Other countries use liquid tite conduit and watertite designer for transformers the ground worker is a unceasing worker of 56 to 64 degrees after every assail we change obsolete installation systems with obsolete installation systems only to be blown downbound again are we insane or just quick fixers.Note: the initial cost would be enthusiastic but the fact of feat without power,hitting poles parcel right of structure would modification greatly.
so far we have one mortal with enthusiastic reasoning 100 years ago we had setup poles,and the argument that it takes smaller lines above ground makes about as such sense as it takes more gas to go 1 knot in a delve than 1 knot through open air and there is a identify of conduit that can be run and be liquid tite and as far as bushel it would cost far less in the long run as winds,snow ice,and dropping trees would not interact as far as a earthquake pvc schedule 80 will take a pounding and if the quake is bigger than the conduit can appendage beleive me there won’t be no poles up nor will there be houses to run power to
Grid Notepad
Jul
4th
By MoltarRocks on Jul 4, 2010 | Reply
Earthquakes happen.
And in many places you have a lot of mountains to go over. Not exactly feasible to put the lines through that way.
By Sunshine on Jul 4, 2010 | Reply
Because it’s difficult and costly to dig up the wires to look for problems or repairs, to protect them fro water and burrowing animals, and if the county dug up my yard every time the power went out and they wanted to look, I’d be pissed.
By George B on Jul 4, 2010 | Reply
Installing them underground and maintaing an underground system are both considerably more expensive.
By 4ver_asking on Jul 4, 2010 | Reply
the cost of digging up the ground for repairs would be outragious
not to mention how much longer it takes to find a problem and solve it
most other countries when they have a problem take weeks to find and fix
in the U.S.A it takes minutes or hours
By Soon Dead Ted on Jul 4, 2010 | Reply
Everything in my geographical location is now underground, but, some areas are not suitable for it.
Using “other countries do it” is the worst possible argument a person can possibly find to defend any position.
By Jacob W on Jul 4, 2010 | Reply
You are asking the same question I keep asking. I am an old guy. Back when I was a child I won a prize with a essay I wrote. The teacher was discussing the time, way in the future (this was about 1962) when we would enter the 21st Century.
We were supposed to write about things that we thought we would or would not see anymore. Kids wrote about flying cars, taller buildings, regular flights to the moon etc.
I took a more practical approach. I stated that we would no longer see power lines. Even then, I was disturbed at the way telephone poles looked. They seemed so primitive with all the junk hanging off them and the rat’s nest look. They seemed like something we would see back when Thomas Edison first invented the light bulb.
I won with that essay. Everyone agreed that by the 21st century that would be the case. Oh, well.
*
By mikey on Jul 4, 2010 | Reply
High tension lines, that handle large volumes of “electricity”, which of course is really only electrons, are much more efficient with a smaller diameter if above ground than if below ground. Underground transmission would require larger ‘wires’ to transmit the same amount of power. It is also cheaper to put them up, and easier to replace and maintain. What other countries are you referring to? Mexico?
By Stone K on Jul 4, 2010 | Reply
Cheaper, faster, easier to maintain, even digging up the ground to place a conduit requires all kinds of environmental studies and approvals.
so for a quarter of the cost and in less than a quarter of the time and hassle you can put up open air lines.
By ranger_co_1_75 on Jul 4, 2010 | Reply
We also use under ground conduits in our newer additions to city’s.
I have been to both Europe and Asia. Europe has the same system we have, mostly above ground, but being placed under ground as the infrastructure expands. Asia is almost entirely above ground and not making any moves towards putting utilities underground.
People with older homes and businesses don’t want their houses tore down so the utilities can be placed underground, so we just have to wait until the whole subdivision is revitalized.
By rare2findd on Jul 4, 2010 | Reply
not sure
By Erudite#1 on Jul 5, 2010 | Reply
Here in Michigan it’s done because it’s cheaper. The powers that be do not and will not look toward the future.