Apr 12, 2020 · About half the wood poles in the US are treated with pentachlorophenol, known as “penta” in the trade. Penta is “cheap, easy, and effective,” explains Philip Ford, director of technical sales and quality conformance at American Borate, which makes wood preservatives for other applications.

According to CPUC, in 2022, 70% of PG&E's Cellon-treated poles will be more than 42 years old, and by the year 2030, all of PG&E's 543,560 Cellon-treated poles will be older than 42....

Reinforcing, and Reusing Wood Poles This utility procedure provides instructions for intrusively inspecting, testing, restoring, reinforcing, treating, and reusing wood poles.

Preservatives integrated into the poles through pressure, combined with wood’s natural resilience, allow wood poles and crossarms to remain in service for 70 years or more. Wood poles and crossarms must meet a series of standards to be used by utilities.

Differences between distribution and transmission poles. Decision points. APPLY the procedures in this document to all wood distribution AND transmission poles unless noted by exceptions, difference, OR decision points.

Jan 16, 2025 · There’s no doubt wood utility poles have been running up against non-wood competitors making unbelievable claims about strength, fire-resistance, resilience, cost and environmental performance to pitch composite fiberglass and other non-wood poles as superior alternatives to wood poles.

Nov 22, 2021 · In the notification, PG&E identified an issue with its Cellon-treated wood poles after a Cellon-treated wood pole failed in a customer’s backyard in Danville, California on July 8, 2020.

On July 8, 2020, a Cellon gas-treated pole failed in a customer’s backyard in Danville, CA. The 2015 and 2005 intrusive inspections failed to detect significant internal dry rot in the pole that led to the failure.

Wood Pole Coalition asked internationally recog-nized environmental toxicologist, Dr. Kenneth Brooks of Aquatic Environmental Sciences, to summarize the science and risks associated with the common wood preservative systems used to treat wood utility poles.

In the fi rst case, the non-wood pole would have to be designed to 65 percent of the ANSI wood pole transverse strength. In the second case, the non-wood design would have to be to 65 percent of the column loading strength of the ANSI wood pole. These are not the same design point, and the effect would be different depending upon the non-wood