It seems kind of primitive to have power lines just hanging on poles, right?

Bit unsightly too

Is it just a cost issue and is it actually significant when considering the cost of power loss on society (work, hospital, food, etc)?

  • gigastasio@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    22 hours ago

    There’s a pragmatic reason too. Power lines and transformers need constant maintenance. When the line fails somewhere, it’s easier to access when you don’t have to dig, and also less disruptive.

    Also, they’re up high because people in general are dumb af and will fuck with them if they’re within reach.

    • marcos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      22 hours ago

      Power lines need way less maintenance if you bury them.

      Orders of magnitude less maintenance.

      • Dr. Bob@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        21 hours ago

        The cost to reach them to diagnose and replace outweighs the decreased maintenance. Digging is really expensive.

    • gustofwind@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      22 hours ago

      I was in a suburb once that had the lines running in an accessible plastic rectangle running between the sidewalk and road and it seemed pretty brilliant

      • SSTF@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        22 hours ago

        Which is a solution for a limited area where the extra cost and longer install time might be deemed worthwhile, but when you want to run miles upon miles of lines then it is less feasible.

        • gustofwind@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          22 hours ago

          I think it’s probably reasonable to run the large transmission lines open because they’re huge and easier to landscape but most people live in dense suburbs or cities (where they’re already underground)

          And most dense suburbs just have their power polls waiting precariously under trees which requires additional tree maintenance and is expensive to fix after a storm

          I agree there are places it wouldn’t make sense but it seems like nearly all the places where it would make sense still havnt bothered (cost, I know)

          • Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            20 hours ago

            Companies have done the math, repeatedly.

            If underground cost less even over a 5 year period, they would be doing it.

          • SSTF@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            22 hours ago

            In a dense urban environment you are wanting retrofitted lines run through terrain already full of concrete, water lines, and other urban features. That would take a lot of coordination in design and still likely miss things (which means more time and money on redesigns). It also means a long installation time which means extended disruption to the area.

            These sorts of underground lines are easier to run in totally fresh new construction, but then again, it runs into servicing issues and extra expense.

            is expensive to fix after a storm

            Assessing and fixing underground lines is much harder, more expensive, and disruptive.