Utility Pole Materials: Which Is the Best Choice for Longevity and Sustainability?
The choice of which utility pole to use depends on balancing cost, environmental impact, and material performance. This article discusses the benefits and disadvantages of the main utility pole materials available. By considering the full lifecycle costs and environmental impacts, utilities can make informed decisions that align with both economic and ecological goals
The Evolution of Utility Pole Materials
Historically, wooden utility poles have been the standard for supporting overhead power and telecommunications lines. Wood is abundant, lightweight, strong, and, when treated with preservatives, durable. However, changes in legislation affecting wood preservatives have reduced the lifespan of treated wood, particularly in tropical climates. This shift has prompted utilities to explore longer-lasting alternatives, including reinforced concrete, galvanized steel, and composites. But do these alternatives truly offer a longer lifespan? Let’s delve into each material to assess their viability.
Concrete Utility Poles: Strength vs Environmental Impact
CO2 created per 1000 poles = +1460 tonnes*
Advantages of Concrete
Uniform Appearance:Â Concrete gives a consistent, modern look.
Strength:Â Highly durable and robust.
Rot and Termite Resistance:Â Immune to biological decay.
Fire Resistance:Â Naturally resistant to fire.
Disadvantages of Concrete
Handling Difficulties:Â Extremely heavy and challenging to transport and install.
High Cost:Â Generally more expensive than wooden poles.
Corrosion Issues:Â Reinforcing bars within concrete can corrode, leading to structural failure.
Energy Intensive:Â Production requires significant energy, impacting environmental sustainability.
Roadside Safety:Â Can pose dangers if struck by vehicles.
Environmental Concerns:Â Not as eco-friendly as wood, given the high CO2 emissions during production.
Galvanised Steel Utility Poles: Durability with Challenges
CO2 created per 1000 poles = +784 tonnes*
Advantages of Galvanised Steel
Uniform Appearance:Â Consistent and sleek design.
Strength:Â Very strong and durable.
Rot and Termite Resistance:Â Not susceptible to biological decay.
Fire Resistance:Â Withstands high temperatures.
Disadvantages of Galvanised Steel
Higher Cost:Â More expensive than wooden poles.
Electrical Conductivity:Â Conducts electricity, which can be a safety concern.
Installation Issues:Â Difficult to fix and install.
Corrosion Risk:Â Can corrode over time, leading to potential failure.
Environmental Impact:Â Production processes are less eco-friendly.
Composite and Fiberglass Utility Poles: Innovation vs. Cost
CO2 created per 1000 poles = +867 tonnes*
Advantages of Composite and Fibreglass
Uniform Appearance:Â Modern and aesthetically pleasing.
Strength:Â Strong and resistant to damage.
Rot and Termite Resistance: Not affected by biological factors.
Lightweight:Â Easier to handle compared to concrete and steel.
Insulating Properties: Good electrical insulator.
Disadvantages of Composite and Fibreglass
Fire Resistance:Â Generally lower than other materials.
Cost:Â Significantly more expensive than wooden poles.
Energy Consumption:Â High energy requirements for production.
Long-Term Data:Â Limited long-term performance data available.
Environmental Impact:Â Environmental concerns similar to other alternatives.
Wooden Utility Poles: A Sustainable and Proven Choice
CO2 created per 1000 poles = +867 tonnes*
Advantages of Wood
Availability:Â Readily accessible and widely used.
Strength:Â Strong and reliable.
Low Weight:Â Easier to handle and install.
Cost-Effective:Â Lower initial cost compared to alternatives.
Roadside Safety:Â Generally safer if struck by vehicles.
Disadvantages of Wood
Decay Risk:Â Susceptible to decay if not properly protected.
Termite Attack:Â Vulnerable to termites if not treated.
Fire Risk:Â Lower fire resistance without protective measures.
Inspection and Maintenance:Â Ensuring Longevity
Pole Inspection
Each material exhibits unique failure modes. Regular inspections are crucial after the initial 10-15 years to prevent pole failure. Concrete poles often suffer from reinforcing bar corrosion, steel poles face ground line corrosion, and wooden poles are prone to ground-line decay and termite attack.
The lifetime cost of utility poles is a critical factor for utilities, combining initial costs and projected lifespan. While wood generally remains a cost-effective choice, particularly when considering advancements in protection technology, each material’s cost-effectiveness varies. For instance, while concrete and steel poles might have a higher initial cost, they offer longer lifespans compared to untreated wood.
A study undertaken in Australia gives data on expected lifespan based on real-life experience over many years. The graph below details the results:
Source: Pole Service Life – An Analysis of Country Energy Data (Australia) Nathan Spencer Koppers Wood Products Pty. Ltd., Sydney, Australia (Contact: nathan_spencer@koppers.com.au) Leith Elder Country Energy, Goulburn, Australia (Contact: leith.elder@countryenergy.com.au)
Innovative Solutions for Wooden Poles
Recent advancements have addressed wood’s primary weaknesses—decay and termite attack. Ground line protection products, such as heat-applied sleeves like Polesaver, effectively isolate wood from moisture and fungi. This innovation dramatically extends the life of wooden poles, making them a competitive choice compared to steel and concrete.
Conclusion: Making an Informed Decision
Utility pole selection depends on balancing cost, environmental impact, and material performance. While concrete, steel, and composites offer some advantages, wooden poles—especially when protected with advanced technologies—remain a strong contender. By considering the full lifecycle costs and environmental impacts, utilities can make informed decisions that align with both economic and ecological goals.
Contact Polesaver
Polesaver is the leading manufacturer of products proven to extend the life of wooden utility poles, and has been working with utility companies globally for 30 years. Get in touch for more information or to arrange a TEAMS call with one of our specialists.
(*) Source: Conclusions and Summary Report on an Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of Utility Poles Prepared by AquAeTer, Inc.
LEARN MORE
TOTAL POLE PROTECTION
From durable fire fabric, to outstanding protection against rot and termites, Polesaver products are tested and trusted to deliver unbeatable pole protection.
In this short article, we run through the alternatives to Pentachlorophenol wood preservative and how you can use them in conjunction with a full barrier system to prevent decay and increase pole life by +20 years from the start.
Core rot is the decay of the strongest part of a wooden utility pole, the core. It typically accounts for around 60 to 70% of wooden pole failures and can occur at any time during in the utility poles life. Core rot normally occurs due to air or insect-borne brown rot fungal spores entering the unprotected core of the pole through cracks
The choice of which utility pole to use depends on balancing cost, environmental impact, and material performance. This article discusses the benefits and disadvantages of the main utility pole materials available. By considering the full lifecycle costs and environmental impacts, utilities can make informed decisions that align with both economic and ecological goals
Polesaver manufactures and supplies guaranteed products that are proven to maximise utility pole lifespan. With millions of Rot-Guard™ sleeves supplied to date, our patented ground-line barrier sleeves have been proven in volume use since 1994.
*Polesaver uses long term independent test data on the effectiveness of barrier sleeves and fire protection fabric to reach all the conclusions given on this website (test data available on request). Based on this data, Polesaver believes longer life, maintenance of strength over time, improved safety and reliability, extended inspection periods and reduced maintenance requirements are reasonable claims. This is subject to Polesaver products being correctly applied as per our instructions and used on correctly preservative treated (for long term in-ground use - Use Class 4 or higher) wooden utility poles that are free of decay at the time of sleeve application. The claims made, real or implied are not warranties. It is the responsibility of the user to evaluate and satisfy themselves that the performance of the product meets their specific safety, reliability, extended inspection, repair and any other performance or cost-benefit criteria before using Polesaver sleeves or fire protection fabric.
