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.worldOPEnglish
    6·
    2 months ago

    Is that the real cost differential? Someone else said it’s only 5-7x more expensive which doesn’t sound that bad

    Not to discount the significance of such expenses but 5-7x is way different than 100x the expense

    also the value of lost power can be significant, if someone dies you lose all their economic output for life and some people can work from home so even a few hundred people losing power could add up and have been worth paying for underground cables

    • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
      41·
      2 months ago

      Every major infrastructure project that involves tunneling or digging runs into massive cost overruns, so basing the number on a cost estimate is already fishy. 100x is probably overkill, but not absurdly so. US infrastructure averages 8-12x more than elsewhere in the world, and it’s getting worse. New York adding less than two miles of track to their subway still cost more than double the estimate. California is spending infinite money on a rail line that may never exist.