E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSHARTFORD, Conn. -- Once again, Connecticut's trees are at the center of a storm.
Countless trees and limbs were brought down by the remnants of Hurricane Irene in late August. Two months later, trees with their leaves still fully on branches were overwhelmed by a rare October snowstorm and were felled by heavy snow.
Both times, overhead electric lines were tangled in downed branches, which blocked roads and slowed repair trucks.
Politicians, utilities and tree-lovers are now battling over the future of trees in one of the most heavily forested states.
Investigations are focusing on how to avoid future widespread outages such as those that affected more than 800,000 utility customers for a week or longer in October and early November. One solution that's emerging is to trim or remove trees to provide greater clearance for overhead wires.
Opponents of broader tree clearance have skewed priorities, said state Sen. Steve Cassano, D-Manchester.
"Those same people were not pleased to not have power for eight days or 10, let alone two blackouts in six, eight weeks," he said.
The cause of the outages was obvious, Cassano said.
"The reason the power was down was because of trees," he said. "We have been complaining about being over-treed, and a lot of people would probably disagree."
The Greenwich Tree Conservancy would disagree. It's urging state officials to require Connecticut Light & Power to bury power lines to avoid tree removal.
"The cutting down of hundreds of thousands of trees is not going to solve the problem," said Peter Malkin, president of the group. "It would be an environmental disaster."
He said trimming also is unacceptable because it "takes the heart out of the trees and they die."
But United Illuminating, which serves 325,000 customers, says burying power lines is prohibitively expensive.
"It isn't prudent and customers don't appear to be in the mood to pay those costs," said spokesman Michael West.
In addition, trimming alone does not solve the problem, he said. United Illuminating trimmed trees in its easements and outages still occurred, he said.
Malkin said not burying power lines leads to costly cleanup and restoration operations after destructive storms. Connecticut Light & Power and its parent company, Northeast Utilities, have said it expects the tab to be $200 million or more for cleanup and restoration related to the two storms.
Utilities are required to provide uninterrupted service, but fail to do so when the weather turns nasty, Malkin said.
"The system we have in Connecticut is 19th-century. It must be updated," Malkin said.
Mitch Gross, a spokesman for Connecticut Light & Power, said the utility has 17,000 miles of electric lines and interest by towns in burying lines evaporates when CL&P officials mention the cost. In addition, lines belonging to cable and telephone companies also would have to be buried in construction projects that are extremely disruptive, Gross said.
In the conflict between aesthetics and trimming or removing trees to ensure reliable electricity, the balance has shifted to cutting trees because of the outages, said Dave Goodson, manager of vegetation management at CL&P.
The state's largest utility is asking Gov. Dannel P. Malloy and legislators to change state law that limits tree cutting and trimming, he said. For example, making it easier to cut trees on private property and streamlining an array of state laws and local ordinances governing tree maintenance in scores of towns are among changes that are needed, Goodson said.
"There is no short-term fix here," he said.
The battle over trees covers a lot of ground. As much as 58 percent of Connecticut is forested, making it 12th among the states in forest cover, said Jeffrey Ward, chief scientist at the Department of Forestry and Horticulture at the Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station.
"That's one of our connections to nature," he said. "When you think of New England, you think of stone walls and trees."
Leave a Comment:
Burying the lines is the least expensive in the long term, for multiple reasons. People used to care more about generations to come; now they just seem to care about their own generation. It's sad.
Short sightedness at its best. When nature is destroying your infrastructure, change your infrastructure. If you try to change nature, it will kill you. One way or another.
Most towns go quiet when the cost is mentioned....perhaps they are also informed that in order to bury the lines, you have to take an easement, which has to be cleared because you can't bury anything without digging. In the digging of an easement, they will have to clear enough room to work, to install the lines, the protective cover's and everything else that would be associated with burying the lines. When the power company tells you how many trees they would have to cut down to be able to clear enough of a path to bury the lines, will you still be agreeable to burying the lines. oh and the trees will have to remain down along the easement area as the roots of the trees will eventually destroy the lines. You will save more trees by trimming them around the power lines than by demanding they bury the lines.
