Slashdot Mirror
FCC Approves BPL Despite Interference Concerns
goosman writes "The ARRL is reporting that the FCC has approved revised Part 15 (unlicensed services) rules to specifically regulate the deployment of broadband over power line (BPL) technology. The Commission adopted a Report and Order in ET Docket 04-37 when it met in open session today. At the same time, three members of the Commission, including Chairman Michael K. Powell, specifically mentioned the concerns of Amateur Radio operators at the open meeting and expressed either assurances or hope that the new BPL rules will adequately address interference to licensed services."
It was the wishes of a few million people that the Native Americans be displaced, but that was still wrong, just as this is too.
The tyranny of the majority is still a tyranny. Hence the reason we have a Republic, not a pure Democracy.
I have nothing to do with amateur radio, but for those of us who dont trust the government or big business, radio allows people to communicate without any cable or phone or power company or goverment direct control. It requires no significant infrastructure to work...in the case of a natural disaster or crackdown on free communications, its a way to "route" around the damage or block. The internet can be unplugged or blown up...AR just requires a guy, his radio and some off the grid power source...
It seems sad, and yet predictable the government would not care that the interference might be a big issue...
Sure, and the rest of the time?
Look, ham gear is expensive, and people primarily use it to communicate in times of non-emergency for fun. You aren't going to find too many people who happily purchase expensive radio equipment, study and pass a license exam, then wait for a power outage so they can use their equipment.
Frankly the people who already purchased thousands of dollars of equipment and passed the required exams only to be fucked over by the FCC (suprise, we decided we don't care if your stuff works anymore) have a right to be royally pissed over this.
You want a last mile solution, look to WI-MAX, BPL is a failure.
Finkployd
Suppose in one place there is a disaster and the power goes out...
Now there they could use HAM equipment for communicating... (Assuming people still have it as it is useless at other times and you can practice or test it).
Who is going to hear you scream for help?
Not the guy in the place were the power is still on.
The only thing he hears (Assuming......) is BPL
Jeroen
Secure messaging: http://quickmsg.vreeken.net/
actually, if I know the ham regs right (a friend of mine who is an operator told me this), all the money a pissed off radio operator needs is enough for a big-ass amp...then he can legally piss all over the BPL frequencies and there'd be nothing the power co can do.
"Evil will always triumph because good is dumb." -- Dark Helmet
Two points:
First. we are getting BPL because the power companies are too cheap, or stupid to start installing power lines that contain fiber optic strands. These are non conductors so they can share space with the electric distribution system.
Second, this is a 2 way street. The BPL can cause interference in the HF spectrum, but it can also be interfered with by HF. And one way for hams to overcome interference and bad conditions is to up their power output. Its amaizing what can be done with only 5 watts under good conditions. But we can go as high as 1500 watts, which may be needed to get a signal through the BPL interference.
What annoys me is that the FCC, in particular chairman Michael Powell (yes, son of Colin Powell), have ignored their own purpose and directive and have been entertaining agendas that are not central to their entire purpose. The FCC was created in the early 1900s (around 1912 I think) to regulate frequency usage to reduce interference by being a netrual party coordinating spectrum usage. This was to prevent the problem of several broadcast stations competing simply by increasing their transmitted power.
Now it appears the FCC doesn't give a rat's ass about those they are suppose to protect and work with (i.e. licensed spectrum users) and are giving a carte blanc to unlicensed intereference. The amendenments allows basiclly more freedom for utilties to create intereference. They have ignored both the amateur radio community (i.e. the ARRL) and the US Government's spectrum management agency, GTIA (I think).
Michael Powell has been considered a disappointment, naively believe that the "free market" can balance what are "natural monopolies."
The other annoyance is that BPL has faired poorly in the majority of trials, and globally most BPL trials have been shutdown with no plans on deployment. I believe numerous power companies are in fact merely trying to boost their stock value, not plan on actually delivering Internet services to rural users.
"I have some reservations about the FCC regulating something that they have not regulated much in the past. As far as I know, the power company has not needed a license to broadcast their 60 hz signal before... "
"BPL won't broadcast at 60Hz... there's tons of unused bandwidth in overhead transmission lines.
BPL will operate at higher freqs, typically the HF portion of the spectrum... and that'll interfere with Amateur Radio.
If they were transmitting BPL at 60 Hz, they wouldn't have enough bandwidth for it to be useable at all! Hell, a TV channel uses a whopping 6000 Hz itself!"
First of all BPL signals cover 80,000,000Hz+ (80Mhz) of spectrum, furthermore a standard TV signal is 6Mhz wide not 6Khz. The FCC is a mere shadow of what it once was, it was run by technically competent commissioners. Now it's run by technically incompetent we'll bend over for industry commissioners. Power lines were designed to do one thing, deliver power at 60Hz. When broadband RF is applied the act like antennas and radiate most of that energy as interference.
