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.

Re:Near first post

[zxnos]

i bet they would price it the same as the competition - maybe 5$ less. right now many locations (at least in, near and around my area) only have DSL or cable so it is hard to get companies to compete if they dont *have* to. if it is the same cost or cheaper than cable i would switch. hopefully enough other people will too. once the local companies lose enough subscribers there should, hopefully, be a price war.

Re:Near first post

[Maxite]

I'm sure that under the Power Companies, you have to buy electricity off of them as well. No electricity, no internet. So yeah, you'll be suckered in by them as well by paying for a service that you may not want.

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

[josecanuc]

The opposition, even with the offer of notching the offending frequencies, is that the notches that have been demonstrated don't do enough.

You could say it lessens the interference by 50% or so, and that's not enough because ANY increase in the "noise floor" (the background signal that exists on a frequency which a signal must overcome in order to be heard) makes it more difficult for ham radio operators to use the frequency spectrum that they are licensed to use.

One solution would be for ham radio operators to just increase the power they use. Unfortunately, most hams operate (on HF anyway) at their full power capacity. Also many hams enjoy the challenge of low-power communications of 5W or less (worldwide communications are possible on under 5W).

The principle of the thing is that why should a commercial venture be able to do the things that, so far, no one has been allowed to do: emit RF across such an immense spectrum of frequencies, including those for which others have what the FCC calls "primary" usage granted to them.

The ARRL has said that they do support a Motorola solution because it does not add any interference to the ham radio frequencies. So not all BPL is bad. Ham radio operators are opposed to those that are bad.

Re:Hams

[Anonymous Coward]

here
is a graph of the licensed frequencies that some hams think that the unlicensed BPL technology will pollute (blacked out).

Hams are fond of shortwave because it allows people to communicate around the globe (not only line-of-sight).

Re:Hams

[querist]

As an Amateur Radio Operator I think I may be able to answer this question.

Firstly, there are a fairly large number of licensed operators. Not everyone is active in the hobby, but it is the number of licensed operators that the ARRL (American Radio Relay League -- Amateur Radio's main 'club', so to speak) uses when confronting the FCC and other regulatory bodies (including Congress) about issues that are a concern to Amateur Radio.

Secondly, as previously reported on Slashdot (no, I cannot find the article at the moment) the BPL companies' attempts to "notch out" the part of the BPL signal that interferes with Amateur Radio transmissions have not been very effective.

Thirdly, while BPL is certainly a good idea in theory, and I for one would welcome our new BPL overlords if they can dispose with the interference on the Amateur Radio bands, there are still technical details to work out before it can be used harmoniously in conjunction with existing services, including Amateur Radio.

Remember, Amateur Radio serves a critical role during emergencies to provide communication when other means are not available. If those power lines go down there will be no interference, but what if they are still up and there is a major emergency? Also, many Amateur bands are close to other public service bands. Yes, I know that the police are using cell phones now, but unless there is something that allows the cell towers to give priority to the police phones over my phone they police may be unable to communicate in an emergency.

I know our local ambulance service uses radio. So does our fire service. BPL will interfere with them as well, though not to the same extent because they are shorter range.

A little interference is not such a big deal with shorter range communications like the local fire and ambulance, but when you are trying to push a signal across the country, that small amount of interference is a major issue.

I'm sure I'm going to get flamed for this, but such is life. These are the main issues to the best of my understanding. Again, I would love to see BPL work. I live out in the boonies and I can't even get cable, never mind DSL.

Re:Hams

[Anonymous Coward]

Contrary to popular belief, we don't live in a military junta, and the law is honored. Spectrum has been allocated to the amateurs and it is the responsibility of the BPL providers to avoid stomping on it. The amateurs also have credibility, having provided the only available reliable communication during events such as the Florida hurricanes, eastern blackouts, and September 11th.

The real problem w/ BPL is that using it for long haul requires a costly investment by the utilities that has not been discussed. Don't know what causes it, but putting a massive inductance (e.g. transformer winding) on a high-speed data line tends to filter the data out (!!!).

So, one needs to put gear at all the subs, trannys and protection devices to provide bypassing for the data signals. The end result is that the communication data ends up using the existing fiber backbone until the last hop to the customer premise if the utility wants to avoid making a massive investment in duplicating telco and cable infrastructure. This makes BPL relatively less competitive except for servicing customers outside of existing xDSL and cable service areas.

