Should The U.S. Bury Its Power Lines?
Vložit
- čas přidán 26. 06. 2024
- Burying power lines is an expensive but sure-fire way to practically eliminate the risk of utility-caused wildfires, which have devastated towns across California. PG&E, the nation’s largest utility, has been found liable for numerous wildfires in the state. In an effort to prevent future disasters, the utility is planning to underground 10,000 miles of distribution lines in fire-prone areas, including 2,100 miles through 2026.
But it’s not cheap. PGE’s plan would likely cost tens of billions of dollars, to be paid for by customers through their utility bills. This is causing some to advocate for cheaper, alternate options such as insulating power lines, though PG&E maintains that undergrounding is by far the safer bet. The path forward will be at least partially determined in November, when PG&E’s regulator, the California Public Utilities Commission, votes on the utility’s proposed four-year budget.
Chapters:
00:00 - Introduction
02:02 - Undergrounding advantages
05:15 - Costs and challenges
08:29 - Need to act
Produced and shot by: Katie Brigham
Edited by: Nic Golden Henry
Additional Camera: Sydney Boyo
Animation: Andrea Schmitz, Christina Locopo
Supervising Producer: Jeniece Pettitt
Additional Footage: PG&E, Getty Images
» Subscribe to CNBC: cnb.cx/SubscribeCNBC
» Subscribe to CNBC TV: cnb.cx/SubscribeCNBCtelevision
About CNBC: From 'Wall Street' to 'Main Street' to award winning original documentaries and Reality TV series, CNBC has you covered. Experience special sneak peeks of your favorite shows, exclusive video and more.
Connect with CNBC News Online
Get the latest news: www.cnbc.com/
Follow CNBC on LinkedIn: cnb.cx/LinkedInCNBC
Follow CNBC News on Facebook: cnb.cx/LikeCNBC
Follow CNBC News on Twitter: cnb.cx/FollowCNBC
Follow CNBC News on Instagram: cnb.cx/InstagramCNBC
#CNBC
Should The U.S. Bury Its Power Lines?
Not only does it better protect them from natural disasters (and in some cases causing wildfires) but it's just much more aesthetically appealing not seeing a bunch of power lines and poles littered all over the place.
The natural enemy of all things buried is the backhoe.
I live in Denmark, where they've been dug down. I kinda miss them - the swallows used to sit in them. But the messy ones I saw in NYC weren't exactly charming. It's pretty expensive, but it saves a lot on maintenence, so in the long run it is a sensible investment. I live in the countryside - we've just did all of them in one go
@@jakobraahauge7299doing it all in one go in Denmark is very different from doing the same in the US.
@@hewhohasnoidentity4377 very! But climate here is a lot more calm - and we still did it. I'm. not sure America could do the same - you have some odd solutions to running and funding infrastructure
@@hewhohasnoidentity4377- I know, but USA has had 20-30 years to catch up with Denmark.
But I get it. Americans are a bit slow.
Speaking as someone in the industry, who has advocated for underground versus overhead for over a decade, the primary issue is upfront costs versus lifetime costs. Underground is around 6-10x more expensive, in terms of cost to engineer & construct. However, when viewed from a lifetime cost perspectives, underground can be cheaper. The problem is getting the various Public Service Commissions that regulate the industry to shift towards a lifetime cost perspective.
*IN MY EU COUNTRY* the vast majority are buried. No fires, looks nicer, lower EMI
Also, all ours are in conduit - a bundle of like 6 conduits that run from access point to access point - so you can run other telecoms and fibre optic etc AND you can repair stuff without having to dig the road up.
@@piccalillipit9211 Yes, ductbank construction is certainly preferable to direct bury. The only issue you’ll run into again is the discussion of immediate costs versus lifetime costs. Additionally, depending on the route, you may be able to lease that fiber to telecom companies & offset a significant portion of the cost for the electric utility.
@@Zero11235 We have the advantage that nearly all the infrastructure was put in under the communist governments pre-1992 - where the lifetime cost was all that mattered.
Much of the city is covered with 1m x 1.5m underground "tunnels" that contain everything, the city heating system, the gas, the telecoms, the electricity. We still benefit every day from that investment 60 years ago.
@@piccalillipit9211But in your contry there iz problem and ze problem iz transport.
