"Common sense" suggests that you amplify the signal at the sending
end, not the receiving end.

"Common sense" also suggests that you use a balanced cable with
a separate shield. This is the way microphones are wired, and for very
good reason.

As someone pointed out, a foil shield provides 100% coverage
(or close to it), while braided shields rarely do.

I'm not sure what your assumptions of my project are, but they have
led you to believe that I lack common sense. I have considered this
approach of amplifying at the sending end, and I may end up building a
voltage to current converter circuit to achieve this.This more
expensive approach would require a climate controlled nema 3r control
panel to be mounted on a roof, adding quite a few dollars to the
overall cost. I have 12 temperature sensors also mounted on the
system. I can not afford to build a sending circuit for each.


Your original post told us next to nothing, so it's not surprising that the
suggestion of using coax came under attack. You don't send weak
instrumentation signals down 35' of unbalanced line and expect them to
arrive unscathed. We haven't even discussed the possibility of ground loops.

Coax simply isn't a good idea. That you can't afford to do it the right way
doesn't make it any better an idea. People constantly ask for advice, then
complain that the correct advice costs too much to implement.

Go ahead and use the coax. But when it doesn't work the way you hope it
will, don't come back complaining.