Web Access Over Power Lines

anaesthetica writes "The CSMonitor is reporting that power companies may now be able to break into the internet provider market, giving consumers a third option, outside of telephone and cable companies. From the article, "Broadband over Power Lines (BPL), with investments from big-name companies including Google and IBM, is beginning to move beyond small trial projects to deploying systems for large communities." Earthlink may offer BPL as soon as next year. Apparently, a major source of opposition to BPL is operators of ham radios."

Comments

Near first post

[Kawahee]

I think that it's a good idea, but users won't be switching soon. The only thing that might encourage users to switch to the power providers is if they can provide a way better plan, or they just want the convenience of paying it off on their power bill.

Re:Near first post

[Sharth]

or if it's, you know, cheaper?

Re:Near first post

[Alex P Keaton in da]

Well, in my situation I am stuck with Cable. I don't have a land line phone (just cell, like many of my generation) and to get cable internet I have to have cable tv. That is fine by me- I want cable anyway, but this would at least give me a choice. If I wanted no phone or cable, just internet, then the power options would be great.

Hams

[kevin_conaway]

Recently BPL companies offered to "notch out" that part of the BPL signal that conflicts with ham broadcasts, but the controversy appears to be far from settled.

The article was light on the details of why the hams are opposed to this, except for the issue of whether or not it will interfere with their signals. If the BPL companies are offering to NOT interfere with the signal, why is there still opposition?

On another note, not to be a dick, but how can a bunch of hams form a "major" opposition against the power companies, IBM, Google etc?

Re:Hams

[LiquidCoooled]

I would assume that the Ham radio users would be the first to know about disruption to their signals in the same way that us geeks are the first to know or care about SCO lawsuits.
They will oppose anything which further clouds their airwaves.

Re:Hams

[op00to]

I like your wording -- THEIR airwaves. Yes, the HAMS have first dibs on much of the contested bandwidth (after the military, of course).

Many hams may be old and crusty, but they're not a group to give up easily.

Re:Hams

[RevengeOfPoopJuggler]

many hams enjoy the challenge of low-power communications of 5W or less

Well then they should love the challenge of trying to communicate with a higher "noise floor" ;)

Re:Hams

[Chanc_Gorkon]

It's also more then just Amateur Radio and Police, Fire and Abulance radios that can be affected. You TV can be affected as well as AM/FM broadcast band. Has anyone here ever been living near a noisy (as in RF) powerline? Power companies are notorius for letting things get bad before the fix them. As long as the wire delivers power, they do not care if it spews RF all over the place. Notching the Ham band out will not be effective. The power company must not have heard of Harmonics.....sure the main signal is notched out but what about the harmonic of the signal? Harmonics is what is going to cause this to be a bigger then ham radio thing. Also, BPL is being promoted by the FCC to be able to bring broadband internet to rural America and that just ain't so. Rural users typically have older power delivery systems when compared to the urban folks and those are not always going to be able to carry BPL.

The BIG reason power companies want BPL is so that THEY can use it for reading your meter. They want to make your electric meter to be adressable and able to be read over the internet. They also want to have teh transformers and what not be able to report their status over it as well. BPL is about cutting some costs for electrical companies and it's just a bonus that they can add ISP to thier hat as well.

Re:Hams

[Kythe]

I would love to see BPL work. I live out in the boonies and I can't even get cable, never mind DSL.

BPL would not be a solution for rural area access. BPL is not useable for long-haul communications: basically, providers need to get the signal almost there using fiber or ethernet (or some similar technology), then put it on the power lines.

This makes BPL a useable, cost-effective technology when you're talking about a subdivision with a bunch of houses. But it's unlikely that a BPL provider would string a fiber across the miles to 50 feet from a remote, rural home, then put the signal on the power line. You might as well string the fiber the rest of the way, from a cost standpoint. Which means you're pretty much back to square one.

Re:Hams

[Anonymous Coward]

Power companies are notorius for letting things get bad before the fix them. As long as the wire delivers power, they do not care if it spews RF all over the place.

This is very true. I've been dealing with a MidAmerican Energy (power utility) interference issue on 144 MHz for six months and have finally resigned to having the FCC get involved. In one community in our area, they have equipment that is blasting interference so strongly that it has wiped out about 300 Hz and has raised the noisefloor across about 2 MHz substantially. From 144.5 MHz to about 145.2 MHz, all amateur operation is impossible for about a one mile radius.

When they've been called, they promise they'll look into the matter yet always come back with a "nothing found" response. They're never able to find the time to visit with anyone to demonstrate the problem and the locals living by the equipment have yet to see a power vehicle there when they claim to be investigating.

