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."
I think it has been said that BPL doesn't use "twisted lines" but during hurricane Ivan half of our neighborhoods' lines were downed, and I got a chance to get an up close and personal look at the lines, and they did look twisted to me (just like any wire that is twisted up for strength). Won't this twist help keep the signal from leaking so badly?
Just another ignorant AC...
I remember people were touting BPL as being an easy last mile solution before I had cable/DSL access available to me in the mid-90's . It sounds great, but BPL has been vaporware longer than Duke Nukem Forever. BPL could have been the number one provider, but now with DSL and cable so widely available it seems like it will never take off except in the most rural of areas.
time is a perception of a being's consciousness
time is your 6th sense, the wierd ones are 7+
Not being in the US myself, I'm curious to know if this regulation now allows research and work on BPL to start, or if lots of trials and so forth are already under way. I know that a great deal of work is being done in Europe on it already, and even here in South Africa (with some of the Eurpoean deployment in Spain being done by an SA firm, which is basically what I know of the global BPL situation :) ). To the best of my knowledge, these implementations are still experimental work though.
Does this regulation now allow for commercial implementation of BPL by US power companies, or is this not the end of the story as far as regulation in the US goes?
Of course, I may be completely wrong and full scale commercial development is under way in other parts of the world already. Is it?
Daar is nie 'n lepel nie
With all the frustrations of DSL and sketchy availability of cable (i discovered that even in NYC, in 2004, it is still possible to move to an address not covered by a single broadband option) BPL can still very much find a market.
What I want is fiber optic, goddamnit! That would be the real last mile solution!
And it pi55es me off that so much fiber optic infrastructure is going unused for lack of investment!
Contemplate the marvel that is existence, and rejoice that you are able to do so.
Wonder what the DoD think of this proposal as HF is still widely used by the military / emegerncy services in the US for both long distance and bouncing signals over mountains etc...
--- Users are like bacteria -> Each one causing a thousand tiny crises until the host finally gives up and dies.
When I first read about using power lines to provide broadband Internet access, I was very excited, especially since I lived in an area in which there was no real competition in broadband. It seemed like a great idea. At the time I didn't realize that the unshielded power lines would interfere with Amateur Radio.
Radio Amateurs, HAMs, have played critical roles in almost every large disaster that has happened in this country. They provided emergency communications when no other communications technologies were working. Groups of HAMs regularly set up disaster drills where they perfect their ability to get information in and out of a disaster torn area. HAMs have also helped advance radio technology. The very first wireless Internet connections were set up by HAMs using 2-meter rigs connected to their computers back in the days of the first IBM PC and Apple IIe.
There might be all kinds of rules that the power companies have to follow to prevent interference with HAM radio, but my guess is that they'll just ignore them. How many amateur radio operators are going to have the fiscal resources needed to take on a big power company?
My guess is that everyone will quickly forget about this debate until a disaster strikes. Then maybe people will wonder why the communications were so poor and count the lives that were lost because of it.
If the power companies are going to disrupt the ability of HAM radio operators to provide communications during disasters, they should bear the cost of setting up alternative communication networks that can supply the needed communications. It's a cost of doing business.
Another question springs to mind, why this particular frequency spectrum, is it dictated by the application, or was this spectrum selected because there was they figured that amateur radio operators couldn't organize real opposition to it?
-All that is gold does not glitter - Tolkien
www.ra
{I'm not trolling here} It seems to me that on Bush's agenda buried deep away someplace was to ensure that high-speed internet was plentiful for his constituents. In general this is a good idea. I can't help but wonder about the timing of this announcement just so close to an election. As a long time computer geek and radio enthusiast, I'm torn between two wants/needs and ideals, the high-speed and the use of the radio spectrum. At the end of it all it is up to the FCC to regulate the use of the spectrum. I could be wrong but it seems to me that this is a rare decision where they KNOWINGLY put in a service that will cause interference to another service. As a radio amateur, I expect parts of the spectrum to be unclear at any time. I do not, however, expect a government body to purposely trash it at all times with interference in order to move forward an election agenda! 73 de VE6VPD
So long as it doesn't interfere with emergency freqs, it's a net gain.
- Broadcast crap all over amateur radio bands.
- Amateur radio users have to sign up for BPL.
- BPL ISPs rake in money from all those monthly fees.
A net gain, but not for the amateur radio users.I shower often, brush my teeth, wear deodorant and don't live at home. Not to mention I'm under 30. (rimshot)
Seriously, folks: unless there is some way that the FCC and the BPL operators can guarantee with 100% success that interference won't occur, this is going to really wreak havoc on the hobby.
During the "great blackout", hams were actually really important in helping emergency services communicate after backup generators powering the Public Safety radio systems died. Introduce a technology that prevents hams from persuing their hobby recreationally, and eventually, they'll all go away.
Ergo, when the lights go out again, there's hardly anyone around to help.
But let's look at something else: how vindictive and brazen some of these older "1337" hams are.
You start to fuck with their only hobby, and I'll bet you dollars-to-donuts that they'll fight back.