@@Zero11235 I suspect the cost differential has widened recently, in a way that disfavors buried lines, due to higher interest rates. Another thing is that tech advances (solar, SMR nukes) may render many large lines unnecessary by making power generation much more distributed.
This should be done in areas that are prone to frequent natural disasters
Everywhere has natural disasters
This should have been done 40 years ago
@PasqualeFA it was just as superfluous back then, and buried cables have always been a thing
@@samsonsoturian6013some experience then more often. Florida, Texas, and Louisiana come to mind
In Seattle, we have power outage every year when there's a storm or snow. It's kinda ridiculous. I've never faced this problem in Canada where I grew up.
Burying the power lines is an investment in safety.
Think about all the money spent recovering from wildfires and the lost homes, lives, and the suffering. This upfront cost is worth it.
Sounds like you think that majority of wildfires caused by high voltage lines
If the dry conditions are there, a wildfire will happen regardless of underground power lines. It might reduce the risk slightly, but the forests still need to be managed better, whether it be thru controlled burns or other measures.
Except in Hawaii it was man made
I would think burying power lines will save on insurance rates for homeowners and utilities, which could amount to a lot of savings in the long run, especially as insurance rates have been increasing with natural disaster damage.
@joeaaronsen A lighting strike or any number of things could easily be the ignition source for a fire when the conditions are favorable. Any insurance savings would likely be minimal.
Simple answer: YES!!! Born and raised in Los Angeles in an area with utility poles and every heavy wind or rain (or a car hitting a pole), like clockwork, the power would go out. In 2006, I moved to a neighborhood north of Los Angeles with buried lines (no poles). The new neighborhood is actually much windier than L.A. was and the power does NOT go out. I think I can count on ONE HAND the number of times the power has gone out since 2006; it even stayed on during the recent ‘hurricane’ we experienced in Southern California!!!! 😮👍
In LA, people ought to have solar and a small battery system. That would suffice.
In the Netherlands, only the high voltage transport lines (110-380 kV) are above ground to bridge large distances. These are attached to 60m tall towers, so way above any tree line. After that, all lines are buried underground. Flooding does nothing to insulated underground wires and maintenance cost is next to none, because these wires are not exposed to the elements. I think the last power outage we had was like 5 years ago and that was due to a fire at a transformer station. 6 million to bury a mile of wire underground seems filthy excessive though.
It's California, they don't know how to do things at a reasonable cost, that's why people making six figures can still be homeless there. It's truly insane.
Look up Redwoods…now I don’t know where exactly this is being done but they are some of the biggest in the world some over 90m
The Netherlands is a tiny country compared to the United States.
@@RBzee112That's always the excuse the US gives for infrastructure challenges they can't seem to solve! It was the same excuse they gave for highspeed rail, until China an equally big country came along. The challenges in America are a mixture of greed, NIMBY, Kafkaesque bureaucracy and vested interests stifling change etc.
The saying goes "The US always does what's right... After they've tried everything else".
@@RBzee112 yes, the Netherlands is a tiny country, but we also have a tiny population and a tiny GDP compared to the US. If we can do it here, you can do it there.
People are complaining about the cost of undergrounding lines, but the real wasted expense is a utility having shareholders. Those shareholders take far more money than undergrounding lines
Facts
It’s private company not non profit organization or government. Blaming shareholder for being greedy is not the solution. Instead creating state owned government body managing utilities is the way
@@user-vw6mu8gt6c Yes because no greedy or lazy people work for the state organization
@@user-vw6mu8gt6c My utility company back where I grew up in rural Pennsylvania was a Co-Op. It was SO much nicer than the for-profit company that supplies my energy here in Denver.
@@user-vw6mu8gt6c Yea, that's exactly what he's suggesting....
Not only will this be better for our environment, but it will also be better for people in general walking under power lines. I've seen videos of live power lines falling on people and it's very scary to see.
This is why public services should be PUBLIC, otherwise we are either stuck with unaffordable services, end up using public money for private profit or both!
Ehh... I've seen public utilities run by local gov and the local govs treat it as a piggy bank.
@@nahnahson sometimes, but private companies will ALWAYS use them as a piggy bank. Also public use can be fixed with proper legislation.
The focus of a public company is providing a service, the focus of a private company is generating profit.
Sometimes one can have both, public and private offerings, like the health service in Mexico which makes it far superior to the one on the USA. Note: I was born in Mexico but now I live in NYC with health insurance (expensive and almost useless), so I know first hand both systems.
