Power Lines Must Go, But Where?

[Marcus Allen]

Ok, I have sat on this pet peeve for years now and must voice my extreme distaste for electrical power lines that dot our neighborhoods and communities. I just finished viewing posts of The Heights and First Ward as well as revisiting pixs of other HTown neighborhoods. I can't stand them. Such a blight on communities around this country. But, other than burying them or building so close and running them across the roofs of structures, I am not for sure there is an alternative to this peeve of mine. Any thoughts? Am I being obsessive? Do any of you think they blight what could really be beautiful neighborhoods? Anyone know of wireless electricity possibilities? LOL.

[democide]

It's really hard not to notice the power lines, they are all over the place!  They sure ruin a great picture too.  The only thing I can think of is when I was in Calgary, I don't remember seeing any power lines anywhere.  Turns out they have theirs underground.  I'm thinking it has something to do with their extreme winters.  Anyways, I loved it, so that's the way to go.

[Subdude]

There is a lot of resistance to burying power lines because it is very expensive to do so.  That said, when I worked for a utility our engineers argued that the savings in repair costs justified the extra expense, at least in urban environments.  In rural areas they felt the argument for burying the lines was less clear.  Once I was riding down Dunlavy with a friend who mentioned that all of the overhead power lines made it look like a third world country - and he was from Turkey!

 

 

[Naviguessor]

I grew up in Overland Park, KS in suburban Kansaa City. The majority of Neighborhood power lines, built in the 1970's and after were all buried. The reason was purely for asthetics. All the traffic lights have sensors since the 70's too. Every one. Another concept we can seem to grasp. Must be "too expensive" as well.

[samagon]

Buried power lines would really transform our landscape. It would really amplify the beauty of our town and people would get a charge out of the change. As others have mentioned, there's a lot of resistance. People with that thinking would need to be discharged before we could overcome that impedance. Myself, I am somewhat neutral on the subject. 

 

Sorry, for all the puns, I hope my post doesn't make anyone short circuit.

 

Anyway, Tesla did a lot of testing for transmitting electrical current over the air, the biggest problem with this is there's no real way to measure how much electricity someone is using, and as I recall, it was only useful for really high voltages. 

[Subdude]

I would add that the way the Texas electricity market was structured upon deregulation,  I think it would be difficult to come up with a funding mechanism for burying power lines.  Right now there is absolutely no incentive to do so.  

 

[Houston19514]

I would add that the way the Texas electricity market was structured upon deregulation,  I think it would be difficult to come up with a funding mechanism for burying power lines.  Right now there is absolutely no incentive to do so.  

 

What has changed regarding the delivery of electricity?  The delivery is still completely regulated.

 

[Subdude]

The transmission companies pass through the cost, but their incentives are for reliability, not aesthetics.  Also, the lines are for the most part owned by private companies, not governmental entities that could conceivably mandate programs such as line burial.

 

[Houston19514]

The transmission companies pass through the cost, but their incentives are for reliability, not aesthetics.  

 

and how has that changed since deregulation?   It is no more or less difficult to come up with a funding mechanism for burying electric lines now than pre-deregulation. 

 

Here is an interesting article on the topic of burying electric distribution lines.

[Marcus Allen]

Thanks all. I think of all the trees that could be planted via walkways and those that wouldn't be butchered when they conflict with power lines. It's too bad aesthetics don't take priority in this case. What a transformation to this and other cities if the lines could be hidden somehow.

[barracuda]

Another less expensive option is to locate the power lined behind properties, along rear property lines. Many areas in the Heights are like this. It does at least make the street perspective more attractive.

[KinkaidAlum]

How much does it cost to keep the lines clear?

 

I've lived in Houston for 3 years now and they have come by my house twice to trim trees away from the lines. I can only assume they have to do this all over the city. 

 

Also, I was secretly hoping that last week's "winter storm" would have produced some ice. Those lines would have been snapping all over town.

[Naviguessor]

Imagine how much it cost to repair all the downed lines and equipment after Ike. Certainly underground utilities would be much more stable when hurricane's hit. 

[Marcus Allen]

Thank you Naviguessor. I was thinking along those same lines. For the most part I see us HAIFers as aesthetic ambassadors verses those that only look at the bottom line....money. Sigh. But seriously, these power lines must go.

[Houston19514]

Thank you Naviguessor. I was thinking along those same lines. For the most part I see us HAIFers as aesthetic ambassadors verses those that only look at the bottom line....money. Sigh. But seriously, these power lines must go.

 

What Naviguessor said is correct.  However, also to be considered is that burying the lines, especially in already-developed areas, is not just a little more expensive, it is exponentially more expensive and the cost, like it or not, would be paid by the ratepayers (that's you and me).  Further, while it is certainly true that the underground lines would be more stable and need repairs less often, they are not fail-proof and when they do fail, they are exponentially more expensive and time-consuming to repair.

 

We also need to keep in mind that these overhead delivery systems carry not just electricity, but telephone and cable services.  If we want to get rid of the poles and overhead wires, all of those need to be buried, meaning even more expense.

 

That is not to say we shouldn't consider it or maybe even do it, but we need to be fully aware of what we are getting into and just how much we would be paying for it.

 

Edit:  From a recent NYC study regarding the possibility of burying their electric distribution system (What?  Cities other than Houston have above-ground electric wires?  Even the most urban and cosmopolitan city in America???):

 

 

To the extent that a reduction in adverse aesthetic and visual effects of overhead systems is a desired result, that may not be achievable because the electric utility poles currently in use serve multiple functions, including support for hard wire telephone service, cable television lines, and other fiber facilities. The physical removal of poles would therefore depend on placing these infrastructure elements

underground as well, at a considerable additional expense.

 

A recent study recently issued by a national utility industry trade group, the Edison Electric Institute (EEI), attached hereto as Appendix B, found that over the last ten years, at least eleven studies or reports have been generated by various states on the merits of undergrounding overhead electric lines as a means of dealing with the impact of large storms. To date, however, no state utility commission has

recommended wholesale undergrounding of the utility infrastructure. EEI conducted surveys of consumers’ willingness to pay for underground infrastructure, and found that residents typically were willing to pay an additional 0-

10% on the monthly retail bill for enhanced security from undergrounding. However, the EEI study also found that the capital cost associated with undergrounding entire utility systems would, on average, double residential retail bill charges.

The principal benefits and challenges to undergrounding were examined in the EEI Report.  The perceived value of undergrounding includes both heightened reliability and improved aesthetics. Possible problems associated with undergrounding include costs, operation and maintenance concerns including longer repair times, and a lessened longevity of components – potentially only 30 years for underground system elements versus as long as 50 years with overhead

facilities.

 

I think you would probably enjoy taking a look at the full NYC study.

[Marcus Allen]

Very helpful. Thanks. Maybe then an alternative is like what was suggested above, build new neighborhoods with a special throughway for such things hidden behind the buildings. And then find ways to slowly incorporate this placement in already established neighborhoods.