Why Reconductor with ACCC® Conductor?
Larger conventional conductors are often too heavy to use existing structures and can be costly to rebuild. However, ACCC® Conductors with the same diameter and weight as the old wire can be installed using existing structures. This makes swapping out the old wire for the new wire quick, easy, and cost-effective while maximizing performance.
Doubles line capacity and mitigate congestion costs.
Reduces Line Losses by 25 to 40%
No need to modify or replace structures
Helps reduce fuel consumption, associated greenhouse gas emissions, and water consumed by thermal power plants.
Proven to mitigate sag violations.
Use existing ROW, which reduces permitting
Conductor Comparison
Each reconductoring project has unique challenges, making it crucial to choose the right conductor. While ACSS is commonly used, it may require structural modifications to accommodate increased sag or fall short of delivering its maximum capacity. With a successful track record in over 1,250 projects worldwide, ACCC® Conductors offer numerous benefits over legacy conductors.
| Features | ACCC ® | ACSR | ACSS |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enables increased line capacity |  |
 |
1 |
| No need to modify or replace structures | |
|
2 |
| Improves line efficiency | |
|
|
| Follows IEEE 524 Installation Guidelines | |
|
|
| Method to check installation integrity | |
|
|
| Reduces thermal sag | |
|
|
| Offers protection from N-1 conditions | |
|
3 |
| Resists Corrosion and cyclic fatigue | |
|
|
| Reduces fire risk | |
|
|
- ACSS may exceed sag limits before potential capacity is achieved.
- ACSS may require structure modification to meet sag requirements.
- ACSS sag may not allow full capacity to be realized.
The Economics of Efficiency
Whether you are considering a rebuild or reconductoring using existing structures, ACCC® Conductors offer the most cost-effective solution.
Value of Line Loss Reductions
| Peak Amps | Temperature at peak amps (C°) | Load Factor | MVA | Annual Line Losses (MWh) | Generation Capacity to Supply Losses (MW) | Value of Reduction at $1 million/MW | Value of Reduced Generation per lineal conductor | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Meter) | (Feet) | ||||||||
| ACSR | 1,000 | 96 | 53% | 398 | 76,989 | 20,362 | $1,018,085 | $3.40 | $1.04 |
| ACCC® | 1,000 | 83 | 53% | 398 | 56,628 | 22.33 | $8,020,000 | $26.73 | $8.15 |
| ACSS | 1,600 | 196 | 53% | 637 | 252,407 | 99.43 | … | … | … |
| ACCC® | 1,600 | 158 | 53% | 637 | 179,284 | 73,122 | $3,656,119 | $12.21 | $3.72 |
Assumption: 100km (62 mile) 230 kV line, Drake Equivalent Conductors;53% Load Factor; 30℃ Ambient;2fps Wind; .5 Emissivity; 5 Absorbivity; $50/MWh; $1MM/MW;Coal Fired(2.19#/kWh);CO2@25/MT
Value of Generation Capacity Savings
| Peak Amps | Temperature at peak amps (C°) | Load Factor | MVA | Annual Line Losses (MWh) | Generation Capacity to Supply Losses (MW) | Value of Reduction at $1 million/MW | Value of Reduced Generation per lineal conductor | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Meter) | (Feet) | ||||||||
| ACSR | 1,000 | 95 | 53% | 398 | 76,917 | 30.35 | … | ||
| ACCC® | 1,000 | 82 | 53% | 398 | 56,588 | 22.33 | $8,020,000 | $26.73 | $8.15 |
| ACSS | 1,600 | 194 | 53% | 637 | 251,998 | 99.43 | … | … | … |
| ACCC® | 1,600 | 156 | 53% | 637 | 179,022 | 70.63 | $28,800,000 | $96.00 | $29.26 |
Value of Emission Reductions
| Peak Amps | Temperature at peak amps (C°) | Load Factor | MVA | Annual Line Losses (MWh) | Generation Capacity to Supply Losses (MW) | Value of Reduction at $1 million/MW | Value of Reduced Generation per lineal conductor | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Meter) | (Feet) | ||||||||
| ACSR | 1,000 | 53% | 398 | … | … | … | … | … | … |
| ACCC® | 1,000 | 53% | 398 | 20,362 | 20,227 | 92 | 31 | $1.69 | $0.52 |
| ACSS | 1,600 | 53% | 637 | … | … | … | … | … | … |
| ACCC® | 1,600 | 53% | 637 | 73,122 | 72,638 | 332 | 113 | $6.07 | $1.85 |
Trusted by Utilites Worldwide
Why Utilities Rely on and Trust ACCC® Conductor
Our Customers Speak for Us!