[Rumor]

Here is the link.

A leading provider of BPL service is a Maryland company, Current Communications. It's cooperating with TXU, a Dallas power utility, to provide BPL service to 2 million customers.

Last year, Current received about $100 million in cash from investment bank Goldman Sachs, media giant Hearst Corp. (which happens to publish this newspaper) and, yes, Google.

Another $130 million was raised in May from other investors, including General Electric and Internet service provider Earthlink.

Google said at the time of its investment that it was keen to support alternative broadband technologies. That interest has since taken on new importance as Congress moves closer to passing legislation that would allow network operators like AT&T and Comcast to charge higher fees to heavy users like online video services.

This would be great. Where I live we have only Adelphia and SBC unless you count Hughes (which is a rip off. 1/2 the speed of basic DSL for 5 times the cost). There are many areas out here that don't get anything at all.

[TETENAL]

The problem is that the power line is not designed for this and acts as a transmitter that can disturb radio. An ISP who provides this in Austria has a lot of trouble with this (heise German)

ARRLWeb: BPL is "Spectrum Pollution," ARRL President Says

[voodoo]

I've tries this. Good thing about it is that it is symmetrical cable (equal speed up and down), but it has more disturbance than cable or adsl.

Perhaps they've fixed it now, but it was not all that reliable four years ago.

V

[baw]

Powerline internet destroyes the shortwave bands.

[residentEvil]

They can also bring in internet over the gas lines:

Welcome to Nethercomm Corporation

Nerthercomm's website has gone stale, but it had a lot of buzz for awhile.

[Big Mac]

Broadband Over Power comes up now and then, but it never seems to go anywhere.

[Rumor]

Google is financing it now, so perhaps it might go somewhere.

What shortwave bands does it destroy?

[olePigeon]

Part of the problem is that power lines are unshielded. When you transmit data over them they act like a giant radio. It might work okay for places with underground power, but not in the burbs or cities with traditional power lines.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by baw

shortwave bands.

So what ?

We live in the 21st century, at least, most of the people.

-t

[itai195]

Originally Posted by residentEvil

They can also bring in internet over the gas lines:

Welcome to Nethercomm Corporation

Nerthercomm's website has gone stale, but it had a lot of buzz for awhile.

I'm waiting for Internet access to come in through my water.

Then I could both read and drink MacNN!

[abe]

Originally Posted by what_the_heck

So what ?

We live in the 21st century, at least, most of the people.

-t

Broadband over Power Line:
Why Amateur Radio Is Concerned about Its Deployment

View/Print as a PDF file (51,606 bytes)
Radio amateurs are not opposed to broadband services. On the contrary, they tend to be early adopters of new technology. However, there are ways to deliver broadband that do not pollute the radio spectrum as Broadband over Power Line (BPL) does. These include fiber-to-the-home, cable, DSL, and wireless broadband. The ARRL--The National Association for Amateur Radio-- is supportive of broadband access for all Americans; however, it opposes BPL as a way to achieve this goal because of its high potential for causing interference to radiocommunication.


What is Broadband over Power Line?


BPL is the delivery of broadband Internet signals using electrical wiring to conduct high-speed digital signals to homes and businesses. BPL systems are designed to deliver Internet services using medium voltage power lines as the distribution medium and generally use the frequency range between 1.7 and 80 megahertz (MHz).


The Concern: Broadband + Power Lines = Interference


Because power lines are not designed to prevent radiation of RF energy, BPL represents a significant potential interference source for all radio services using this frequency range, including the Amateur Radio Service. Overhead electrical power lines and residential wiring act as antennas that unintentionally radiate the broadband signals as radio signals throughout entire neighborhoods and along roadsides. Interference has been observed nearly one mile from the nearest BPL source.


What is the status of BPL?