All actions and activities have an impact, the thing that people ought to be wishing to do is to find a solution that will be the least disruptive and take into account the impact and consequences of every option.
Trees aren't the problem. It is where PEOPLE plant them. I can point to 100s of trees within 2 miles of my home that were planted too close to power lines. Some directly under them. I am not talking about major hi tension line but lines running through subdivisions. People never take into account that the small tree you plant today will be 50ft. to 70ft. tall some day and that it with have a 30ft. branch spread. My power company does what it can legally to trim the trees back from the lines but the can't completely cut them down because it is illegal and owners complain. Some fight it in court. The way they have to trim some trees really ruins the trees aesthetic look. I had a one home that the neighbor planted a small pine tree about two feet from the lot line years before I owned it. Probably before I was born. That tree grew 15 foot taller that my home. It was all over my house. Rubbing and pushing up my shingles on my roof. It was in my gutters and causing me to have to clean my gutters yearly. The power line to her home ran through it's branches. In bad weather it would bang against my home. I asked the neighbor if I could trim it back. She said no. I offered to pay a tree company to do it. So she would not be liable. She said no. Finally it just got nasty between us over that and other issues. So one day I just cut it back to the lot line. The tree leaned towards her home by about 7ft. at the top and looked like crap because I cut so much of it off. Basically I cut half of the tree off. Putting all the weight of the remaining branches on her side of the tree. She called the cops and when they looked at the situation told her that as long as I stayed on my property that I had the right to cut it back to the property line. Again I offered to cut it down or have it professionally done she said no again. When I re-sodded my lawn I rototilled the area and it cut the roots that were in my back yard. Again I was worried the tree would fall. Most likely on the neighbors house. I asked the new owner if I could remove or have the tree removed and he said no. Some people lack common sense. That tree had become a problem and had to go.
Learn to live without electric power.
I live in the New Orleans area. After a series of hurricanes starting with Cindy which occurred 1 1/2 months before Katrina, the local power company cut back branches & limbs such that they would not hit the lines. The power company paid for this. Now, if a tree is completely blown over, it will take down the lines and at least one pole with it and the tree will be lost completely. They now do this every year in May before the hurricane season starts. Burying the lines is an answer but creates easement issues, is expensive and if a transformer blows, it will take much longer for them to replace it and get the power back on. Also, if the winds are strong enough, they will take down the high voltage towers the feed the lines in the neighborhoods and the power will go out whether the neighborhood lines are buried or not.
It's called Mother Nature.
WRONG!!! Typical person who does not know what they are talking about. First, the cost of burying them in existing neighborhoods (unless every person is will to have their driveways torn up and repair oon their own dime). Second, 10x as costly and slower to repair (oops, got to dig it up rather then rehang).. Third, added cost of insulating.
Burying is cost effective in new subdivisions, because you can lay it first, and you know where all of the other underground items are. Not so in developed.
Do you live in CT? Burying here means blasting through ledge. It isn't digging sand in the desert. IT takes many decades to pay off.
Furthermore, these two storms were extraordinary weather events. "100 year storms" which by chance happened a few months apart. They are not a bellwether of problems to come.
Hmmmmm,
Why aren't all the tree-huggers putting solar panels on their roof's like I did?
Why aren't all the tree-huggers installing a geothermal energy system like I did?
Why aren't all the tree-huggers upgrading their insulation, windows and doors like I did?
Why? Because they're hypocrites.
They don't want to do it, they want someone else to do it for them. And PULEEZ don't start with the high cost of these systems. The AEI (Alternative Energy Institute) was created in 1977, OVER 34 YEARS AGO!!! You've had the Dot-Com and Housing Booms to start creating your "energy independence".
I had a geothermal system installed over 16 years ago that still works perfectly. I have enough solar collection to power 68% of my home,,,,YEAR ROUND ! ! ! My insulation R-ratings are all at or above the recommendations of the WAP (Weatherization Assistance Program) guidelines. I have updated my appliances over 4 times in the last 23 years using Energy Star recommendations. This has come at significant cost outlay on my part but my carbon footprint is 28% of the average American household and my cost savings are double what they would have been otherwise.