$10B divided by the 16m PG&E customers equals $625. If we split that over 10 years to do the upgrades, then it's $62.5 per customer per year or $5.2 per month. So not that much of an increase in customers monthly bills. Especially if instead of evenly splitting the cost they charge per kW used or charge a higher rate to corporations... Maybe get some state funding... Seems like it's worth it
$5 extra per month for 10 years it’s kinda expensive and I prefer not to pay it. Potentially there is no need to bury all the lines.
Seems like people complain for every $1 it does up…
@jinmi7832
Around 3 percent of the total GDP. Social security is the absolute biggest expense the US has at half I think. I'll look later.
Average customer can expect to see an average increase of $44.26/mo. $3.40 of that is for undergrounding the cables.
It's also EXTREMELY stupid to bury the power lines in earthquake country. Get ready for it to takes weeks, possibly months to make repairs to lines after a quake.
If we can pump oil the width of the US and parts of Canada I'm fairly sure we bury some electrical wires in a waterproof line underground.
Cost to bury. Cost to dig up and fix. Plus the current climate trend of flooding doesn't help.
@@brodriguez11000flooding doesn’t do anything to buried power lines.
It's wayyyy more complicated than it sounds. Then you multiply that difficulty by the endless miles needed... pretty nuts. Practical Engineering did a video on it. After you watch that you start to understand why we don't simply just bury all our electric lines.
@@johnjingleheimersmith9259 modern technology allows for power lines to be buried like how they’re installing Fiber internet. They drill the lines through the soil and air blow them through. Most western european countries have removed them completely while the most popular city in the US (NYC) still has them everywhere.
@@miles5600 It really isn't the same. Just watch Practical Engineerings video on it. They even have to pump liquid nitrogen into lines to repair them as just one single step.
This should’ve been done regardless. It’s horrible seeing all those cables and poles everywhere. In Europe, you never see power lines everywhere like in the USA.
All you have to do is go on Google maps to a rural area of Europe, power lines are above ground just like this rural area of California.
Yeah, they are an eye-sore.
Here in Central Europe our power lines are buried.
Everytime there is a strong storm it always knocks down the power lines because the winds are so strong.
Yes. All power lines should be underground! They do it in most 55+ communities here in NJ. It can be done and it's proven to work.
I live in Denmark, and we just did it in one go. It's been about 20 years, and the investment has paid itself off years ago
Which communities in NJ?
@@miles5600 All of the 55+ communities in ocean county
@@andrewferrauiolo4618 i still see them everywhere there. Which parts have had them buried (without it being new construction)
New Jersey is definitely prone to flooding though, and much of South Jersey has acidic sandy soil that would damage and erode underground wires.
The cost is immense. What would normally cost 10’s of thousands (few spans of overhead) would cost millions to build underground. Also any faults in the future would take much more time and money to repair leaving People out of power for much longer.
Not really. There is a city near me that paid for total underground wiring in their downtown area over 10 years ago. No regrets, no maintenance problems like before from storms, outages and people hitting poles. They only wish they had done it sooner. Don't forget maintenance caused by bad weather affect your rates also, and they have actually saved money.
@@sherriianiro747 yes really. I’m an engineer for a major east coast electric and gas provider. I plan, design and build these new transmission and distribution construction projects.
@@mik3ymomo In the long run it is actually cheaper.
That's why more communities are jumping on board we are pushing for it here too but we know there is more money to be made by the power companies with above ground. Our city was the first in the U.S. to install all underground power lines in new developments.
That was back in the 60's when it started and the movement is back.
@@sherriianiro747 what do you mean long run? What is your experience? Can you cite the study that supports this?
@@mik3ymomo It costs more up front but over time it pays for itself - yes I know the people of the city that did it a decade ago and their electric bills are cheaper. Who do you think pays for it as more and more storms are creating more maintenance and repairs? Our power here goes out over a dozen times a year and we are sick of it, not to mention the lighting strikes to them.
I know the city that buried them did it overwhelming through a vote and it cost 3.4 million to bury the entire downtown area and I believe they may have had funding too but I can find out.
I have wondered for decades why power lines aren't buried. Where I live, power lines both cause fires AND are brought down by winds and snow. It may be expensive to bury them, but that cost is a pittance compared to the financial costs of damages and power outages, not to mention lives lost. Burying them is wise preventative maintenance. Reactive, after-the-fact actions are extremely foolish and expensive. We have brains capable of forethought and foresight for a reason. Let's use them.