From a regulatory standpoint, BPL is an unlicensed, unintentional emitter of RF energy and is subject to FCC Part 15 rules. FCC rules require that BPL systems may only operate subject to the express condition that harmful interference is not caused to licensed radio services. BPL is not entitled to protection from interference. So far, BPL has been deployed in numerous temporary test sites but in few commercial installations. Despite the very limited deployment, considerable interference has been documented. In October 2004 the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopted new rules for BPL systems. These rules place new restrictions on BPL systems in recognition of the fact that they pose a greater threat of radio interference than most Part 15 devices, such as garage door openers. However, the new rules are not sufficient to reduce the probability of harmful interference to reasonable levels. Administrative appeals of the rules have been filed and court challenges are likely.


Why are the regulations inadequate?


The Communications Act of 1934 and the FCC Rules have long required that unlicensed emitters such as BPL systems must protect licensed radio services from interference, and that they must accept any interference to their operation that is the result of normal activity by licensed radio services. However, in practice it is often difficult to resolve such interference problems in the field. In one case in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, BPL engineers spent 12 weeks trying to solve an interference problem without success. The interference did not cease until the test was terminated prematurely.


Studies by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) show that the probability of interference from a BPL system operating at the FCC radiated emission limit on the same frequency as a typical two-way radio station is essentially 100% 200 to 400 meters from the power line, depending on the frequency. Despite this clear evidence that the limit is too permissive, the FCC declined to impose a tighter limit except in frequency bands used by aeronautical services. This means that unless they voluntarily design their systems for reduced emissions, BPL system operators will have to take expensive, customized steps to correct interference on a case-by-case basis. That may not be possible unless they turn off their systems. Of course, they will strongly resist having to do so. This is why radio operators are so concerned, and why BPL customers cannot be assured of receiving reliable broadband service.


Has the interference potential been proven?


The ARRL laboratory has made observations of BPL radiation at a number of trial areas. The lab's findings of interference and related information, including video and audio recordings of actual interference, are available on the Web at www.arrl.org/bpl. These and other observations of radio-frequency interference at BPL test sites in the US are a matter of public record in FCC files.


An April 27, 2004 report released by the NTIA acknowledges that BPL signals "unintentionally radiate" from power lines. The NTIA also said then-current FCC Part 15 measurement techniques may "significantly underestimate" peak BPL field strength and that "interference risks are high under existing FCC Part 15 rules." The FCC rulemaking only partially addressed these concerns.


Although BPL proponents dispute these claims of interference to licensed services, they have provided little in the way of calculations or measurements of BPL radiation levels -- and what they have provided has been flawed by technical errors.


Others at risk


The "short waves" -- the only part of the radio spectrum that supports long-distance, intercontinental radio communication. The short waves are used for international broadcasting, aeronautical, maritime, disaster relief, and other services including the military.
The "low-band VHF" frequency range that is heavily used by volunteer fire departments, police, and other first responders.
Depending on their distance from a BPL system, some public safety and federal government radio systems could receive harmful interference.
ARRL -- The National Association for Amateur Radio
www.arrl.org · Newington, CT 06111

March 2005

http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/HTML/pl...eployment.html

[turtle777]

As long as only amateur radio is affected, I don't care.

Whoever lumps amateur radio, and police, fire or emergency into one should think about the term amateur.

-t

[abe]

Originally Posted by what_the_heck

As long as only amateur radio is affected, I don't care.

Whoever lumps amateur radio, and police, fire or emergency into one should think about the term amateur.

-t

Maybe you're right.

[baw]

Originally Posted by what_the_heck

As long as only amateur radio is affected, I don't care.

Whoever lumps amateur radio, and police, fire or emergency into one should think about the term amateur.

-t

You know amateur radio saves countless amount of lives? Guess what works when the power and cell towers go dark. Ham radio. Ham radio proved to be essential during the September 11th attacks. Ham radio was there in the tsunami disaster of 2004.

Amateur radio - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Amateur radio emergency communications - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Read up on it.

[turtle777]

Sure, it saves lifes. And so do guns.

-t

[baw]

Originally Posted by what_the_heck

Sure, it saves lifes. And so do guns.

-t

That is right. So to allow business to interfere with the ham bands may effect the lives of people in the next disaster.

[Eug]

P.S. I had major problems with DSL with faxes and phones on the same line. The filters didn't help much. That's why I switched to cable - every time I got a call, my internet access would go down.

Apparently that's fixed... but I've stuck with cable.

