9. May 2011 14:25
Middle East Query – Rejuvenation Saves Capital
Dweller of the Desert asked 22 questions in his post …
Middle East Query – 22 Questions.
In this installment I address question 12.
12. What is the expected cost of curing compared to cable replacement?
Typical costs for injection are one-half to one-third of the cost of cable replacement. For submarine cables and armored cables, cable injection can be only one-sixth the cost of replacement. With soaring costs for copper, aluminum, and petroleum-based polymers the economics of injection only get more compelling. In addition to raw material costs, skilled craftsman to replace cables are becoming increasingly scarce and more costly. Rejuvenation requires one-half to one-third of the labor-effort to replace a length of cable, so the cost to rejuvenate will always be proportionally less than replacement. With the state-of-the-art sustained pressure rejuvenation process, even cables in ducts, conduits, or trays enjoy the cost advantage of rejuvenation. Because splices are either non-existent or easily accessible in these systems, the rejuvenation productivity remains two to three times higher than replacement. Hence the cost to deliver rejuvenation remains below the cost of replacement. Finally, the funds expended for cable rejuvenation are capital cost – just as cable replacement is a capital cost. In fact, Novinium technology is the only cable rejuvenation that the FERC (U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) and the RUS (Rural Utility Services) have approved to be capitalized for post-failure treatment. Check out the FERC Letter Order and the RUS Letter Order for more details. Saving capital is what we do. Technology invented by Novinium founders has saved circuit owners around the world over one billion U.S. dollars!
For now, Ma’a salama (مع السلامة/Good bye)
T. B. Frog