On April 8, 2025, a groundbreaking study from the University of Massachusetts Amherst revealed that the combined undergrounding of both electrical and broadband infrastructure is not only a forward-thinking initiative but a financially prudent one. Researchers have presented compelling evidence that employing a simultaneous undergrounding strategy can yield significant economic benefits, saving municipalities millions of dollars. This “dig once” approach proves especially advantageous for communities prone to outages, as it trades the inefficiency of piecemeal upgrades for a cohesive and cost-effective solution that tackles two critical infrastructures simultaneously.
The findings indicate that implementing a co-undergrounding strategy—a process where electrical and broadband lines are buried together—can enhance cost efficiency by nearly 40% compared to the traditional method of installation, which often involves a subsequent and redundant excavation of roadways for separate upgrades. The lead author of the study, Mahsa Arabi, an ELEVATE research fellow at UMass Amherst’s Energy Transition Institute (ETI), emphasized the considerable cost savings achieved through this method. By effectively pooling resources and labor, even smaller towns can afford to upgrade their aging infrastructure systems, paving the way for improved resilience and connectivity.
A clear implication of this research is the pressing need for municipalities to consider proactive approaches toward undergrounding, especially for lines currently above ground that have not yet reached the end of their useful life. Waiting until infrastructure degrades completely may not only hinder progress but could also lead to excessive downtime and increased costs associated with outage management. The researchers emphasize urgency in the implementation of these upgrades, particularly in areas experiencing frequent service interruptions.
Integral to the study was the evaluation of various scenarios using advanced computational modeling techniques. The researchers meticulously analyzed data to assess upfront costs, the frequency and duration of outages, and the resulting economic impact due to these interruptions. They thereby developed an analytical framework that accounts for critical variables—ranging from soil composition to broader land use considerations—that affect the costs associated with underground installation.
Focusing on the town of Shrewsbury as an illustrative case study, the research team calculated that an aggressive co-undergrounding strategy over 40 years would incur costs of approximately $45.4 million. However, the anticipated benefits—primarily derived from reducing outage-related losses such as spoiled perishables, compromised business operations, and increased reliance on generators—amounted to an impressive $55.1 million. This emphasizes the essential point that anticipating outages and addressing them through infrastructure investment can result in net economic gains, rather than being perceived solely as an expenditure.
Specific calculations revealed that the costs incurred during outages can be staggering, with estimates placing the financial burden at $10 per hour for individuals, $205 for businesses, and a whopping $15,000 for industrial enterprises for every hour they are affected. In Massachusetts, the average customer faces 1.38 hours of outage annually, a substantial figure when considered collectively throughout a community. Therefore, preemptively transitioning power lines underground mitigates these potential losses and turns outages from a burdensome inevitability into a manageable condition.
Interestingly, the research also found that the aesthetic improvements afforded by the undergrounding of utility lines could significantly elevate property values in the process. A projected boost of $1.5 million in property values underscores the multifaceted benefits of the strategy beyond mere economic savings. Eliminating overhead lines not only enhances visual appeal but can also contribute to enhanced community pride and increased real estate desirability, reinforcing the argument for underground infrastructure investment.
While the study highlighted significant net benefits from a co-undergrounding strategy, it also identified alternative strategies such as converting only electrical lines to underground, which yielded lower net benefits due to resulting cost savings not being as pronounced. These alternative approaches, however, were shown to fall short, with more gradual transition strategies yielding negative net benefits overall. Such findings underline the importance of making informed decisions rooted in rigorous cost-benefit analyses.
An ongoing challenge the researchers face is disentangling the complexities around outage causation. While undergrounding intuitively seems to reduce outages, particularly those induced by weather conditions, there is a nuanced relationship at play. Some outages stem from equipment failure or maintenance issues that are unaffected by burying lines. With more than half of outages often attributed to external factors, establishing a clear framework for risk assessment prior to implementing undergrounding remains vital.
Moreover, events like California’s wildfires underscore the urgency for municipalities throughout the country to reassess their infrastructural strategies. Recent instances of utility companies in California preemptively shutting off power to prevent the emergence of wildfires reflect a growing recognition of the interplay between infrastructure management and broader environmental considerations. The study’s principal investigator, Jimi Oke, emphasizes the need for strategic frameworks and regulatory recommendations that can guide utility companies and local governments toward more resilient infrastructures.
The implications of the research extend well beyond Massachusetts, with hopes for additional studies to quantify the advantages of co-undergrounding in various geographic contexts. This ambitious research agenda aims not only to solidify the initial findings across diverse scenarios but also to delve into alternative routing options and additional strategies for minimizing outages, providing a comprehensive view of infrastructure investment in the coming years.
Addressing the pressing need for modern infrastructure solutions, this study lays the groundwork for a larger conversation about the future of utility systems in America. As municipalities grapple with upgrading their infrastructure amidst escalating weather events and technological changes, findings like those put forth by the UMass team could catalyze necessary and impactful policy changes that enable communities to thrive. By advocating for efficient, sustainable solutions, researchers contribute to a growing body of work that seeks to embrace innovative approaches to longstanding infrastructural challenges.
Ultimately, the detailed research from UMass is not merely an academic exercise, but a clarion call for towns and utilities to reassess their strategies with an eye toward co-undergrounding. The demonstrated long-term benefits and clear cost savings offer a compelling argument for immediate action, not only to improve service delivery but to enhance the overall quality of life for residents and businesses alike.
Subject of Research: Co-undergrounding electric and broadband lines
Article Title: Benefits of aggressively co-undergrounding electric and broadband lines outweigh costs
News Publication Date: April 8, 2025
Web References: Cell Reports Sustainability
References: UMass Amherst Study
Image Credits: UMass Amherst
Keywords
Energy infrastructure, Cost effectiveness
Tags: co-undergrounding strategy advantageseconomic benefits of combined undergroundingefficient resource allocation for townsEnergy Transition Institute researchinnovative infrastructure upgradesMassachusetts broadband and electricity savingsmunicipal cost efficiency improvementsreducing outages through undergroundingresilient infrastructure solutionsUMass Amherst energy researchundergrounding infrastructure benefits