This company hasn't figured out how to handle its primary responsibility and constantly loses power to communities in our part of the state due to years of cost cutting in their distribution system, yet we should trust them and others like them with technologies that require coordination, cooperation and competence? Good luck.

Re:Hams

[Verteiron]

t's a firestorm in the hams-on-Internet world, as some are extremely vocal (with very poor grammar) about keeping "the rif-raf" out with the hurdle of a morse code test for the HF bands. You'd think the sky was falling...

Know what this sounds like? The September that Never Ended.

Re:Hams

[harrkev]

You should support amateur radio.

We provide critical communication after a disaster. When four hurricanes hit my area a year ago, guess who handled communications between red cross shelters? Power was out... The phone lines were down... The cell towers were down... The wind was too fierce to send smoke signals. Amateur radio operators were just about the only method of communication.

And if BPL comes to town, there goes amateur radio. If the airwaves are blanketed with noise, nobody will invest in the expensive equipment, and of course they will not get any practice using it. And even IF the disaster wiped out the BPL noise in that area, a ham would have nobody to talk to, becuase the neighboring states would still have the noise.

So, let's assume that BPL does notch out amateur radio frequencies. Then, only some military channels, some shortwave channels, and some ship-to-shore radio frequencies are knocked out. No big deal, unless you happen to be on a ship or trying to listen to shortwave radio.

So, notching is not the answer. If you notch out ALL frequencies, then you can't transmit anything. And the more you notch out, the less bandwidth you have for sending data. And no matter WHERE your energies go, you will step on somebody's toes.

The frequencies below 30MHz (and sometimes all frequencies below 50MHz) have the wonderful quality of being able to travel entirely around the world. It is not uncommon for an amateur radio operator to talk to people thousands of miles away on at little at 5 watts. So, it is not hard to see that if BPL is introduced in every community in the USA, this will make the HF spectrum mostly unusable for THE ENTIRE WORLD. Actually, I am surprised that there is not some sort of treaty that would prevent this BPL nonsense.

Actually, I would love for the power companies to provide broadband. But they should have to do it over shielded cables, just like everybody else.

Re:Hams

[Rytsarsky]

If the hams cannot operate under normal circumstances, then we will not be prepared to operate when we are needed. Also, some of the critical work done by hams is done when a disaster is threatening, not only after it strikes. Listen to the ham bands during a tornado watch and you may hear a local national weather service representitive conducting a weather net. Many ham operators are trained weather spotters and act as the eyes and ears of the nws when bad weather threatens. A good TV meteorologist is monitoring these nets so they can break into programming to give you the very latest reports.

Re:Hams

[harrkev]

I live in Florida, land of Hurricanes. Cell towers have back-up batteries, but no battery system can run for a week or two without power. And it is also possible (probable) for a hurricane to damage antennas.

I admit that not every area has hurricanes. California has earthquakes and riots. Kansas has tornados. New York has a big target painted on it.

When TSHTF, you will be happy to have hams in your neighborhood.

Re:Hams

[nosphalot]

Disaster strikes area A, and power goes out. Ham operator in area A can now transmit again.

Emergency supplies in area B, where power is still on, can not recive signal from area A ham because area B BPL is still interfering with the signal.

There are two points in a point to point link, if one point has too much noise to hear the other, there is no way to communicate. So basically Hams in disaster areas would only be able to communicate with other Hams in other disaster areas.

Re:Hams

[Anonymous Coward]

I think YOU ought to look up what that FCC Part 15 thing that is on all your electronic equipment, and try and understand what it means before you spout off like a clueless jackass.

On the technical side you should also put even a small amout of effort into basic antenna theory to understand that you just don't put in a few notch filters and the problem goes away.

On the political side you should look into the specs of BPL to see what the advantages (none) and disadvantages (many) are for BPL vs internet over phone lines or satellite. You'll see that BPL is being pushed from the top down not for technical reasons, but because of a well funded lobbying industry.

You also need to read a little on spectrum management and the supposed role of the FCC before you make really stupid statements like "We were here first."

You should also look at the other field trials of BPL that were done in England, Virginia, and Texas to see that not only did the sideband noise stomp all over other frequency bands (including non-ham bands), but you'll see that those efforts were dropped because it is a technology that rife with technical problems and one that cannot be promoted as an attractive alternative to other resources (i.e., it is a economic loser).

You are at least consistent with your "me first" attitude when it comes to things that you want vs the effect it would have on anything else. Damn the airwaves. Damn the environment. Damn the poor. Damn anything that would get run over by whatever pie-in-the-sky gotta-have shiny thing that crosses your path. But if you want to at least make intelligent arguments or sound even slightly informed, you should start with the homework assignments I've mentioned to start you on the road to getting a clue (because, to be honest, you really sound like an ignorant dumbfuck otherwise).

