• tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 days ago

          I’ve actually come to like the aesthetic in certain contexts. Maybe because a lot of cointries bury their power lines so seeing them snake through the countryside evokes a more quaint and raw setting than I’m used to.

          I’ve been to Kyushu once and it was really lovely down there so I’d like to get back and see more of the place.

    • AbsentBird@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 days ago

      For over a decade every one of my wallpapers was an Aenami piece. They’re just so dang cool.

    • BougieBirdie@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      10 days ago

      I think the long distance transmission lines are kind of neat. They often become roosts for hawks and eagles here, gives you a chance to see some nature near the city.

      The linked comic is ugly as sin though, that’s a high voltage rat nest. And I’m sure there’s a happy medium to be found with that sort of electrical pole, but it doesn’t give me the feeling of serenity that the high tension towers do.

      Underground transformers seem to be the better approach for denser connectivity

    • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      43
      ·
      edit-2
      10 days ago

      While they do affect the skyline, i find them kind of a great. Its like wind turbines, they serve a very easy to understand purpose and exist for everyone while having only little environmental impact and lasting a lomg ass time. Compared to infrastructure like starlink which will only ever serve a few people, obstructs the entire sky for everyone from any angle and will only function for a few(5) years before having to be replaced.

  • Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    10 days ago

    Only in backwater countries that still use those antique washing lines that break with every instance of bad weather.

    • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 days ago

      It’s cheaper to repair them all the time than it is to dig to repair them occasionally

      If you’re wondering why

  • Lasherz12@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    10 days ago

    I think clean power lines look nice. I’d definitely prefer them to a butterfly killing roadway or lighted poles that create light pollution and confuse wildlife.

      • MissJinx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 days ago

        Different countries have different needs. In the US you have hurricanes so it makes sense to.protect the power lines above ground, but here we just had a flood, do you want us to loose power for months everytime it rains a lot? It makes a lot nore sense to us to have it above ground.

      • kboy101222@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        10 days ago

        And have to dig up even more earth using even more big machines? If you did a 50ft power line underground, that’s 50 ft of earth that has to be dug up, not to mention what happens whenever something inevitably goes wrong and you have to dig it all up again. Then you also have to bury transformers, which means you need to cool them.

        There’s many, many good reasons that we use power lines over burying them. Mostly, power lines are so significantly cheaper and easier that it’s not even comparable. I’ve seen the bill when a buried fiber line gets broken. It is crazy expensive.

        • lime!@feddit.nu
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          10 days ago

          i don’t know of a single town here that has overhead power lines in populated areas. those are for long-distance transmission only.

          or, okay, i know of one. but that’s because there’s a steel mill and a hydropower plant there, and you don’t wan to bury lines that carry that around of energy.

        • Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 days ago

          PG&E has been having to cut off power for swaths of customers in California every time we get in a red-flag fire weather situation, because their power lines over the mountains sway and spark and have caused horrendous wildfires. Notably the Camp Fire that completely destroyed the town of Paradise, killing over 85 people and thousands of animals. It’s been pretty expensive for them. Of course, they saved money for decades by skimping on maintenance, but that all went in their executives’ pockets, so they’re having trouble with trying to get up to code and pay their court costs and fines

  • vzq@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    51
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 days ago

    Overhead transmission lines are so 1950s.

    Invest in your country.

    • EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 days ago

      Interestingly, underground lines aren’t feasible in my hometown because of how close the water table is to the surface. Any trench deep enough to bury cables in would have to worry about flooding with groundwater or saltwater in some places.

      The water table is so high that not only are there many places where basements would flood 100% of the year, but the majority of homes still have septic tanks instead of town sewage lines, and you can find houses where the lawn has been raised up with 3 or 4 feet of concrete to raise the septic tank to comply with modern regulations to avoid contaminating the groundwater supply.

      • vzq@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 days ago

        Interestingly, underground lines aren’t feasible in my hometown because of how close the water table is to the surface.

        I’m 4 meters below sea level. We don’t have basements because the buoyancy of the empty space would cause the houses to literally float on ground water. But we do have buried power lines.

        You are being lied to.

      • aeronmelon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        10 days ago

        Japan is slowly burying all their overhead lines into the sidewalks. A lot of urban streets look so much nicer now than they did 10 years ago.

        It’s probably no worse in an earthquake than the water mains, which would inherently be a lot more rigid than cables with intentional slack built into every segment.

        • Farid@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          10 days ago

          Afaik, the problem with buried cables is that in case of a flood or tsunami they might break, get exposed and electrocute someone.

          • kn33@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            10 days ago

            Is that less likely to happen if the pole is knocked down instead of the line dug up?

            • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 days ago

              I know that a downed power line is very visible, especially if it’s live and touching water! I wonder if it’s underground if you might miss the signs

      • stebo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 days ago

        Are they really safer in an earthquake though? Those poles could fall over and people could get caught under the cables, worst case while they’re still under high voltage…

    • HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      10 days ago

      Yes im encouraged by seeing them use those machines to put things in the ground. I had not realized how effiicient it had gotten. May be cheaper than the poles hanging now.

      • SomeoneSomewhere@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        10 days ago

        Still about a 10x cost difference, plus (particularly on transmission lines) there’s issues with extra capacitive loading.

        • HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 days ago

          so 10x more expensive for buried? if so I am really surprised because those machines seem like less than having the cherry picker and such. Granted though I think it only really works were you have long spans of soft soil. If its all concrete your not going to be able to do it. I would hope in the concrete thing though that tunnels would be available for this infrastructure.

          • SomeoneSomewhere@lemmy.nz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 days ago

            Boring through rock is super slow and expensive, plus now your tunnel needs to be big enough to walk & run machines through, and needs aircon to keep it cool. It is done, but usually only in CBD areas where you need lots of cables and room for future expansion. Google ‘cable tunnel’ and you’ll find lots of examples. Trenching machines go through very expensive consumable digging teeth whereas bucket trucks are just a fancy forklift, burning fuel and needing hydraulic & engine maintenance.

            With high voltage cables, the (really thick) insulation gets really expensive, plus you need more conductor (copper/aluminium) because the insulation needs to stay cool. Aerial lines are directly air cooled (better cooling), and can run hotter, because the limit is the metal getting too hot and sagging, not the plastic degrading. Glass insulators are only needed at every tower and can be easily replaced.

            Because keeping the conductor small is important, you need to use expensive copper rather than cheap aluminium for cables.

            You also need regular joints which are very labour intensive, because they have to be perfect and you can’t make a cable the full length because you can’t ship a drum that big.

            If a cable fails, fixing it is much harder than fixing an aerial issue. There was a cable fault in LA in 1989 that took 8 months of round-the-clock work to fix. When a tower falls over (usually because of slope failure or undermining), temporary structures are usually up in a couple of days.

            Digging trenches under roads is much more invasive than pulling cables over roads, and rivers are even worse to deal with. It’s very common for underground cables to be converted to overhead when they cross a river before heading back underground.

            The Western HVDC Link between Scotland and England was built as an undersea cable because it’s so hard to get planning permission and land rights to do major projects in the UK, as High Speed 2 found out.

            • HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 days ago

              So what I have seen is these machines that push them through earth. We do get a lot of commercials in the area telling people to call a number before they do any digging on their property. They come out and mark where the cables are. We did end up having a condo thing where power was knocked out because the guy mismarked the area. He actually came back after and tried to put correct markings in. I heard he got fired.

              • SomeoneSomewhere@lemmy.nz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                8 days ago

                Yeah, directional thrusting is a thing. It was used a lot when contractors were installing NZ’s new fibre network about a decade ago. I don’t think it’s in as widespread usage for power because power cables tend to have much wider bending radii.

                • HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  8 days ago

                  This sorta surprises me as I would think the fiberoptic would be worse than copper. I guess the thing ones could roll up pretty good but we had to be much more careful with them than the copper internet at least.

    • Vilian@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 days ago

      Investing on your country would be connecting more people to electricity not make the sky look better

      • vzq@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 days ago

        The sky looking better is just one thing. No more blackouts when there’s winds or thunderstorms or just stray branches is the real perk.

    • sharkfinsoup@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 days ago

      There are benefits of overhead lines. They are cheaper to install, maintain, and repair. Diagnosing problems are much easier as well. They’re certainly uglier and easier to damage but you don’t have to dig up the road to fix them.

      Newer cities shouldn’t install overhead lines but to have old cities with overhead lines switch to underground ones is very expensive and takes a lot of time, something smaller cities likely don’t have the budget for.

      • DaPorkchop_@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 days ago

        You don’t have to dig up the roads to fix buried power lines any more than you have to tear up your walls to replace power lines in your house: you install a conduit (basically a pipe) under the road once and if the cable somehow gets damaged and needs to be replaced you can just run new cable through the existing conduit by simply pushing it in on one end and pulling from the other.

        Transformers and other non-cable equipment are typically housed aboveground in little boxes or built in to the house, so they’re actually easier to maintain than if they were installed aboveground on a pole since you don’t need a cherrypicker to access it.

        Obviously in a less wealthy small town with existing overhead infrastructure it doesn’t make much sense to move it all underground “just because”, but if you’re already trenching under the road to install water/sewage/gas mains, it won’t cost much extra to throw down an additional one or two smaller conduits for running power cables or telephone/cable/fiber lines.

    • Eiri@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 days ago

      Remembering that show frustrates me. How did they start with such a hilarious premise and end up with a show that’s okay and not one milligram more?