Updating the infrastructure will actually help with that in the long term.Did anyone mention we're having some financial difficulties here and really are not looking to spend on every pet project?
Infrastructure Reforms
The question is: What will it cost the country if they dont do that?Should the federal government help the states and victims of hurricane Sandy?
Is it the job of the feds to help rebuild infrastructure after a natural disaster? To what extent?
Can a single state carry the cost of rebuilding after such a desaster?
Does it even have the manpower to do so?
-
GIThruster
- Posts: 4686
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm
That's defined by preexisting law, FEMA and the limits of what the USG does once an area is designated a "national disaster" area. NY and NJ are already slated to receive such recovery funds in addition to all the insurance funds that will flow in.rj40 wrote:Should the federal government help the states and victims of hurricane Sandy?
Is it the job of the feds to help rebuild infrastructure after a natural disaster? To what extent?
http://www.fema.gov/national-disaster-r ... -framework
US Army Corp of Engineers is already in place working on repairing the NYC subway system. This is what support becomes available once the area is declared a disaster.
Last edited by GIThruster on Wed Oct 31, 2012 4:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis
-
GIThruster
- Posts: 4686
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm
My brother is a volunteer fireman in NJ. During the storm they had 27 calls from trees crashing through people's homes and about 3X that of trees knocking down power lines. There are 70 towns in that county and a couple dozen counties in the state. That's probably 150,000 tree fall events that need to be cleared in NJ alone. They're telling people it may be as long as 10 days before power is restored everywhere.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis
Couple day long outages are pretty common in the mid-west and east. Having grown up in the area, I can attest to this 100%. Was it not just this past summer where we lost power during sweltering heat conditions. Or about 9 years ago when we had a cascading power failure from Ohio to Maine. We can also note as the articles above mention pretty much every winter. Now I'm not saying months of outage are common, but it doesn't surprise me. Our power grid is pretty pathetic in design and not much of a "grid" but more of spaghetti string design.GIThruster wrote:It is the exception. You can look up the numbers online of you like, but people very seldom go without power for more than a couple days. I've been through more than half a dozen direct hits from hurricanes and the power almost always goes out, but never for more than a day or two. When millions of people lose power, it takes longer to have it restored. The cost of avoiding this is however, extremely high and with the economy as it is right now, there's no money in people's pockets to fix it.
If you're that worried, buy a generator.
We let's see anyone here design and build a power distribution system for 300 million people spread across an area of 3,000,000 square miles. Some of which can be dug, some of which can not, and some of which must span bodies of water (large and small, moving and not). Power sources must also be varied from nuclear to hydro, and things in between like solar, oil and coal.Our power grid is pretty pathetic in design and not much of a "grid" but more of spaghetti string design.
And then for fun, lets throw in random earthquakes, tornados, hurricanes, wildfires, heat waves, flooding, ice storms, population trends and an occasional meteor strike just for fun. Then just when you have all that figured out, lets add in a moving regulatory environment that functions on an inverse square law with funding and a non-linear function based on public (voter) whim.
Oh, I forgot, the Europeans have it all figured out and we should just ask them. While we are at it, we can also compare notes on who has a longer standing government...
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)
ladajo, there is a difference between claiming to have the best solution and saying that a situation needs to be improved. I think that we all can agree that power outages are not only annoying, they also harm businesses and even cost lives. All this means harm to the economy and the competitiveness of the country. It should be clear that reforms of that infrastructure will have a long term benefit to the economy and the quality of living.
-
GIThruster
- Posts: 4686
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm
Underground vs. Overhead Power Lines
Debates about the merits of overhead vs. underground power lines generally focus on two key issues: reliability and cost. With that in mind, consider the following facts:
Reliability
Most measures of electric reliability focus on two metrics: the frequency with which a customer sustains a power outage (# of power outages/year) and the duration of power outages (minutes/year a customer is without power). Five years of underground and overhead reliability comparisons for North Carolina’s investor-owned electric utilities – Duke Energy, Progress Energy and Dominion – found that the frequency of outages on underground systems was 50% less than for overhead systems, but the average duration of an underground outage was 58% longer. Because those repair times are typically much longer, customers served by underground lines are usually among the last to have power restored.
Long term reliability is also an issue. As underground lines get older, they become less reliable. In fact, a Maryland utility found that customers served by 40-year-old overhead lines had better reliability than those served by 20-year-old underground lines.
Cost
Before discussing the cost of placing lines underground, it’s important to understand the difference between distribution and transmission lines. Transmission lines are high-voltage lines carrying power from generation plants to substations. From the substations, the voltage is reduced and sent out into neighborhoods through lower voltage distribution lines.
The cost to place new transmission lines underground is about 8 to 10 times the cost to build overhead lines. The cost to build underground distribution lines is typically four to six times the cost of underground distribution lines.