Re:Hams

[HiThere]

If you can't use your rig normally, why would you have it?
If you don't have it, you can't use it when the power goes down.

Would you buy a computer that you could only use when the power went down? Ham radios are in the same price range (and up).

Re:Hams

[Sly-Guy]

That is PURE speculation, and by attempting to prevent the development of BPL, you are actually stalling progress which could eliminate the interference.

Directly on the contrary. Hams have indeed assisted companies to develop BPL solutions that minimize interference, there are just not that many that have invested the time and money to do so. If I remember correctly Motorola has made a solution that eliminates most of the harmful interference.

The issue with BPL is that the interference can not be easily eliminated due to the nature of the powerlines. Phone lines are twisted with ground so as to not be transmitters, the center tap on a coax line is covered by a shielded ground to keep signal in. Power lines are just bare wires out in the open, nothing more than anyone uses as a standard HF dipole.

Just remember, with this much RFI coming out of the power lines, what does this do to military HF signals. Yes, the military does indeed still use HF. What does this do to commercial AM and FM stations, much less over the air TV. Remember, most of the cable companies do not pipe out the local channels all the way from the transmitting station, they use your standard high gain arial at the head end.

Why are hams so eager to place the burden on the power companies? There is probably a great reason, but what I've heard is essentially "We were here first" or as you did "there is an incredibly small niche that is insignificant, but I can spin it to appear important". That won't fly.

Because as a Part 15 _*UNLICENSED*_ user of the spectrum, they are required by FCC law to _*ACCEPT*_ interference by Part 97 _*LICENSED*_ users of the spectrum.

It is not a matter that we Hams are whining, it is the fact that we have spent money and time to have the FCC grant us a license to use the spectrum that we are licensed to use.

If someone nearby is transmitting on your favorite AM or FM radio station, are you going to sit there and say "Well, I just have to take it." Or are you going to call #1 the radio station whom paid a good sum of money to get the spectrum they have and #2 call the FCC.

I know I would be doing both #1 and #2.

I am a licensed Amateur Radio Operator by the FCC. If someone is causing harmful interference of my licensed transmission then I will do whatever is necessary to stop it. This is not a matter of whining, this is a matter of law.

Mark - KC8ZUC

Always just a short time until...

[under_score]

I've been reading slashdot articles about this for years, and it's always claimed to be just a short time away. I know that probably at some point it will actually be just a short time away... but is there any better reason to believe that this is it?

Ham Operators Know

[SenFo]

"Apparently, a major source of opposition to BPL is operators of ham radios."

Of course. It's the ham operators that actually understand the potential for BPL to cause harmful RF interference. The rest of the world won't care until it affects them personally. Ignoring the advise of ham radio operators is like ignoring the advise of the bomb squad when there's a bomb in a subway. Ok, so it's not as drastic, but it's still quite silly.

We aren't whining.

[AltGrendel]

Most of the places that they want to install this are RUAL areas. You know, small towns that typically have small populations with little money for infrastructure, like in West Texas. That means above ground power lines.
Personally, I think that any town that buys this stuff is going to get stuck with a bunch of junk that they don't understand. Especally when the company they contract with goes out of business or gets bought out. This sounds like a great oppertunity for the fly-by-night folks.

Re:However it's provided, it should be disaster-pr

[databyss]

"But I think that the most significant hurdle to all of these broadband technologies is keeping the network running even in a disaster like an earthquake or hurricane. Power lines fall down, are torn off the poles by falling trees, and generally succumb to events that they should not encounter everyday. In a lot of places, power lines are run underground, which gives them added protection from above-ground disasters.

Phone lines, too, are affected by such disasters, though in many places the lines are laid under the earth. However, in a large earthquake like is expected in the Bay Area, shifting land could easily sever those lines, stranding thousands of people."

If you don't have power, it's unlikely you'll be able to use your computer. And if you have a laptop, what is powering your wireless router?

Besides, if there's a major earthquake or something, I think internet connection should be pretty low on your list of priorities.

These days, 5 letters will control those 3

[WindBourne]

MONEY. And we are talking BIG MONEY. Most likely, not from Google, and likewise, I doubt the tech ppl, but from the energy ppl. These days, anything goes for the companies that control energy such as Haliburton. Tax breaks out the whazoos, while profits sky rocket.

Re:watch all the lobbyists & "libertarians" sl

[Kris_J]

It's because we understand the issues, dumbass.

Security, anyone?

[ugen]

BTW, what is the protection of the data signal transmitted over an electric wire? Clearly the signal is emitted far and wide and can be easily intercepted and decoded. This is very much unlike any other wired transmission medium where signals are well contained. Even satellite connection is somewhat narrowly directed and pointed upwards. Here your web browsing session will be available for 100s of miles along the path of those power lines, in places with easy access. Just set up a tent, open a laptop with proper antenna and enjoy.

The power companies that implement this would have to provide significant signal encryption well beyond anything that is currently done by other carriers.

Re:Already available in England

[mattrad]

No, that's incorrect.

Blink Broadband is a rebadged-BT Wholesale ADSL offering. What they also offer is Homeplug-style in-house powerline networking (Blink Plug option). There is no WAN BPL producr.

Scottish and Southern do have a BPL *trial* in place but only in 4 remote locations. AFAIK they have no plans for a national roll-out.

FUCK Ham radios? How about FUCK corporate control?

[Ellis D. Tripp]

For someone who is supposedly advocating "egalitarianism-oriented" free speech, you seem awfully quick to hand a PUBLIC RESOURCE called the RF spectrum over to a tiny group of PRIVATE CORPORATIONS.

In case you haven't thought about it yet, there is nothing "free" or "egalitarian" about BPL. It will be under corporate control, accessible only to those who can/will pay for it. Contrast this with amateur radio, which is more or less the last vestige of non-corporate, decentralized, communications technology left in existence. Anyone who can pass a simple test can get on the air and communicate worldwide without any dependence on power companies, telecom giants, or huge media conglomerates.

Destroying public access to the radio spectrum via BPL is just one more move that will keep people dependent on corporations for EVERYTHING. Don't you think that individuals should have SOMEway to communicate and disseminate information that doesn't depend on big business?

AHidden Reason for BPL

[ec_hack]

From the article:

With BPL, utilities can quickly identify where outages have taken place, read meters remotely, and conduct preventive maintenance, such as replacing a transformer before it fails, by monitoring unusual "noise" on the system.

One of the real reasons for this is the remote meter reading capability. It eliminates the need for manual meter reading (or, for places with remote read systems, to have a van drive by getting the data.) But, it allows this camel's nose into the tent: the meter will be smart enough to allow time-of-day-based rates for electricity, like large commercial customers already pay. You'll pay more for usage during peak hours, less for off-peak use. Note: this is fair, as during peak times, electricity often is generated using higher-cost sources such as natural gas plants.

Distance Limits

[AB3A]

I can't imagine where you got that silly idea...

The fundamental technology is still distance limited. In fact, given natural and artificial interference factors from pre-existing spectrum users (not just ham radio operators, but everything on Shortwave) the distance limitations may be even more severe than those imposed by the telcos.

Hams aren't the only objecting group. They're merely the loudest. Most of the others, such as short wave broadcasters and trans-oceanic air traffic, Ship to shore Marine communications and the like don't have a constituency that the FCC will give much credence to.

Air Waves as Public Domain

[StillNeedMoreCoffee]

The public park analogy is close but the electromagnetic spectrum was originally considered public domain. The government started to regulate it it keep the peace and then it progressed to leasing certain spectra to common carriers, then passing laws to make it illegal to listen in on those frequencies (which before were public domain). Then they passed laws to restrict any short wave radio to not be able to tune any band not explicitly Ham or commercial short wave.

Now it appears as though the corporate interests are being given more of the pie. The U.S. governement does not own the electromagnetic spectrum as it is really a world or universe resource. I don't see any mention of what effect it the interference will have on other countries or ongoing research in say tagged animal studies.

I don't imagine that the entire phone wire network will be without problems or leakage. It will come into your PC's your radios, your TV's and cause new and intermittent problems. Not me mention pace makers and medical equipment. Remember you only have to have a piece of wire or a board trace the lentgth of a harmonic of the frequency to build up a galloping gurtey effect in any circuit.

I don't think this has been well thought out.

It will be so much easier to eaves drop on others as well.

realworld measurements

[gb7djk]

Ofcom in the UK have measured the emissions from the PLT (as it is called here) system trials being held here. The results are here on the Ofcom website.

Basically they show just how noisy these signals are as well as spectrum trashing ability they have. It appears that, even at 100m from the powerline the systems exceed the German emission standards (the only applicable ones that the EU has currently) by a wide margin.

It is unlikely that PLT will be licenced in the UK with these characteristics.

Re:Oh, puhlease

[rzebram]

It's not so much their "greater understanding," but the fact that they legitimately care about the unlicensed spectrum. The big difference is that the ham radio operators, unlike your government, are not in bed with big corporations. Do you think your government and the FCC are really doing what's best for you? They're just working for the highest bidder, in this case throwing a freebie at the energy industry for god knows what rewards.