For example, if I took a bullhorn and mounted it atop of a pole and transmitted say, an MT63 signal to a dish microphone several blocks away, made sure I kept the dB level down as not to break some noise ordnance would you still like it? Probably not.
BPL is going to cause radio interference on a scale that hasn't been seen since the days of spark gap transmitters. It WILL violate the international agreement the US has with other countries to keep the spectrum clean for the reception of short wave broadcast. Despite what BPL providers and equipment manufactures say, it WILL cause interference, I worked my ass off to get my extra class ham license. I put up with enough "regular" interference from consumer electronics like TVs, computers, cracked insulators, etc.
And the biggie, EVERYONE keeps overlooking the fact that BPL can be interfered with something as simple as a CB. I could drive into an area, key a transmitter and DOS entire neighborhoods. I could use a software defined radio and just drive into a BPL serviced area and conduct surveillance, sniff packets with no physical wire connection.
I'm all for broadband but deploying it on the HF band is a bad (in the extreme) idea that will eventually cost you money when it fails. Even Japan tried it and then banned it from their country because it caused so much interference.
"I bow to no man" - Riddick
I'm a ham radio operator and I can assure you that we've got far more specturm than we need or use, and this BPL stuff has great potential for rural areas where even wimax isn't going to be a viable option.
.04 cents per minute for a 128K line. T1 lines are $800-$1,200 a month - if you can get them.
And what level license do you hold? Not that it makes that much a difference, a HAM is a HAM is a HAM, but if your name is any indication, you are a technician licensee, and probably have little experience using HF bands in any case. I could be wrong, but since you fail to provide a call, I can do little more than assume that you have limited if no HF experience. And to keep things fair, my call is W4KDH, and I hold a General class license.
BPL is a really the only solution for some areas, even in this day of DSL/Cable/Wimax/3G and whatever.
NO it is not. WiMax, and in some cases even Satellite are better solutions, cheaper to implement and ultimately cheaper to maintain. Not to mention the direct benefit of no incidental RF radiation from miles and miles of antenna(power lines).
To give you folks a bit of perspective, I live 1.5 hours away from New York and Philadelphia, in Pennsylvania, a place called Bucks County, up in the north end. It's not exactly "rural" but it's still a place where people come to get out to "the country".
And again, to be fair, I live in a little place called Bear Creek, NC, in Chatham county which IS a rural area, not just a "Could be considered rural for this excercise" area. I commute an hour to work and an hour home each day due to the distance between my house and my office.
DSL service has only been offered in this area since April 2004. Cable internet access is still NOT an option and won't be anytime soon. Modem connections in many areas are - at best - 56K X2, with typical connections much slower. ISDN is charged by the minute - at
DSL service is NOT offered here. Sprint does not care for the expense of setting it up. I get dialup, and 56K X2 is a standard, not a connection speed. Typically, even in the best of circumstances, a "56K" connection will get you 52K realized speeds... I typically get 28.8 max. ISDN is not an option, as again, sprint deems it too expensive to set up the existing infrastructure for ISDN. And you can get T-1. Its just a matter of cost. Any provider will gladly provide you a T1, no matter where you are, so long as you make it worth their while to run the lines, etc.
There's a guy running an point-to-point wireless ISP operation called "Airisen" here, but it does not work where there's too many trees (like my house).
Then the reasonable solution would be to put an antenna higher than the trees. As a Ham, you should at least have SOME grasp of the basics of RF principles, and especially the idea of Line of Sight. You dont think that WiMax or 3G would be any different do you?
What matters most about BPL is that it rides on existing infrastructure - no new towers, no new wires, no digging, no aiming, no clearing trees to get line of sight.
Here you mention line of sight, but seem to overlook that WRT the aforementioned PTP wireless provider. What the problem with BPL is is that that existing infrastructure is ancient, by most standards, unshielded, and NOT MADE to carry signals at the frequencies needed for PLC. Think about it... the areas that proponents argue will be best served are the EXACT areas that those power companies have yet to actually test in.
Of course BPL works in major metropolitan areas... but no real studies have been done in the US, that I am aware of at least, involving a BPL rollout to a truely rural area (meaning an area where there is VERY limited infrastructure to begin with). Hell, my power company cant even keep the power on when we have someting like a simple rain, how can I possibly expect them to provide adequate broadband? And the same goes for most similar areas
"Our funds have never taken part in toxic or death spiral convertible financings of any sort" -BayStar's managing partne
Its a hobby until the area you are in is devastated and all other communication channels are down.