And don't worry, I am NOT the 1% you so despise. But I also DON'T have a 42" Plasma, a boat, RV of any kind, a 3,000 sq ft home or a photo album of a bunch of lavish vacations or cruises.
And by the way, do you think digging up all the easements and burrowing under these 50+ year old trees, to place all the underground lines, isn't going to affect them also?
Make up your minds, all you eviro-mental-maniacs. Either stop being the problem or start being the solution. It's time to either put up or shut up.
Oh, one more thing, even with all I've done to become less energy dependent, guess what?
I still promote DRILL BABY DRILL!
No.
It is in no way whatsoever less expensive to bury.
Any way you want to slice it. Environmentally, economically, whatever.
Tell me, how much will it cost to replace those lines once the insulation wears out? What will happen when tree roots break the lines? The large majority of utility lines are along highways, tell me, how would you propose moving them when the road gets widened? Direct bury high voltage lines are 10-20x more expensive than aerial un-insulated ones, and that doesn't even count the cost of burying it. Where is that money going to come from? You? What about all that soil erosion from cutting 14,000 miles of trenches? What about the effect on groundwater of directly burying 14,000 miles of pcbs, lead, and copper? What about how cutting the roots of a tree is far more damaging than cutting its limbs?
People clamoring to bury all utility lines have an astounding level of ignorance about which they are speaking. I wish the author of this article would have done a little research about the issue rather than opting to take the easy route and give voice to an obviously irrational lobbyist.
I *LIVE* in Connecticut. I was affected by these power outages. And I say LEAVE OUR BEAUTIFUL TREES ALONE. Bury the power lines. Many of us would gladly eat the cost via taxes to leave the beautiful trees our state is known for intact. They give us oxygen to breathe, shade in the summer, and beautiful bursts of color in the autumn. They house countless squirrels, birds, and other arboreal creatures. The very idea of losing them brings tears to my eyes. If they begin to cut our trees I'll be the first one in line to climb up them so that if they want to cut them down, they'll have to cut me out of them first.
Burial of utilities can cost somewhere in the neighborhood of $100K per mile thats $140 million plus the cost of easements/ROW and permits. Not even counting the cost of removal of the old poles and transformers, which are considered toxic waste. Who should pay for it? Get real people with fund deficits everywhere it's not practical.
Same thing in Hurricane-prone Florida. No thoughts about everyone else's well-being or the general good of the community.
Actually, just no thought.
silvershadows: Um, no. I also live in CT and to bury everything would cost (ready?) BILLIONS. Cut the trees near the lines. Want to see trees? GET OUT OF YOUR CAR AND WALK IN THE WOODS! They outnumber the ones by the roadside about 50:1.
You don't have to dig trenches anymore you can bore through, the gas company redid all their lines in Durham recently doing it that way. Also why not drop fiber in for community wi fi or AMI infrastructure at the same time, bundling a lot of projects that need to be buried at once saves everyone money.
Bury them!
elyhim: Way too sensible. Also this gets into the area of the Presidents Infrastructure claims.
Are these native species of trees or plant biological diversity, the creators of Earth's ecosystems, our natural and wild land communities?
Science has stated the most vital evolutionary experience was the appearance of plants and trees on the land. So, what do trees do for the Earth and mankind. Trees release oxygen and evapotranspire cooling water vapor that cools the leaves, the soil and the surrounding area. Each tree stores many pounds of the heat trapping gases in its living, life giving body. Trees are the natural sequestration of C02 and methane and they are in the eco-nomy of rainfall. Trees shelter the heat of the sun from the Earth.
Slicing down trees or deforestation heats up and dries out the climate. As plant biological diversity is at the bottom of the ecological pyramid, the entire ecosystem is dependent upon plants and trees. Trees also renew and create fresh, new soil. Trees and plants provide the habitat/homes for the animal biological diversity, including their food, their shelter, their cover and nurseries.
If the trees are merely ornaments, their existence isn't as critical as our native biological diversity.
"That's one of our connections to nature," he said. "When you think of New England, you think of stone walls and trees."
The other connection is that Nature is your master and it will make you pay for the inability to make informed decisions, like trimming trees.
