Down With the Poles? Up With The Costs
|
TOOLBOX
   Resize
COMMENT
 Discussion Policy
 CLOSE
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
Who's Blogging  |
Saturday, April 30, 2005
The telephone poles in my neighborhood lean precariously. One is so wobbly that workers refuse to climb it to make repairs. The jumble of overhead wires and cables leading to my house does little for its curb appeal.
Shove those lines underground, remove the poles and be done with it!
What a joy it would be to watch the phases of the moon without obstruction. Street trees could grow normally, without the haphazard whacking they get now when they tangle with those unsightly lines.
Putting lines underground would mean an end to outages caused by ice or fallen trees. It would free up sidewalk space, so people using wheelchairs and strollers could move more freely.
In 2000, vehicle collisions with utility poles resulted in 1,100 fatalities nationwide. Remove the poles, reduce the accidents.
As desirable as all that sounds, it turns out that moving electrical and telecommunication lines underground isn't as easy as it seems -- or as foolproof.
For almost 30 years, new construction in Maryland has been required to have underground utilities, unless that would be economically unfeasible. Even though there is no such mandate in Virginia, in 2003 Virginia Power put 96 percent of its new residential service underground.
But in older communities such as mine, developed in the 1930s, "it's not a matter of laying a trench and removing a pole," said Robert Dobkin, a spokesman for Pepco. Tearing up yards, sidewalks and streets to install conduits, transformers and other equipment makes costs soar.
In fact, in January of this year, two extensive reports -- one by Edison Electric Institute, the association of U.S. shareholder-owned electric companies, and one by the Virginia State Corporation Commission -- reached the same conclusion. The trade-off between cost and aesthetics does not warrant wholesale burial of utilities in older communities.
"Cost" is the operative word here.
When the State Corporation Commission solicited public comments on the desirability of burying utilities in older communities, homeowners overwhelmingly applauded. Many respondents said they were even willing to pay a "reasonable cost" for the service, but the definition of reasonable is vague. A respondent said she wouldn't mind paying "an additional $1 to $3 a month."
Brace yourself.
