• gastroglizzy@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    Ask New York City. It’s expensive af every time a change needs to be made underground because you have to dig everything up, and once you’re down there, it’s just a nest of wires in conduit so knowing which one you’re supposed to work on can be a challenge.

    Underground wires have to be insulated to prevent short circuits to ground. The longer a wire needs to go, and the more power it needs to carry, the thicker it needs to be. Since insulation goes around the outside, this increases exponentially and the cable quickly becomes mostly insulation in many cases, which is expensive and inefficient.

    Also, there’s only so much ground you can dig up before you hit bedrock. So, in some cases, power infrastructure expansion is limited because there’s nowhere to bury the wires.

    In many places it’s easier to let the damage happen and repair it cheaply.

    • BananaTrifleViolin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 days ago

      Yet in London, power lines are buried, alongside gas and water supplies and most of the telephony network.

      Its a choice about what cost is acxeptable for the long term benefits of protection from the elements and safety generally. It costs more upfront, but extends the lifespan of cables as theyre protected from temperatures, UV, fainfall, and falling tree branches.

      When they do need repair / replacement it requires digging but theyre generally subsurface, and many utilities are under pavements or to one side of the road, allowing roads to be kept partially open. But they generally require repair less frequently than exposed cabling.