Might be less expensive to "mandate" that all homes and businesses have backup generators. Smart people already have generators. We do :-)
Cut down every tree in that socialist state and turn it into a wasteland so the utility company can make an enormous profit.
Why must people like you join in the discussion? Where did it called for to say that CT. is socialist? Stick to the topic and discuss intelligently or stay away.
Actually, Connecticut *was* deforested in Colonial times. There are very few trees in the state that are over 100 years old.
Why not replace fallen lines with break away lines? Much easier to repair next time. Just pick it up and plug it back in.
You know underground lines would solve this issue!!! It would save the trees which we desperately need for oxygen and shade; and the power lines underground would be safer for all involved.
Trees don't make oxygen they make deadly CO2.
Bernie,
Go back to biology class. While trees expire some CO2, they spend the majority of their time converting CO2 into sugars, cellulose and oxygen, O2. People inspire O2 and expire CO2, and burn wood from trees creating CO2.
Bernie-2892518.
That is the dumbest comment I have ever seen. Trees absorb CO2 and expel live giving oxygen. Maybe you should read a book ocassionally.
Bernie, think, and google BEFORE you type. Try this link http://forestry.about.com/od/treephysiology/tp/tree_value.htm
Then learn to educate yourself before posting something ignorant, thanks.
Sort of we want to have our cake and eat it too.
We don't want to cut the trees, and we don't want to pay for a long term solution.
Waaahh, waaahh, waaahhh!
the typical liberal hypocrite.
In what way is Letusreason's remark liberal? Or conservative? Or anything? Sounds like a summation of American politics to me. We want things, but don't like the cost. Nothing is free. Voting is our way of deciding what we want to pay for.
AG99,
I agree with you, too many are ready to slap labels on people without listening to the content of their thought.
If a tree is trimmed by a trained person, the tree doesn't necessarily die. No, it doesn't look the same. But it does provide some room for the power lines. How do they know that people won't pay to have the lines buried underground? Did they ask the people, or did they, like most city officials, just say that to get out of conducting some sort of survey?
The people should not have to pay, the company can do it and it's cheaper in the long run. Water/Sewer and gas all do it, electricity is more expensive and yet the infrastructure for wires is cheap.
Out here in the West, Tree trimming is natural, It is not random but done with care by expert that seal the cuts made, often the trees are healthier then trees not trimmed, otherwise either cough up more in electric rates to bury the lines or live with the power outages as the trees are ripped apart and die from the storms, Instead of just saying No, try working together towards a solution
They don't seal the cuts where I live. Doesn't seem to hurt the trees any though. However, pines and spruces have central trunks and it's easy to cut overhead branches at their origin. Many deciduous trees, especially maples, have branching trunks. Perhaps trimming them is more destructive.
Scott and AG99,
One of the issues here is the way the trees are trimmed and by whom. Power companies are in the generation and distribution business, not tree surgery, or even land preparation. They contract out tree trimming and removal, whether the job is for a new power feed line or maintenance of residential distribution. The quality of the work then depends on the quality and efficiency of the contractor and its crews. Whether paid by the job, the mile or the trees involved, the object for the contractor is the same, cut the most in the least amount of time.
In my area, SE Indiana, this has resulted in flat-sided, flat-topped trees with unstable structures. Rather than cutting limbs back to the trunk, they often leave 5-10' bare branches protruding. The area's trees invariably sprout fast growing sucker limbs, concentrating more weight at the top of the tree and the ends of the trimmed branches, making them more likely to break or uproot in wind or ice conditions. And requiring more frequent trimmings. Likewise, trees in groves survive better than "specimen" trees off by themselves, as they have no surrounding trees to absorb wind buffeting.
I am NOT a tree-hugger. I had five "water" maples cut on my small property due to their growth and poor condition from excessive power company trimming, including two that were copsed (trunk cut off at 12-15') which created totally unmanageable top growth. But I also paid over $1000 to have two mature (100 yo) American White elms trimmed and thinned on my church's compact urban close. These trees were located within the city's urban tree protection zone, where the power company contractors are not permitted. Conversely, I and the church lobbied the city to remove, or allow us to remove, a half dead silver maple on the parking in front of our church. The city refused any action other than removing some lower dead branches. When Hurricane Ike visited us, that tree left a scar in the front wall of the church and a gaping hole in a 160 year old stained glass window. Fortunately, we had had the 4x20' window restored a few years earlier and the restorers were able repair and restore the window again using period glass.