Placing existing overhead lines underground is also an expensive proposition. Preliminary estimates compiled by SCE&G suggest that it would cost more than $24 billion to place its existing overhead distribution lines underground. The North Carolina Utilities Commission studied the cost of placing Duke Power’s distribution facilities underground and found it would cost more than $41 billion, resulting in a 125 percent increase in customer rates.
Currently, about 77 percent of SCE&G’s distribution system is overhead. However, most new distribution lines serving developments and communities are being placed underground. The cost to do this is usually paid by developers, who prefer underground lines for aesthetic reasons.
A mechanism does exist for municipalities wanting to place existing power lines underground. This mechanism, called a non-standard service fund, takes a percentage of the franchise fees SCE&G collects on behalf of the city/town and places those funds in a special account. SCE&G matches that amount, and then the municipality decides which projects to undertake.
http://www.sceg.com/NR/rdonlyres/465E65 ... oundvs.pdf,
Debates about the merits of overhead vs. underground power lines generally focus on two key issues: reliability and cost. With that in mind, consider the following facts:
Reliability
Most measures of electric reliability focus on two metrics: the frequency with which a customer sustains a power outage (# of power outages/year) and the duration of power outages (minutes/year a customer is without power). Five years of underground and overhead reliability comparisons for North Carolina’s investor-owned electric utilities – Duke Energy, Progress Energy and Dominion – found that the frequency of outages on underground systems was 50% less than for overhead systems, but the average duration of an underground outage was 58% longer. Because those repair times are typically much longer, customers served by underground lines are usually among the last to have power restored.
Long term reliability is also an issue. As underground lines get older, they become less reliable. In fact, a Maryland utility found that customers served by 40-year-old overhead lines had better reliability than those served by 20-year-old underground lines.
Cost
Before discussing the cost of placing lines underground, it’s important to understand the difference between distribution and transmission lines. Transmission lines are high-voltage lines carrying power from generation plants to substations. From the substations, the voltage is reduced and sent out into neighborhoods through lower voltage distribution lines.
The cost to place new transmission lines underground is about 8 to 10 times the cost to build overhead lines. The cost to build underground distribution lines is typically four to six times the cost of underground distribution lines.
Placing existing overhead lines underground is also an expensive proposition. Preliminary estimates compiled by SCE&G suggest that it would cost more than $24 billion to place its existing overhead distribution lines underground. The North Carolina Utilities Commission studied the cost of placing Duke Power’s distribution facilities underground and found it would cost more than $41 billion, resulting in a 125 percent increase in customer rates.
Currently, about 77 percent of SCE&G’s distribution system is overhead. However, most new distribution lines serving developments and communities are being placed underground. The cost to do this is usually paid by developers, who prefer underground lines for aesthetic reasons.
A mechanism does exist for municipalities wanting to place existing power lines underground. This mechanism, called a non-standard service fund, takes a percentage of the franchise fees SCE&G collects on behalf of the city/town and places those funds in a special account. SCE&G matches that amount, and then the municipality decides which projects to undertake.
http://www.sceg.com/NR/rdonlyres/465E65 ... oundvs.pdf,
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis
Yes, but that did not seem to be your (or others) lead in to the discussion.
In any event, it is not up to government to "build or improve". That is up to the free market. The government can heavily influence the market and its actions by creating standards.
What annoys me in this discussion is that none of you are familiar with the standards. If you were, you would understand that reform is taking place. Infrastructure is improving. Apparently it is not at the speed of drive in service that you are seeking. but none-the-less it is happening. The really cool part is that the standards are influenced by many competing interests, so that invariably, the standards produced are actually pretty robust and effective.
If your buddy was without power for months as you claim, then I must agree with GIT that he is/was a statistical outlayer, not living in a manner like mainstream society.
I can site a similar event from my past where some friends of ours house burned to the ground. The local Fire Department (mix of full time and volunteer) was unable to get to it in time, and when they did get there, the main fire truck got eaten by the forest and thus could not respond. The firefighters walked the remaining distance to the house (about 1/4 mile) and they all watched it burn to ashes with the family.
Was this a function of governmental failure or a statistical outlayer?
Well lets take a look:
House was the only house, and isolated at end of a road (about 2/3 of a mile) in the mountains. Existing roads did not match the road plan. Thus the fire department spent some time driving around lost looking for a connecting road that was on the map, but not on the ground. Once they figured this out, they then "went around" and got access to the road. However, after driving in about a half mile, the forest ate the brand new state-of-the-art all wheel drive Pride of the Department. Being winter, it was snowy and icy, and the truck slid, and then rolled off the road into the woods downslope. Ooops. None of this was the fault of the fire department, nor the town government. At best, one might argue the map issue. But given that the area was a "Private Association" and they had provided the map/plans to the town, but never actually finished the missing road...(to be fair, they did cut trees and clear it, put in power lines, but then never paved, and the woods grew back...) it can also be argued that it was not the town's fault, again.