Part of the thing with BPL is that while it interferes with Amateur Radio frequencies, Amateur Radio frequencies can interfere with them in turn.
It's going to be very hard (if impossible) to stop some stinky, angry ham operator from pulling up next to some power lines in his tricked out hamsexy truck and pump a couple hundred Watts of RF into the BPL lines.
A couple months of continual service outages would drive customers away.
Beware the wrath of a stinky ham.
According to Kevin Kushman (CEO of Current Communications), "This [ruling] will spur a national buildout of BPL."
Obviously the AARL is right in pushing for regulation that will reduce the possibility of interference of the radio spectrum. For this reason, the equipment does need to be certified and some guidelines are required on how it is implimented and the database can be used to identify and contact offenders. I have no problem with that stuff.
On the otherhand, certified equipment costs more, and meeting code requirements means that there are some things that a company may want to do that would be viable technologically, and be of a benefit to the customer, but can not be delivered because of the restrictions in the rules they are obliged to follow. The database may be required to be too thourough, requiring a great deal of administration from the company and this could be a major expense too. So, I can also see the company's side.
I hate nothing more than listening to the radio, or talking on my cel phone, or watching TV only to be victimized by radio frequency interference. For my wife, it is even worse, RFI can really mess up her hearing aids. This doesn't make us unique, it is a fact of modern life. To some extent or another, we are all annoyed (or worse) by some RFI. So I think we can all understand what the AARL is warning us about.
On the otherhand, BPL can deliver broadband to people who have not been able to get it before. BPL may be able to provide less expensive service than other methods, and just by having another player in the game, BPL may be able to spur competition and innovation in what is really a comodity service.
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 - yet we all recieve it and use it. They are laying this new service down on the old infrastructure and using the fiber that controls their automated substations to get the BPL "signal" into the neighborhood. So, I guess I don't see a whole lot of new broadcasting going on!
The FCC I think made a wise decision, allowing the service to go forward while requiring solid equipment. Given the FCC's (recent) friendly attitude to buisness and ability to quickly make adjustments to rules, I think that they have done the right thing. I think that there may be a few power companies out there who will decide to not offer the service because they disagree with this but I'll bet those companies that do that will be located somewhere that already had broadband providers. So, BPL will go a lonq ways to providing those who have been left behind in the broadband race!
a.) I told you but nobody would listen.
b.) Wayne Green and Art Bell are going to be really pissed off.
c.) Think of how dumb-down the next generation of children are going to be who wish to tinker with RX/TX and learn electronics.
d.) I predict in areas of bleedover (in either direction) destruction of property, lawsuits, jamming, jail, and death, etc. Hams are not going to give up as easilly as you think. And CB'ers? Don't even think they won't "pump it up."
e.) We are loosing all our rights in the US now. Interesting times. I'm already pissed.
Power lines were designed for transmitting low frequencies [50Hz] with maximum power throughput -- delays and distortion be damned. A big motor driving a hefty flywheel isn't going to care about THD or SWR, just kilowatts. Furthermore, at that kind of frequency, unshielded cables won't radiate much -- 50Hz mains has a wavelength of 6 megametres. [The Earth's circumference is only 40 megametres.]
Broadband internet uses a high-frequency carrier and expects a transmission line designed for low distortion, and delays that don't vary too much with frequency. It's less critical how much of the energy you put in actually comes out the other end; a scope trace that looks the same shape is what's important. High frequencies need special precautions to avoid losing the signal to radiation; either a shielding braid around the conductor {co-ax, like TV cable}, or a second conductor carrying an antiphase signal in intimate proximity {twisted-pair, like a phone cable}.
Using power lines to carry broadband internet just sounds like using the wrong tool for the job. The scary part is how "almost right" it looks. But, if you use a Phillips screwdriver in a Prodrive recess, you'll end up knackering the screw and the screwdriver.
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
I hear this arguement made a lot by people who live in high population densities and I always cringe at your ignorance.
Since most rural areas tend to be populated by people working in either agriculture or extractive industries how about if we turn this around?
Since you have no "right" to inexpensive food, or material goods the following now apply:
$100 a pound for tin foil? Boo hoo.
$100 a ton for low sulphur coal? (The same coal that fires your powerplants I might add)Boo hoo.
$15 a pound for chicken, beef, & pork? Boo hoo.
$100 a bushel for corn, wheat, & rice? Boo hoo.
$20 for a dozen eggs? Boo hoo.
$15 for a gallon of milk? Boo hoo.
$10/therm for natural gas. Boo hoo.
We all support EACH OTHER, and if you want to undo the deal then get ready to watch the prices on many of the things you take for granted blow through the roof...if you can obtain them at all.
People who feel somehow superior because they live "In The City" really get on my nerves.
If you want to ignore the rural areas of the United States and leave them to rot like some third world backwater that's fine, just don't be shocked when you have no food, no fuel, and housing prices in your precious city suddenly skyrocket by a factor of 10 as all us poor ignorant rural folks try and move in.