Balance must be applied to everything, but when cost and the bottom-line rules business; business will seek the most expedient, cheapest solution, a cheap job which will need to be repeated over and over.
Bummer. I feel for your church. We are a cheap society. Freedom is great and all, but it seems to me it leads mostly to selfishness.
Dude, a 300,000 contract to trim tress on easements every other year is not cheaper.
I live inOhio and our power company came through 10 yrs ago and cut down any tree or bush that was taller than 10 ft and within 50 ft of power lines. 5 yrs later they cut down trees within 100ft of those same lines. What next? 120 or 150 ft will put them in my great room and my roof will be too tall. My property is between the large power lines and my 15ft blue spruce that blocked prying eyes from the school yard behind my home had to be cut down because they were considered to be a hazard to the power lines that are over 100 ft in the air. Logic does not dictate that my trees were a hazard of any kind but that was what the legislature allowed the power company to do. So if your state is thinking of doing the same and limiting the tree locations and heights around power lines be wary of the language of the law.
It sounds like they were allowed to go way too far (a good example for requiring some form of regulation).
We in NH suffered somewhat with Irene, and considerably with the October snowstorm. In severe cases, whole trees toppled over, but as damaging as that was, it was relatively rare. We could live with gambling on that. The major damage (in both events, but mainly and more prevalent in snowstorms) was caused by branches coming down, even weighted down to the point that they touched the wires and shorted them. Common sense tells you (or should tell you) that it's only those branches above the lines that can do this damage. If they would just cut away those branches above the lines, we wouldn't end up with nearly the incredible amount of downed lines that we have been, or destroy the tree. If a tree THAT big enough comes down and cleans out some wires (this would have to be a tree that has been standing for at least fifty years or longer), then I would consider that an act of God, unless it was already 'standing dead' and should have been removed anyway. You can't prevent EVERY accident, and I think we could live with that. The rare uprooted tree will not cause the amount of destruction we witnessed, and not take 4 - 12 days or more to recover from, requiring crews and equipment from all over the country and Canada. A simple, relatively inexpensive and quick solution (as opposed to burying the wires) which should satisfy tree lovers, the power companies, and everyone who hates losing power for two or three weeks.
steel toed boot,
Regarding the relative damage of broken to uprooted trees. I think much depends on the specie and growing conditions. Our experience with Hurricane Ike in SE Indiana was that conifers snapped off at the trunk. The local golf course had a row of 20' spruce planted between a green and the street beyond. Each tree was broken off at about 2-3'. But the deciduous trees mostly uprooted. These are the trees that caused the most damage. One, a huge oak, fell on an acquaintaince home, breaking the roof and rear wall of a substantially framed century old house. Another, across the street from this tree took out a good portion of the third floor of a pre-Civil War manse. Another tree victim was a city "mascot" commerated to the city's founder and reputedly given to the city as a sapling by Lafayette. After two hundred years, the old oak lacked sufficient roots into the hard-pan and shale to withstand the estimated 95-115 mph winds.
Ike put portions of our county without lights for about 5 days, but all parts of the city had power within 3 days. Road clearance was a combined city - public action, with debris first dragged to the side, and finally haulled to a contracted field north of town. We pretty well filled twenty acres, but less than 20% of the trees in town were affected. Burning took months. The commerative tree was sawn and the luimber sold to support local charities. A few other trees were privately salvaged, but most went to the torch.
Bill, It is too bad that you not only lost so many old trees, but that the city didn't make good use of them. We had a tornado go through Minneapolis at the end of May and over 1600 city trees and who knows how many private trees were lost in a swath about 3.5 miles long. Minneapolis came through and cleaned up all of the boulevard trees, cleared out the trees down in the parks and if people could get their private trees to the street by a set date, they took them too. Then they set up a huge staging area in a large city owned lot and ground them into mulch. This then was distributed around the city where we citizens were able to pick it up at no charge and use it for our yards and gardens.
