was based around the fact that on average the cost to bury lines is roughly 10x more expensive than running them above ground, and he has had this experience across multiple different projects. So when people say "it's expensive" they are literally referring to a factor of 10x cost increase. Maybe it's worth it in some cases compared to the costs of power outages and fires, but understand that we're not talking about a "slight increase" here, and that the people making these decisions are generally highly trained and experienced subject matter experts who are already doing cost/benefit analyses to take the best course of action that they can.

patentatt 7y ago
I suppose the only other variable we’d need would be what is the initial infrastructure cost as a share of the total lifetime operating cost of a distribution system. Including things like maintenance and starting wildfires. There may be a break even point where 10x cost is a sound investment.
snagglegaggle 7y ago
Is the cost related to the rarity of buried power lines? Consider doctor testimony that used to be given for deaths while under anesthesia. "It's normal" and "it just happens." Luckily juries didn't listen and anesthesiologists were forced to reconsider their daily practice.
- stickfigure 7y ago
  It sounds like you are asking "is there an economy of scale?" to burying power lines. Or "is there a learning curve that will drive the costs down?", like for solar. The answer seems to be 'no'. Digging and burying pipes is something we've been doing on a massive scale for hundreds of years and there's no reason to believe more volume will improve the economics. It's probably getting worse since new development means more roads to dig up and more structures to plan around.

by jgon 7y ago

patentatt 7y ago

I suppose the only other variable we’d need would be what is the initial infrastructure cost as a share of the total lifetime operating cost of a distribution system. Including things like maintenance and starting wildfires. There may be a break even point where 10x cost is a sound investment.

snagglegaggle 7y ago

Is the cost related to the rarity of buried power lines? Consider doctor testimony that used to be given for deaths while under anesthesia. "It's normal" and "it just happens." Luckily juries didn't listen and anesthesiologists were forced to reconsider their daily practice.

stickfigure 7y ago
It sounds like you are asking "is there an economy of scale?" to burying power lines. Or "is there a learning curve that will drive the costs down?", like for solar. The answer seems to be 'no'. Digging and burying pipes is something we've been doing on a massive scale for hundreds of years and there's no reason to believe more volume will improve the economics. It's probably getting worse since new development means more roads to dig up and more structures to plan around.