4 ms·

Wouldn't that cost something like $1 trillion to do for the entire state? Math: 155147 miles * $750/foot And an article https://www.desertsun.com/story/news/e

by ars 7y ago

Wouldn't that cost something like $1 trillion to do for the entire state? Math: 155147 miles * $750/foot And an article https://www.desertsun.com/story/news/environment/2019/10/11/cost-to-bury-california-fire-prone-power-lines-why-not/3937653002/ https://www.desertsun.com/story/news/environment/2019/10/11/... confirming it's pretty much out of reach. $15,000 per household estimate (and 1,000 years!!).

sjg007 7y ago
Well then everyone has local solar with a powerwall for when PG&E shuts down. Maybe that's cheaper? Honestly I think PG&E could bury the lines cheaper than $750 a foot.
- SllX 7y ago
  Maybe, but I think CEQA will pretty much guarantee that it will end up being a bit more expensive than even that.
dmlittle 7y ago
You wouldn't necessarily have to do the entire state but rather start doing this in high-risk places first.
- misterprime 7y ago
  Good point. Is it also true that high risk places (forest/rural) are probably cheaper and easier to install underground than low risk places (urban)?
  - dredmorbius 7y ago
    A lot of long-distance, high-voltage transmission crosses what's effectively wilderness. You've got issues of unstable slopes, earthquake faults, flooding, and ground-current losses (a big problem with undergrounded power). And that's before you look at getting crews in place. Then there's the question of monitoring, servicing, and repair after undergrounding. It's definitely an option. But not a cheap or universally applicable one.
  - el_benhameen 7y ago
    Not sure about that. The high risk places are also often in remote, rugged terrain. What you save by not having to disrupt other infrastructure you might end up spending just to get people and equipment to where they need to be. Interesting perspective here: https://www.wsj.com/graphics/california-wildfire-pge-drought/?mod=article_inline&mod=hp_lead_pos5 https://www.wsj.com/graphics/california-wildfire-pge-drought...
heisenbit 7y ago
Maybe ultra sparse settlements on a scale as today are unaffordable in the long run? It not just power but also the roads and communication links. Accounting for infrastructure maintenance is not done properly.
Nasrudith 7y ago
Well the obvious thing to do is to bury the ones in wind problem/fire risk areas
rasz 7y ago
> $750/foot 2-3 times more than per square foot price of building a luxury house in California, that number totally checks out!

by ars 7y ago

sjg007 7y ago

Well then everyone has local solar with a powerwall for when PG&E shuts down. Maybe that's cheaper? Honestly I think PG&E could bury the lines cheaper than $750 a foot.

SllX 7y ago
Maybe, but I think CEQA will pretty much guarantee that it will end up being a bit more expensive than even that.

dmlittle 7y ago

You wouldn't necessarily have to do the entire state but rather start doing this in high-risk places first.

misterprime 7y ago
Good point. Is it also true that high risk places (forest/rural) are probably cheaper and easier to install underground than low risk places (urban)?
- dredmorbius 7y ago
  A lot of long-distance, high-voltage transmission crosses what's effectively wilderness. You've got issues of unstable slopes, earthquake faults, flooding, and ground-current losses (a big problem with undergrounded power). And that's before you look at getting crews in place. Then there's the question of monitoring, servicing, and repair after undergrounding. It's definitely an option. But not a cheap or universally applicable one.
- el_benhameen 7y ago
  Not sure about that. The high risk places are also often in remote, rugged terrain. What you save by not having to disrupt other infrastructure you might end up spending just to get people and equipment to where they need to be. Interesting perspective here: https://www.wsj.com/graphics/california-wildfire-pge-drought/?mod=article_inline&mod=hp_lead_pos5 https://www.wsj.com/graphics/california-wildfire-pge-drought...

heisenbit 7y ago

Maybe ultra sparse settlements on a scale as today are unaffordable in the long run? It not just power but also the roads and communication links. Accounting for infrastructure maintenance is not done properly.

Nasrudith 7y ago

Well the obvious thing to do is to bury the ones in wind problem/fire risk areas

rasz 7y ago

> $750/foot 2-3 times more than per square foot price of building a luxury house in California, that number totally checks out!