We lost our pine tree that was at least 70 years old, just popped it right out; there were many others just like ours that came down as well. Our boulevard tree also just popped right out, unfortunately onto our car (thank heavens for insurance!). We have since planted a maple in our yard, and next spring the city will finish planting the boulevards; they received many donations of trees this fall and replanted most of the parks that were affected. I drive through our neighborhood and it just looks so sad without all of the big trees.
ccdjr,
We are near several large natural forest areas. The city operates a four-seasons mulching and grinding operation across about 5 acres. Ike just dwarfed our, and the state's, capability to respond in other ways. Unlike you tornado, our destruction, though lighter, was spread across 50-75 miles from Louisville and into Ohio north of Cincinnatti.
I feel your pain at the loss of mature trees. I lived in Waterloo, Iowa at the height of the Dutch Elm blight. To watch city after city block of great trees cuts was sad. Part of the reason I funded the trimming and cleaning the overstory of my church's two Americam white elms. Unfortunately, we still lost one to Dutch Elm last year, had been stnding since 1908. We still have one left, which I still pray for.
""Those same people were not pleased to not have power for eight days or 10, let alone two blackouts in six, eight weeks," he said."
ahhh. the contradicting and idiotic world of the liberal. how funny...
stop the madening:
You are a complete idiot. Expected from a stupid conservative, however. You don't know any better. Get some decent education so you realize what you and your kind are doing to the environment. How selfish of you.
stop the madening: OBVIOUSLY, you a a dumbarse Republican as almost all Republicans are against everything natural.
Silly people trying to live in a Norman Rockwell painting.. hahaha
The mere fact that many parts of our electric supply infrastructure was engineered and built over 100 years ago and now much of our livelihood depends on it's functioning properly it would seem to be overdue for an upgrade.
Run the power lines underground,trim the trees,have the tree lovers police the trees and stop this problem before it happens or cut them all down....yeah it is just that simple,solutions are simple its bs people that are the problem!
And your welcome ,these solution's brought to you by an American Grad from the School of Common Sense.
"Less government spending,ending failed social program spending equals less taxes on us all"
Another Republican Conservative arse.
How pretty are those trees with the tops snapped off from ice storms or major leaders gone from srtong winds! its just a way of life....storms come and trees go. just continue trimming maitenance....buy a generator
The people that contest cutting the necessary trees need to pony up with the money to put the power lines underground. It is easy to be righteous, when it doesn't cost you anything.
Man you people on the east coast whine alot, I'm outside of Seattle so I know about wind and rain storms, they happen all the time. As new lines are put in they are installed underground, but to go back and bury existing lines, well it doesn't pencil out no matter how you look at it. Out here the utility companies hire private contractors to trim and clear branches when and where needed, and guess what,the trees don't die. It seems to be working just fine, at least it has been for as long as I can remember. Don't be afraid of breaking a rule, you see something that needs fixed, fix it.
The cost of repair and the cost of maintenance for easements is certainly higher than using a gopher to bore the line underground. Trenchless technology is here.
It is a matter of personal responsibility. The property owner should maintain his trees. If his trees cause a outage that could have been avoided by prudent maintenance, then that owner should be fined and have to reimburse the power company for repairs. Otherwise, a lien could be placed on the property until the judgment is satisfied. Prudent maintenance includes thinning the tree and maintaining proper clearance for the power lines on the property. It would be a lot cheaper for all, and I bet you would have a lot less moaning and groaning from the anti-burial contingent.
We inherited a huge silver maple that was slowly dying. It was older than the house, so it was no one's responsibility that it was growing so close to the house. We kept trimming it, but each new storm brought down more limbs. Eventually we had it upraised by a tree specialist (who came with an x-ray), had him certify that it is rotten inside, and had the tree cut down. I felt like I committed a murder.
I think that a prudent solution would be to replace tall trees near the power lines with smaller ones. We planted a dogwood tree where the maple tree once was. Not as nice, but still a tree.
Let to people have there way, if they want the power lines underground so be it! but they will have the cost of underground lines added to the bill's. If not take the damn trees down around the powerlines.
