It’s 12:01pm on Tuesday, March 2nd, and we still don’t have power restored. We’re doing OK, we’re on a generator, and thankfully the temperatures have been above freezing so there hasn’t been much concern for us. The problem is, we’re used to this — we know that, on average, we’ll have a multi-day outage each year. It was explained to us before we moved here, but we didn’t believe it. After 5 years, not only do we believe it but we’re pros at dealing with it.

This leads me to ask the question: what would it take to recoup the cost of burying all these power lines underground in this and other high-impact neighborhoods?

I’m sure from PSNH’s standpoint the answer is, “oh, it’s cheaper to repair downed lines 100 times than it is to bury them once.” And I’m sure that’s true. But that’s not even the beginning of the total cost here.

Let’s list some of the costs in addition to those incurred by PSNH’s repair crews:

Town infrastructure costs, including temporary shelters for residents, management time coordinating with utilities, additional emergency workers, and overtime work for local crews and staff.

Personal costs, including fuel for generators, lost groceries, frozen/burst heat pipes, hotel rooms, meals out, and lost productivity at work.

Health risks, including loose (and potentially live) wires on the street, toxic leakage from downed transformers, and carbon monoxide poisoning from generators (the fire department brought a neighborhood woman to the hospital just yesterday).

I, for one, would love to see a cost analysis here, and if it means adding a surcharge to the local residents, please propose that and let’s make the decision together. Until we do, I *know* that each year we’ll be without power for several days and yet again incurring all of these expenses and exposing ourselves and the town to all these risks.

It seems silly not to at least consider doing this.

In any event, it’s published now, and you can head over to TMO to read it.

[The previous post here still stands: follow me on Twitter if you want to see more frequent/current updates from me.]

You can read (and, if you choose, follow) me on Twitter at @davehamilton

First of all, they only phoned respondents. I know in our household (a very Internet-based one, admittedly) we never take survey calls on the phone. I would venture to say that we’re not in the minority here. In fact, I’d say that people rooted in the “old ways” are more likely to take these types of telephone surveys than the rest of us are, but of course I have no data to back that up, just my gut.

Second — and far more important — the survey asked, “From what source would you say you get most of your news and information about news in New Hampshire?” The UNH Survey Center then *interpreted* that data to mean anyone stating a television station or newspaper name meant they get it from the TV or print editions — they failed to clarify whether or not the people were getting their news from the TV stations’ or newspapers’ websites!

I hope the UNH Survey Center takes these viewpoints into account when they do the next round of this survey so we can get some valuable results about news sources and consumption in our state.

Update: I heard back from Dr. Andrew Smith, Director of the UNH Survey Center, who stated:

I do stand by the interpretation that most people get their news and information about New Hampshire from more traditional news sources. And while we did not probe their responses, I suspect that the majority of people who report getting local news online do so from traditional sources such as TV and newspaper web sites.

Seems there’s some confusion of “source” and “medium” here. I agree with Dr. Smith that most people get their news from WMUR or the New York Times instead of blogs and Twitter, but reading the print edition of the New York Times is quite different than getting the online edition. Different advertising models are used and consumption patterns are (or can be) radically different. We must all be careful in our surveys (and interpretations) not to continue to confuse source with medium.

But I’m not getting any younger, and my body occasionally reminds me of this. I’m no dumb-dumb, and I’m at least aware that regular exercise will be good for me as I age. It may not guarantee that I live any longer than I otherwise would, but there’s good evidence to point to regular exercise maintaining my quality of life quite a bit longer, so I’ve been endeavoring to do it more… regularly.

The problem is that standing on a treadmill watching my iPod bores me to death. Inevitable as it is, death’s not really the goal we’re racing towards here, is it?

I have another issue: I’m a homeowner with a house that’s nestled nicely amongst the trees, so there’s a lot of crap to get done in the yard. Constantly. Occasionally we’ll do marathon sessions on the weekends that kill us all, and then we spend the next few weeks feeling guilty about neglecting this, that or the other until we do it again. I guess this would happen even if we had a home with no trees in sight. Homeownership is a laborious joy for all of us, isn’t it?

Thankfully, I stumbled onto a solution. I’ve recently traded in my not-quite-as-regular-as-I’d-like morning exercise routine (i.e. twice annually!) for a much more productive, kill-two-birds-with-one-stone concept of just working in the yard for 30-45 minutes a few mornings a week. It’s amazing, really, how much different yardwork feels when I’m doing it to kill time as opposed to doing it to actually accomplish something. The results are the same, but I don’t have that feeling of “oh crap I’ll never finish all of this,” because the reality is, I’m not doing it with the intention of finishing anything at all during any particular session. There’s more to do than I’ll *ever* complete, and the work regenerates, so really I think I’ve found the perfect solution. After 30-45 minutes, my heart rate’s up, I feel like I’ve used my body for more than just sitting in a chair, and I’ve actually accomplished *something* tangible around the house/yard.

We’ll see how it lasts but… so far, so good.

The article’s posted over at iPodObserver today, and even includes some tips on making your experience with the iPhone app even better.

I would love to be able to download an app and have a 24-hour trial period. If I like it, I’ll buy it. If I don’t, it magically disappears from my device, never to return unless I fork over the cashola.

Post your comments over at iPO, if you please — there’s already a good trail happening there and we should keep the conversation in one place.