I wonder how much interference there is on power lines in comparison, cuz the symmetrical upload is very attractive. I don't need more download speed, but more upload speed would be very welcome. (I'm on 6000 Kbps down, 800 up.)

P.S. If it only affected amateur radio, I wouldn't care that much either to be honest.

[baw]

Originally Posted by Eug

P.S. If it only affected amateur radio, I wouldn't care that much either to be honest.

Since it will only hurt something you all have little knowledge about, then it is ok? BPL violates FCC regulations, that is why there is opposition to it.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by baw

Since it will only hurt something you all have little knowledge about, then it is ok? BPL violates FCC regulations, that is why there is opposition to it.

Just being honest. Ham radio operators have been complaining since just about forever, but few people care much. I think that's pretty representative of the general population, whether you like it or not.

Anyways, as long as the FCC thinks BPL is acceptable, then it seems OK to me. It's interesting to note that the major complainer is the ARRL, but not the non-amateurs so much.

Furthermore, there are new BPL technologies being demonstrated already that reduce interference (to comply with FCC regulations), yet the ARRL tends to paint all BPL with the same brush.

[Landos Mustache]

WiMax or ADSL 2 is probably a better idea.

[baw]

Originally Posted by Eug

Just being honest. Ham radio operators have been complaining since just about forever, but few people care much. I think that's pretty representative of the general population, whether you like it or not.

They have to complain because the government favors big business, which tends to be the ones introducing interference to the ham bands.

It's interesting to note that the major complainer is the ARRL, but not the non-amateurs so much.

Non-amateurs? Of course the non-amateurs are not complaining. That is because the interference is on the amateur bands.

If something comes along and starts to interfere with a certain spectrum of RF (VHF, UHF, SW, etc.), no matter who's side you are on, it isn't right that the interference should be allowed to continue.

Cinergy had a BPL test here in Cincinnati, but that was at least 3 years ago and there has not been any updates since.

[Rumor]

Originally Posted by Landos Mustache

WiMax or ADSL 2 is probably a better idea.

Where I live, we *might* see WiMax by 2077. DSL isn't available in its current form to many residents here as it is.

[baw]

I live in the second fastest growing county in Ohio and DSL is still not available to me.

[CharlesS]

I think the draw of BPL is that to get cable Internet, you have to get cable TV, which not everyone has or needs, and to get DSL you need a land phone line, which not everyone has or needs, but everyone has electricity. So for people who don't want cable TV or a land phone line, BPL would end up being the cheapest option.

[baw]

Originally Posted by CharlesS

I think the draw of BPL is that to get cable Internet, you have to get cable TV, which not everyone has or needs, and to get DSL you need a land phone line, which not everyone has or needs, but everyone has electricity. So for people who don't want cable TV or a land phone line, BPL would end up being the cheapest option.

But it never seems to take off. You hear about it being deployed some place and that is it. No updates, no expansion to other areas. Duke (formally Cinergy) doesn't promote it at all on their website.

[Eug]

Hmmm... I had DSL in the late 90s. Then I moved, and for about a year I couldn't get DSL, which was odd since I lived in the downtown core of a large metropolitain city.

Originally Posted by CharlesS

I think the draw of BPL is that to get cable Internet, you have to get cable TV, which not everyone has or needs, and to get DSL you need a land phone line, which not everyone has or needs, but everyone has electricity. So for people who don't want cable TV or a land phone line, BPL would end up being the cheapest option.

You don't have have to have cable TV or an active land phone line for cable internet or DSL respectively.

Of course the infrastructure has to be there, but you don't have to subscribe to the service (at least in certain areas). Do people actually build houses these days without cable runs or phone lines?

[CharlesS]

I dunno, I asked SBC (back when they were still SBC) if I could order just DSL without phone service, and they wouldn't let me do it.

[Spliffdaddy]

Not every landline telephone is capable of DSL service. Cable TV only exists in areas of relatively dense population.

My current home does not have any options available for broadband internet. Except for satellite, I guess.

In fact, I'm willing to bet that when "electric line" internet becomes widespread - there will still be some stupid reason this house won't qualify for the service.