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)?

  • gustofwind@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    16 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
      6
      ·
      14 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
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      15 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.