What We Learn About Power Lines From Tropical Storm Irene

If nothing else, I'd hope Tropical Storm Irene has pointed out the strategic advantages of putting power lines underground.  You know, instead of waving them in the air for every tree branch, gust of wind, or squirrel with a death wish to take out.

My argument in a nutshell.

I've heard the argument that we can't put power lines underground because then people would electrocute themselves when digging.  I'd like to refute this argument as a reason against using underground power lines by pointing out that:

A) There are already a significant amount of power lines underground (The Age)

B) People get electrocuted by power lines being above ground all the time, as evidenced by all those "You Can't Touch This" PSA commercials.  If you feel any safer having the power lines above ground, read this: Don't Touch This: Myths and Misconceptions

Also not safe.

If the concern is that people will dig into the power lines underground and get electrocuted then simply educating them about this danger should suffice (which we're already doing).  Power lines are dangerous above ground, too, as we've established.  Therefore, when I was a child I got a lot of instruction from my parents and from school about all the dangers of touching power lines.  Generally this is enough, not a lot of kids get killed by power lines each year.  So few, in fact, I couldn't even find any numbers or studies on the subject online, although I did find that an average of 133 workers are killed by power lines per year (www.lanl.gov/safety/electrical/docs/overhead_power_lines_module_4.ppt).  Would putting them underground, where they can't be reached by every fool with ladder or child with a kite, really make them more dangerous?

More dangerous than digging to China.

The argument that we shouldn't bury power lines due to potential loss of life is hypocritical, as well.  Power plants, particularly coal power plants, the source of the power used to power the lines in the first place, kill 13,000 a year with pollution (Huffington Post).  Even with power lines above ground, where they're more likely to come in contact with people, the number of people killed by the lines carrying the electricity is about 1% of the number of people killed by the pollution created to generate the electricity.


Now consider how vulnerable the power grid is being above ground (Reuters).  Tropical Storm Irene was, well... a tropical storm.  Imagine if Irene had been a category 5 hurricane.  What then?  The biggest problem Irene created was 5 million people without power.  That can kill people, too, you know.  It's not just tropical storms that can take power lines down, either.  General wind storms, ice storms, lack of maintenance, and drunk drivers are also adept at taking out power lines.

As far as cost goes, yes it costs more to put the power lines underground.  The Age article sited above goes into some detail about how towns have dealt with that, and while there is a higher initial up-front cost there is also savings down the road.  Like when you don't have to pay to replace all the wires that went down in a tropical storm and the crews working overtime and being bused in from around the country (who then have to be fed and housed) to replace all those cheaper wires.  For a home, while it can cost up to $11,500 to put above ground wires underground, it can also increase the value of the home by 3%, or $15,000 on a $500,000 house.  Pay me now or pay me later, I say.

And how much do you suppose it cost to do this?

Yes, there is an inherent danger to putting power lines underground, as there is an inherent danger in running electricity anywhere, no matter how we do it.  You can hit them with a shovel when digging and they're harder to repair after flooding events, so there is that to consider.  However, being that you already have to call before you dig, would putting more power lines underground really make it any more dangerous than it already is?