Japan is the most heavily forested country on the planet even though it is also one of the most heavily industrialized. How come they do not have a problem? They plan ahead as to what they are going to do. Conn. is a very rich state with the highest income of any state. Bury the damn lines and pay for it and not have this problem every year.
You speak of western Fairfield County. The rest of CT is not really affluent, and we're already the most taxed in the Union.
Sounds like nature took care of many of the trees near the power lines. We had a tornado with trees down everywhere, no amount of trimming (that IS done here) prevented the outages. People need to be prepared. Get a generator, have food, water and medicine for at least a week, 3 days isn't enough. If you might need heat, prepare an alternative source. Then quit your whining and learn to deal with it.
Where did Peter Malkin get his education? You got to call BS on him. We here in Oregon must keep our trees off
the power lines. I own a 7KW generator just because we have so many outages. I already have had 20 hours of outages in November in just 2 days. When Connecticut Light & Power cuts them down, they can sell the wood for firewood, and will can make some money.
Think we could create a lot of jobs putting the wire underground? We could even use those owing a debt to society, too. They could stand being taught something productive. We wouldn't have to use the trees for those ugly poles, eliminating one more deadly road hazard. Don't you think trees are much more beautiful to look at? The stick with the wires always did deter from the scenery.
Peace
Of course, if you put a nice large tree there ...where the pole used to be ... yah , that's LOTS safer for driving! (Just yanking yer chain.) Agree that burying the lines is at least the second best choice. First might be "broadcast power" ... but we don't have it yet.
A company in Philipsburg, MT, in conjunction with MSU, has invented a product that can be installed on the power poles which will drop the lines when a certain amount of pressure is put on the lines so they aren't broken. When the storm is over the lines can be pulled back in place and put in operation. It is more economical than burying the cables. The power companies that have tree isssues need to contact the engineering department at Montana State University!
Nice technology ...but what about the safety of the folks on the ground? Still sounds like "downed power lines" (and possibly more of it) ?
We need to solve the problems behind "broadcast power". If we can send cell phone signals all over the globe, -why not electrical power. (If it can be done without over-ionizing the air.) That would also set the stage for "clean fusion* " development to get away from fossil fuels.
*Clean fusion allows us to get the energy of 10,000 TONS of coal from the tritium in one cubic meter of ocean water (returning it basically unchanged to the ocean), -WITHOUT any risk of melt-down, explosion, -and NO RADIOACTIVE WASTE. (And does NOT produce any fissionable bomb materials either.) The only "down-side" is the current cost of building one reactor (in the trillions), -but since one reactor could power 1/2 of USA needs ... it could be cost effective in the long run. Also, at first 2 reactors would need to be built ... since the 7 year high temperature maintenance cycle (and security risks) would demand it. Advances in magnetics might also allow us to build much smaller, less costly reactors, -but with the same 99.999% fuel conversion efficiency. This would be a good "bridge technology" to carry us out of the fossil fuel era ... into more renewable sources (solar, geothermal, wind, tidal), but only if we can solve "broadcast power" issues since our current infrastructure won't support delivery from such sources. Eventually though, solar should provide nearly all the energy we need (the entire biosphere runs on ~ 2% of what hits the earth's surface, the rest drives weather, -leaving plenty for civilization to use).
The idea of burying the power lines is marginal at best ... mostly for application in subdivisions, etc. What if the tree roots engage the lines and "ground them out" ... they would have to be very well protected to avoid all the eroding effects of nature. What about earthquakes and underwater stream diversion? Even a minor boulder shift from freezing ground water could sever a line. (THEN YOU MUST DIG IT UP AND REROUTE IT ...HOW MUCH MORE WILL THAT COST?) Burying something you don't want "grounded" in the ground ....hmmm , -doesn't sound too bright to me. (Does get rid of those nasty EM waves though... ; - )
I don't think I like the idea of broadcast power. I'm not sure what it entails exactly, but it sounds like a lot of EM blasting through the air. Some people are very sensitive to that, to the point they live as far from power lines and cell towers as they can get. Lower frequencies disrupt bodily functions while higher freqs kill living tissue. I'm not liking the sound of this at all.
Bury the lines and be done with the infrastructural improvement already.