Exactly. There was a famous football player here that was killed in his car during a storm from a downed power line!
For those wondering...
"Why is it so expensive if we already have tunnels almost everywhere?"
1) it's dangerous to keep them in the same tunnels
2) the earths magnetic field messes with the energy transfer, so you need to have special insulating
Always have wondered why EVERYTHING isn’t buried. Regardless of cost, it just makes sense. Safety and security is paramount. And reliability too.
Regardless of cost? So you are willing to pay 3-5x your current electric bill in the next few years to have underground lines? Because if you don't like $300 power bills, you'll love the $1,500 a month power bill.
Because there are tons of factors to consider, soil composition, rock, water table, seismic zones, etc. Diagnosing problems becomes a huge pain as you have to dig it all up just to fix minor problems. Look at where power lines are now in towns/cities/countryside, now picture digging ALL of that up to bury cables, sidewalks, streets, and its not like you could follow the exact route the power lines are currently on either. They also trap heat (obviously), in certain areas that can slow energy transfer and eventually damage cables.
And lose that sweet third-world look that overhead power brings?? :)
@@kcgunesq how did you calculate those prices? 🤔
@@huskytail I broke it down more in another comment.
We've not been doing it any differently in the Netherlands.... all cables are burried beneath roads/ or in pipes
I didn't see much power lines in Amsterdam, Netherlands. Not seeing the cables and poles made it feel more organized and aesthetically appealing. I think it's better to clean up and hide the cables, similarly, PC enthusiasts and Data Center infrastructure workers deal with cable management to make the server racks more appealing. It makes sense to do the same with power lines.
They said it will cost $800/person in Cali to bury a small percentage of the electric lines. That $800 includes children. We can't do that and also continue to import millions of third worlders every year--and supply wars all over the world.
bet corporate didn't take a loss, it's always the customer that foots the bill 😢
This should have been done over a decade ago. Wildfires are not new. Downed power lines are not new. Droughts are not new. The only thing that's new is that PG&E can no longer run from their negligence and they're trying to put a postive spin on long-overdue remediation efforts.
People are all in favor until they find out how much it will cost and that customers are going to pay for it. Who will people blame and sue when they can't blame the electric company anymore? What about lightning caused fires?
I've been asking this question for 30 years. Especially in hurricane or high snow areas.
It definitely should be a long term goal, focusing first on high risk areas.
Dumb not burying everything. Leaving poles still means tree maintenance.
comments like this show you have no idea. Most places in the u.s. have clay based soil meaning these would shift and break every few years. I donno about you but i dont see it being plausable for the city to dig up my yard every few years due to the ground shifting
@@oyeahisbest123your comment shows you don’t know, you can simply include extra slack underground to accommodate for the shifting. Also, if clay soils can’t support underground infrastructure, how are you receiving running water? Bluetooth?😂
@@BingusDingusLingus They have to replace the pipes every few years and breaks are extremally common ,Infrastructure is in place for them to be easily replaced from the road to help with this issue. Even with extra slack it still dosent help as were we have underground lines (near Arlington texas etc) they are known to brake frequently and they eventually gave up and put up lines.
It really became a mess with our waterpipes on the last freeze as well....
It's dumb to bury power lines in earthquake country...
@mrsleep0000 what are you talking about, do you think they are buring them on top of fault lines 💀
I love these kinds of brief documentaries. I LOVE THEM. This in particular is quite informative to me. Kudos to the team.
I’ve been saying for years we should invest in burying lines. In the Houston area we lose power in severe storms many times per year, then requiring workers to repair these lines over and over, which is cost to the utilities that could be saved, not even counting the lost revenue on electricity that would otherwise be consumed. The unreliability forces homeowners to invest in expensive standby generators if they want stable power, not lose food to spoilage and possibly even lives when temperatures are over 100 degrees every day for months and we rely on A/C.
They're digging deep trenches? And they're cutting through streets to do it? That's crazy expensive. What's wrong with the horizontal drilling tech that the cable companies use for running fiber optic lines?! The horizontal drilling rigs are minimally invasive and relatively cheap to operate. I'm certain they could install several a miles of power lines for a $1M...