So, how about your buddy? Did/does he live at the end of a long isolated run? Were there thousands of others higher up in the drama food chain that got helped before he was, given his lower priority?
For future planning, if you want to garauntee fast municipal service for power/water/fire, live next door to a hospital, not alone in the woods.
In any event, it is not up to government to "build or improve". That is up to the free market. The government can heavily influence the market and its actions by creating standards.
What annoys me in this discussion is that none of you are familiar with the standards. If you were, you would understand that reform is taking place. Infrastructure is improving. Apparently it is not at the speed of drive in service that you are seeking. but none-the-less it is happening. The really cool part is that the standards are influenced by many competing interests, so that invariably, the standards produced are actually pretty robust and effective.
If your buddy was without power for months as you claim, then I must agree with GIT that he is/was a statistical outlayer, not living in a manner like mainstream society.
I can site a similar event from my past where some friends of ours house burned to the ground. The local Fire Department (mix of full time and volunteer) was unable to get to it in time, and when they did get there, the main fire truck got eaten by the forest and thus could not respond. The firefighters walked the remaining distance to the house (about 1/4 mile) and they all watched it burn to ashes with the family.
Was this a function of governmental failure or a statistical outlayer?
Well lets take a look:
House was the only house, and isolated at end of a road (about 2/3 of a mile) in the mountains. Existing roads did not match the road plan. Thus the fire department spent some time driving around lost looking for a connecting road that was on the map, but not on the ground. Once they figured this out, they then "went around" and got access to the road. However, after driving in about a half mile, the forest ate the brand new state-of-the-art all wheel drive Pride of the Department. Being winter, it was snowy and icy, and the truck slid, and then rolled off the road into the woods downslope. Ooops. None of this was the fault of the fire department, nor the town government. At best, one might argue the map issue. But given that the area was a "Private Association" and they had provided the map/plans to the town, but never actually finished the missing road...(to be fair, they did cut trees and clear it, put in power lines, but then never paved, and the woods grew back...) it can also be argued that it was not the town's fault, again.
So, how about your buddy? Did/does he live at the end of a long isolated run? Were there thousands of others higher up in the drama food chain that got helped before he was, given his lower priority?
For future planning, if you want to garauntee fast municipal service for power/water/fire, live next door to a hospital, not alone in the woods.
Last edited by ladajo on Wed Oct 31, 2012 8:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)
The jist of this thread was that Obama was right when he "proposed" infrastructure reform. Question is why would you say proposed? What was that trillian dollar shovel ready stimulus thing. Didnt he get it? Wasnt it four years ago. What he proposed is what he got and what you are arguing four years later didnt work because we have power outages after a once in a century storm. If a trillian wasnt enoigh then how much do we meed to borrow so we wont have morethan an hour without power even when half the atlantic ocean comes ashore in a location where it rarely comes as,hore.
Fact is that the cost of power outages in rare events is small relative to the proibitive costs of designing for no power loss. This is an actuarial problem with an actuarial solutition that you dont undetstand. Just saying that loss of power affects businesses so we cant have it is simplistic.
Finally, i really think you struggle with scale. This is a big country. Hurricanes are unimaginably big storms. Hurricanes are unimaginably powerful storms. Comparing anything you see in Austria to this is a demonstration of your lack of understanding of the power of a hurricane.
Fact is that the cost of power outages in rare events is small relative to the proibitive costs of designing for no power loss. This is an actuarial problem with an actuarial solutition that you dont undetstand. Just saying that loss of power affects businesses so we cant have it is simplistic.
Finally, i really think you struggle with scale. This is a big country. Hurricanes are unimaginably big storms. Hurricanes are unimaginably powerful storms. Comparing anything you see in Austria to this is a demonstration of your lack of understanding of the power of a hurricane.
Stick the thing in a tub of water! Sheesh!
300 Million People
3,000,000 square miles of land
790,000 square miles of water
Climate & Environment from Arctic to Tropical, Desert to Alpine Mountain.
Yet even with all that to chew on, we still have the most developed infrastructure in the world. Yes, maintaining it is a bitch, but we do.
So now let us argue about how you measure developed infrastructure.
3,000,000 square miles of land
790,000 square miles of water
Climate & Environment from Arctic to Tropical, Desert to Alpine Mountain.
Yet even with all that to chew on, we still have the most developed infrastructure in the world. Yes, maintaining it is a bitch, but we do.
So now let us argue about how you measure developed infrastructure.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)
-
GIThruster
- Posts: 4686
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm
It should be obvious by now that people are having a hard time believing your story. Still, no real sources? If this is the pervasive problem you're painting, it should be easy to document.Skipjack wrote:She was one of many thousands that were without power for that long.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis