Journal Article
The Business of Forest Enterprise / Urban Ecosystems
Steve Narolski; Richard Bin Mei; Rafael De La Torre; Mike Clutter; John Pait; Maggi Kelly; Frederick Cubbage; Patricio MacDonagh; Gustavo Balmelli; Virginia Morales Olmos; Adriana Bussoni; Rafael Rubilar; Rafael De La Torre; Heyn Kotze; Mauro Muraro; Vitor Afonso Hoeflich; Peter Hall; Richard Yao; Roger Lord; Jin Huang; Elizabeth Monges; Carmelo Hernandez Perez; Jeff Wikle; Paul Adams; Ronalds Gonzalez; Omar Carrero; Robert Abt; Sadharga Koesbanda; Jingjing Liang; James McCarter; John Perez-Garcia; Gerhard Sehnalek; Yanli Zhang; Matthew McBroom; Benktesh Sharma; Jingxin Wang; Prakash Nepal; Peter Ince; Kenneth Skog; Sun Chang; Clark Row; Susan Ford; Sam Jackson; Timothy Rialsb; Hans Williams; Rachel McNamee; Daniel Unger; I-Kuai Hung; Kenneth Farrish; Jacek Siry; Tom Harris; Bob Izlar; Trae Menard; Kevin Lim; Doug Pitt; Murray Woods; Paul Treitz; Nick Gralewicz; Tiffany Potter; Jeff Dunster; Lewis Rothstein; Robert Grala; Donald Grebner; Ian Munn; Anwar Hussain; Tiffany Potter; Mitchell Jones; Tamara Cushing; Rafael De La Torre; Alan Wolfson; Tom Stewart; Doug Jones; Steve Allen; Susan Moore; Christopher Moorman; Kamran Abdollahi; Zhu Ning; Jan Davis; Jerry Boughton; Ken Leonhardt; Robert Loeb; Jacek Siry; Pete Bettinger; Krista Merry; J.M. Bowker; Samantha Gill; Richard Thompson; John Mills; Teresa Trueman-Madriaga; Rosario Lecaroz; Andrea Mojzak; Rory Denovan; Wei-Lun Tsai; Candice Bruton; Yu-Fai Leung; Melissa McHale; Perver Baran; Myron Floyd; Charles Wade; Kathleen Wolf; Kathleen Wolf; Michele Romolini; Weston Brinkley; Alicia Robbins; Dale Blahna; Jean Daniels; Michelle Cole; Brenda Allen
Journal of Forestry · Vol. 109, Issue 8 · pp. 500-510 · 2011
Abstract
22In 2009, five unique methods were used to inspect vegetation-related conditions along Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) rights-of-way (ROW). Some methods were trials that BPA committed to execute as part of a settlement with its regional regulatory organization, the Western Electric Coordination Council (WECC), for violations of reliability standards from vegetation grow-in related outages. A combination of simple, stratified, and 100% sampling were used to compare and contrast each inspection technique. A cost-replacement comparison between all inspection techniques was performed, weighting efficacy of one technique to another in the form of replacement value. Cost-benefit and return-on-investment analyses were also computed. From these analyses, LiDAR proved most effective in identifying vegetation related clearance issues but proved most costly, at least for initial establishment. The average cost of LiDAR trended downward with subsequent flights. The most cost effective method was using helicopters with either Natural Resource Specialists (NRS) or Transmission Line Maintenance (TLM) personnel serving as aerial observers, but this methodology proved the most inaccurate. Furthermore, the ancillary utility of LiDAR for related asset assessments more than justify the initial expense, includes power line sag ratings, asset (structures, insulators, roads, etc.) health, and encroachment identification. It is hypothesized that incorporating LiDAR sampling from 20% of the whole system per year to 40+ % may actually represent a cost-savings when allocating available resources system-wide. This data can also be used for documenting compliance with all federal regulations and requirements, as well as substitute for manual on-the-ground inspections, whether by BPA staff or third-party contractors.