In my parents’ area which is fire prone PG&E replaced all the power poles with bigger poles that are wrapped with fire resistant mesh, have heavier duty connectors, and larger insulated wires. Closer to the nearest town, they put everything underground in the fire prone areas. At least they’re doing something finally. Way too long with poor accountability.
Yes! Smarter, still? Municipal grids. Maybe county level and interlinked. Beefs up security and allows for local generation and storage. Less loss from transmition. Increased security, as each grid can act as a bulkhead, against malicious actors. Hacking, etc. Helps sput alternative fuel industry, by incentivizing local production. Ie. Rooftop solar panels or otherwise unused land which could house solar or wind farms. Even battery banking. Acting as emergency power for the county, or transmitting to a neighbor in need. Make it modular and these batteries could be taken to disaster zones. Cutting time to react down to a minimum. Battery systems built into homes and businesses, kicking on if they need it. Or sent to a neighbor. Puts alot of money in people's pockets, while addressing core problems. What do you think?
Yes they absolutely should. The main excuse to this point has been maintenance, especially during the winter. However, tools and tech today have really rendered that excuse moot. Plenty of tools and equipment exist to allow shallow cold digging. Boxes and access cabinets exist to help too. Below are some of the benefits of burying power lines
-out of the way
-not prone to wind or falling debris
-more tolerant to ground faults due to insulation
-less reclosers needed since less uninsulated wire for potential faults
-zero fire risk
-protected from lightning**
I was told they make more money maintaining the above ground ones, which is why cities have to fight tooth and nail.
Did I just hear this right? An anticipated $44 average increase in monthly customer electric bills? That's really rough, and the poorest most vulnerable users cannot eat increases like that. In my single-family home in Utah, ran by the very efficient Rocky Mountain Power (Pacificorp), eight months out of the year my entire electric bill is around that amount or lower.
PacifiCorp is itself owned by Berkshire Hathaway, who produces 14 tons of CO2 per retail customer. PG&E produces 0.5 tons per retail customer. Clean comes at a cost, but so does dirty.
I love how the video carefully explains how there are costs and benefits of underground power lines, and yet the comment are full armchair engineers screaming "What are you, stupid? Just bury everything."
When I was in middle school, a man ran his car into a power pole, his wife died in the crash, he then headed toward the middle school with a gun, and we were put on lockdown. There are several reasons why updating the grid to something underground may be a good idea, and if the wire were placed in a conduit or tunnel, additional lines, such as fiber optic internet might be installed with more ease, and it may also be a way to route natural gas and/sewer lines as well. Humanity has often placed things underground and sometimes even constructed dwellings. I am gratefully for modern equipment that makes this process easier. It would be prudent to think ahead in my opinion, especially with an infrastructure bill that aims to help curb some of these costs.
Wouldn’t he have ran into the school with the gun even without the power pole
@@Phlegethon I'm with you on that, op is mental.
What the videos are showing is undergrounding done as trenching from the top. This makes it really expensive as whatever is on the surface will need to be patched back after the lines are down, and the trenching will have to go around some structures. Why not bore a narrow gage tunnel instead? A smaller version of what the Boring company is doing. These tunnels could go as deep as needed to pass under foundations, water courses, gas lines and so on.
Also what is the point of leaving up poles to carry the communications cables? I get it they are lower voltage, but much like they often share the same poles with the power lines just put them down in the the same tunnel and help share the cost.
Building tunnels is significantly more expensive than just digging down then patching the road.
Some of those consumer advocacy groups fight tooth and nail against any form of rate increase needed for safety improvements. They are almost as culpable as the utilities in causing catastrophes.
In LA we do not have underground power lines and it is dangerous plus it is an eye sore. In San Diego, they do have buried lines but they also have the highest utility prices in the United States.
they have already been doing this in Europe. my mom is French and I go there almost every year to visit family, and always ask myself this question. why not? it would also just be nicer and blend in with the green.
Great idea!! question, are the same people that can't update our rail roads, bridges, and other major failing/ageing infrastructure going to be in charge of maintaining this? If so, might want to rethink that one, a lot easier to go up then go down and its cheaper. I'm sure all the "highly educated" folks have thought of things like maintenance though, right? 😒
For anywhere remotely populated the answer is YES!
And those remote populations should pay a much larger % of the bill
The US will always looking at saving a few bucks which ironically always ends uo costing a lot more later on smh
Opponents always say it’s too expensive, but the many billions of dollars spent on wild fire recovery each year is reason enough to prevent them in the first place.
