Statements in Favor of Undergrounding

Prior Statements by GCNH

GCNH and URI letter urging DEEP to plan for maximum undergrounding of utility wires in its Comprehensive Energy Plan, December 13, 2012  The arguments made are given new urgency by the probable increased reliance on electricity to achieve a non carbon energy economy, as well as the  increased reliance on internet communication.  The more frequent and severe storms predicted to occur due to climate change will cause the overhead pole and wire distribution system to fail much more than in the past and cause significant and costly socioeconomic disruption.  

Statements by Others
(These statements do not necessarily represent GCNH positions in every respect. 

The Policy on Resilient Forests for Connecticut's Future (PRFCT Future) Final Report, (12.14.21, accepted by DEEP on 1.11.22), at p.11, supported "Incremental Undergrounding of Electric Infrastructure and Improved Coordination of Underground Utilities" stating: Although the Working Group acknowledges various challenges with coordinating this effort across various entities that run utilities underground, one benefit of doing this would be to remove conflicts with planting and maintaining tall stature trees as well as enhancing urban tree cover in areas where more sustainable development would be encouraged. Investments in incremental undergrounding might be credited against required compensatory mitigation due to unavoidable tree losses under certain conditions.

"Buying the Lines Why How -- Benefits and Excuses," by Elizabeth Hopely, December 2020  This statement summarizes numerous benefits of undergrounding electric and communication distribution wires, and addresses excuses given for not undergrounding.  

"Undergrounding Utilities -- The Broad Context (Connecticut)," by Henry Dynia,  February 13, 2021  This statement includes consideration of socio-economic and political factors concerning undergrounding.