Maybe in your state
@@johntippin In California, so yes, very much so haha we have some of the worst if not the worst wild fires in the nation, would definitely benefit putting the cables underground.
Quite a number of commenters below seem to think that a) cables 'rot', or b) soil shifts or c) water is an issue. None of these are true. We've been burying lines for years and years without trouble. On my farm we buried all lines, over a large area, from building to building. It makes us incredibly resistant to windstorms and wildfire. Yes, it was a lot of work. But maintenance costs are zero. Remember, before you start claiming that something cannot be done, look around. Odds are it IS being done, regularly, somewhere else.
Burying power lines is the way to go. The risks associated with wild fires are too great. People’s lives and homes are on the line. This isn’t the area to skimp.
In the gulf south the neighborhoods with buried power lines don’t have nearly the power losses we had before.
Before it was common for trees and limbs blown down by tornadoes to short the cables and cause outages. Now, not so much.
*IN MY EU COUNTRY* the vast majority are buried. No fires, looks nicer, lower EMI
You take it for granted until you see the tram lines and think how ugly they look. Then you realise that everywhere in my home country of the UK is strewn with power lines.
Living costs in the US are very high, but electricity is still very cheap. Those 23 cents average per kWh make Germans jealous.
Would be also useful to identify the houses located in the end of the line. Lease them solar panels + home battery and cut them off automatically from the grid when the wild fire season starts. Because in the winter there is less risk for wild fires and the grid connection can stay on. By giving customer the low cost lease agreement the investment will be pay itself back and can be used to scale the programme further.
This has been talked about for years, problem is too much money.. like over 1,000 usd per foot. Also if they are buried, it takes way longer to find faults, and limited voltages compared to overhead lines (because electron stuff).
Oh, it can be many times more than that. Larger lines can approach or exceed $10,000 a foot. 10x vs overhead is not uncommon.
Why not decentralizing the power generation? Solar cells, storage batteries, and small local power stations?
They should of do that long time ago. Not just wildfire, also storm and strong winds. Ensuring electricity running is essential while in natural disaster
This should have been done years ago. Better now than later, but I hope to see more of these “ambitious” projects.
This is standard building code in my area of ohio that hasnt seen a major storm in over 70 years. We've been wondering when you guys would catch on to this
Just living in a subdivision with buried power lines with other utilities ,we usually only lost power form other issues we do not lose power when a wind storm ,ice storm hit we still have power while the older areas lose power .
Up here in Toronto we had a severe ice storm a few years back. Our block kept power due to underground lines while a block away those with overhead lost power...say no more.
It costs money. Which utilities dont want to pay. No problem. Nationalize power utilities.
I suggest that when repair is needed that the repair be moved underground so over time we keep the budget at minimum and accomplish our goal
Since america kept it simple and made electrical lines all outdoors, it's better to stick with it because it works and is able to quickly repair it. Instead of making it more burden of black outs, boosting electricity prices and traffic jams, it would be logical to think other ways to combat wild fires. Using AI/ML would be the solution. Just hook up a bunch of cameras train a powerful AI/ML model and when weather conditions are bad and trees flying all over the place simply have AI to turn off power and call egineers/technicians to visit the spot. This could work for a long time and at the same time electricity companies can then slowly and economically make underground lines.
Fail to prepare.
Prepare to fail.
Added to fire prevention, aesthetics are important too.
Vermont looks nice because gaudy signage isn't allowed.
When installing new power infrastructure it makes sense to install underground lines because they are more likely to last longer and need less attention and maintenance because they won’t be damaged by high winds and ice storms.
Electricity costs in these areas is going to spike if they have to bury all the power lines. But I suppose it is better than the fires.
What do you do for maintenance? You dig every time?
When you do it, do it adequately. Go for complete underground power cables. It is more expensive to contain these wildfires and rebuild lost homes and, more importantly, lives.
They need a overhaul of future energy systems entirely. The future should be self sustainability not paying for energy anymore.
I came here in 1988 from former USSR. Was shocked to see all those poles (often leaning) with power lines web hanging all over. Did not even know it was possible.
Sounds like a good idea.. But What happens if you need to trouble shoot /repair a line? Ands it cemented... Do you dig it back up?
My city did it about 15 years ago (pop about 12k) amd through a few major storms, we have never lost power. They have said we came close, but never have lost power.
Consumer "advocates" fought undergrounding power lines for decades, nevermind that it reduces the risk of fires and other natural disasters. It also leads to much lower outage rates and boosts home values. This should been done decades ago.
Yikes. I'm an engineer at a competing utility, this is an insane undertaking. This will probably take two decades to finish. I think it would make more sense to actually maintain your powerlines, setup an incentive for people to notify you if there's a serious risk of overgrown brush/etc. Think either of those would be a decent option.
Overhead power lines have a very third-world look tho!
Nobody wants to see that mess.
Suburbs with overhead lines look trashy and it lowers the property values compared to suburbs with buried power.
Plus, the fire/flood safety issues and lower maintenance costs.
@@EveryoneWhoUsesThisTV Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the areas that caught fire like areas in the boonies? Not exactly the Palisades of Los Angeles. We actually do get complaints like that though. When I was doing service level voltage we'd get requests to get rid of the powerlines cuz it blocked their views. The issue is once they hear the cost, they don't want to fit the bill
@@brimmed Interesting...
In most countries the government foots the bill for such infrastructure, so they favour long term savings, aesthetics and safety. The locals would first hear about it when the construction was scheduled.
But I am thinking of the burbs, if it's out in the country then you probably need lines because of the distances involved.
@@EveryoneWhoUsesThisTVnot really sure about the third word and overhead power line. Japan for example has many overhead power lines and other utilities. Just search Japan's overhead power line and there are many pictures of them. The government indeed shows intention to remove them but in the same year they said that, tens of thousands of poles went up.
Customers should NOT be paying for burying power lines. After the project is completed, they can request a modest price increase. As long as they make a profit, they can share the expenses.
The fastest mitigation solution would be installing smart grid technology with automated smart switches. These smart switches automatically turn off power instantly unlike most old fuses. Most of these old fuses won’t blow quickly because the utility gets tired of replacing the fuses every time it blows so they install a much larger one that then burns and burns and burns when a line is struck. The smart switches that FPL uses are set to prevent any sort of fires and requires a technician to go out and verify that the line is clear after the grid attempted to restore it 2-3 times. Each attempt is very short so that it does NOT cause ignition. Why isn’t PG&E using this system?
i love how the 45$ monthly increase only 3$ is for the underground stuff. the rest to the for profit company
I like how they don't tell you the disadvantages of having a buried line.
as long as they remove the $44 tacked on price by 2026 then it would be good. BUT Foothill transit said the same thing with Express lanes. They said the fee would go down after 5 years but after 5 years I'm paying 5x the original rate.
The real question is why they are putting in under the road bed... Just put the cables in a concrete housing 6ft down on the side of the road, that has still got to be cheaper than ripping up and rebuilding the road. Even if most of it won't have to be touched for the next 50-100 years, some parts will, and than its definitely not cheaper.
Burying power lines would absolutely protect them better. But I'm also pretty sure that simple, regular maintenance would also prevent the majority of accidents.
Yeah, I thought that too back in the summer
As a company they should not be allowed to make a profit until all the work is done. There is no reason to charge the customers for maintenance work they have not been doing for the last 20 yrs. Its pretty disgusting. Taking profits and not delivering what they were supposed to.
The main reasons power companies are not doing This is because much of the government subsidies are going towards green energy which is not as efficient as people would like to think.
I think it has its pros and cons BUT the problem I have with it is passing the cost onto the consumers. A judge determined that the cause of one of the fires was a nearly 100 year old hook that held the power lines up finally from 100 years of swaying in the wind it slowly cut thru the hook. PG&E obviously seemed to have neglected spending money for the last 100 years on maintenance of their stuff, customers PAID for them to maintain their stuff for the last 100 years, where did that money go? If they squandered it, why should the consumers have to pay twice, PG&E needs to find the 100 years of maintenance money they wasted and get it back. Screw billing the consumers.
We have overhead lines in Canada too but in Europe they are so uncommon that they equate ours with "wild west" or "steam train" esthetics
How would the used of solar and wind power generation be impacted by this proposed under grounding of wires?
This should have been done 50 years ago. Privatizing utilities has been devastating for progress, as investors care about profits, not progress and safety. Just look how far behind we truly are, compared to all the “liquidity” taken out of our nation through our government’s actions, letting all businesses controlled by finance to create and maintain our massive debt policy. We used to have the highest savings rates in the world, true prosperity, replaced by suppressed wages, and debt used to get the money out for finance’s globalized projects.
The insanity of this is that electricity is already much much higher here than in most places. By 2025 people will be paying 700 dollars a month for PGE
The issue is America has been heavily under funding their asset, public utility and infrastructure. Now the job has become urgent and the bill massive.
They are called insulated twisted bundled power lines. Short term expense for a long time cost saving.
Consumers will always balk at cost increases, and will cry poor when the bill comes. However they should look at burying lines as an investment, not an expense. Almost anyone who can afford to live in California, can adapt to higher power bills. The droughts and high winds are not going away anytime soon.
Well... these capital improvements also comes with a guaranteed return on investment (profit) for PG&E. The more they do, the more profit for them.
The people paying for this are the urban poor. The people benefiting from this the most are the wealthy with second homes in remote mountain communities.
I think having a good response plan is also good, like sounding the alarm and not blocking fleeing people. Plus, I think there are issues with burying transmission lines. There may also be issues with undergrounding for certain climates, like addressing frost lines, earthquakes and flooding. I live in San Diego, so those issues aren't a problem here and why most lines are going underground.
Note from the episode. An increase of $44, but only $3 is for undergrounding. The other $41 is why electricity in CA is so expensive. The reason for those long transmission lines is because the California Utility Commission basically requires electric companies to source their electricity out of state.
In Germany it‘s all under ground except for high voltage. Was always weirded out by the US having it above ground. I guess also because of the war we had the chance to do it right from the beginning.
CA electrical costs are already 70% higher than the national average. And the Captain Obvious here is that buried power lines are more susceptible to damage from earth quakes. They're more expensive to repair, and the damage is more difficult to locate. Last I looked, CA is in a high seismic zone.
There is one issue of burying the power lines that wasn’t mentioned. While the risk for the lines to cause wildfires, it would make them way more expensive to upgrade or add capacity later. In rural areas capacity remains the same for a long time. However in ever expanding communities, capacity increases dramatically over time. Imagine how expensive it would be to dig up the line and rebury them. This means new rapid development area will still have overhead lines. I wonder how underground power lines would fair in a flooded area.
Insulation on wires will not help. The reason why wire were bare to begin with is because the very air we breathe is actually a very good insulator. Birds perched on the wires show that into great effect. The birds have to touch two of the power lines to create circuit. There is a large gap off air between the line they perched on and the second one that would complete the circuit and turn them into mini fried birds. It’s only when a branch that falls on them that causes the two live wires to touch and create a spark. This would happen regardless if wire was insulated or not.
Turing off power may seem like the obvious solution but it also poses some risks too. If Hospitals receive energy from those lines, they would need to operate on emergency power. I didn’t know how much emergency power hospitals have and it could vary greatly, but I would imagine it being limited to the most critical services like ICU and a few ORs for emergency surgeries. Imagine that nightmare scenario could happen.
European countries have an advantage when putting power lines below ground. They have expansive rail systems which are perfect for running utilities along the subway lines. New York City run many of their utilities in their subway lines. Besides when you got multi billion dollar luxury buildings being built, money isn’t a concern and they are constantly digging up and reburying utilities.
we need this in California now !
- Overhead lines should be insulated
- Underground lines where possible
- Poles need to be outfitted with auto-shut off mech so if one segment falls or snaps, that segment is cut off.
I know I'm speaking straight forward but this isn't rocket science.
@Steve-wz6ef writes, "Poles need to be outfitted with auto-shut off mech so if one segment falls or snaps, that segment is cut off."
Shutting off a segment after it falls or snaps is likely too late.
They already had a huge hike in bills last year. Will it come down eventually? I understand it needs to be done, but it's so expensive for the consumer.
It looks 100% better if the lines are underground & you don't have to worry about anything falling on the lines.
The more risk prone communities who need it should be paying for a larger share of the cost, to properly price the choice to live in such a risky area.
Outside of cost, heat build up in conduit is a thing. There is a reason utilities have always favored open free air, bare conductors.
Because you get the most bang per buck.
The power lines should have been buried underground *from the beginning.* It not only prevents spark fires, it prevents people from running into them or ice bringing them down, both of which cause unnecessary electrical outages. Also, the overhead lines are UUUGGGLY!!