Re:Hams

[Artful Codger]

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?

Because the current definition of "not interfering with" is based on fairly loose standards, because BPL noise could ruin the opportunity to use other parts of the RF spectrum in the future, but mainly because power-cabling is unshielded and currently so inefficient at broadband frequencies that they will initially have to use alot of signal, and radiation will be a given, regardless of what's promised.

Think of this as background noise (eg like your neighbour's air conditioner). It may be quiet, but its noise still prevents you from hearing the birds clearly, the breeze in the trees, the buzz of the bees, etc. BPL radiation will reduce our ability to detect faint RF signals. When the extraterrestrials finally get around to thanking us for the LP on Voyager, we won't be able to hear them.

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?

Well, that's the problem. Maybe we need a "sierra club" or "greenpeace" to act as watchdogs on our RF spectrum...

I do believe that BPL is probably inevitable, though... so, sometime in the future, when most of the power grid is adapted for this, and all new AC-powered devices have BPL filters built-in, then the BPL radiation should be less.

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

[imsoclever]

Some, however, are definetly soft and chewey.

Re:Hams

[hotdiggitydawg]

unless there is something that allows the cell towers to give priority to the police phones over my phone they police may be unable to communicate in an emergency.

In fact, that very point was recently demonstrated in London. From this article:

In the immediate aftermath, a statement from the U.K.'s largest network operator, Vodafone, said that an excessive number of calls had caused outages. The operator consequently set aside capacity for phone calls to emergency services.

"Following the major incident in London today, Vodafone London switches are at capacity (which is very rare), so we're having to go into 'access overload' procedures, which means freeing up a proportion of capacity across London to ensure the police and emergency services can communicate," the company said.

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

[josecanuc]

A very valid statement. Not one that most hams are willing to accept ;-)

But then, hams are pretty vocal about keeping the status quo. The FCC has issued a statement that they intend to remove the morse code requirement from all levels of ham radio licensing.

It'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...

The FCC is discussing what kinds of tasks show that one is able to safely and lawfully operate a radio. Meanwhile, some curmudgeons want their little hobby to remain "elite" in their minds and I suppose having it die out is about as "elite" as you can get, eh?

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

[thc69]

querist wrote: If those power lines go down there will be no interference, but what if they are still up and there is a major emergency?

Er...if BPL is up in said emergency, and ham fails, then why not just use the BPL connection?

Also, consider that once BPL comes around, it probably won't be long before the same company sells digital phone over the same lines. Therefore, there will be internet and phone communications as long as BPL signal is up, and if lines or the signal are down, then ham can cut in.

Then, Gorkon wrote: 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.

Sounds great. I'd rather have them read my meter over the internet than have them snooping around in my yard. That's better privacy. Also, while meter readers will be out of a job, it will create IT jobs -- and IT labor demand benefits me, as well as many other slashdotters.

And if I could get some competition for cable internet, which is the ONLY broadband available in my rural location...that sounds like a win-win-win situation! Damn the ham, full speed ahead!

Re:Hams

[ifwm]

The airwaves were there before the hams, so by your logic, the hams actually belong to the airwaves.

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

[rot26]

Here ya go.

http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/allochrt.pdf

Re:Hams

[scgallafent]

thc69 wrote Er...if BPL is up in said emergency, and ham fails, then why not just use the BPL connection?

BPL may be down in the disaster area but it may be up in another area, preventing that area from receiving the transmission.

Let's put this in computer terms:

You've got an 802.11g wireless access point in your house. It is using a specific set of frequencies to maintain your connection between the AP and your computer. Let's say that you are using channel 9 in the US, meaning that your AP is communicating on a small slice of spectrum surrounding 2.452GHz (2452MHz).

Now let's put a microwave oven in your house. Your microwave oven is set to generate energy at 2.450GHz (2450MHz). There is a magnetron inside the microwave designed to generate energy at that frequency. It most likely doesn't generate just 2450MHz waves but generates energy on frequencies that generate a narrow bell curve centered on 2450MHz.

Now let's say that your microwave oven is a little out of spec. The shielding is a little leaky and the magnetron is generating energy at a little higher frequency. Now your microwave is putting out energy at 2451MHz +/- 1MHz. That means that the generated energy stretches from 2450MHz to 2452MHz.

Your wireless access point actually uses 22MHz of spectrum, meaning that the signal stretches from 2441MHz to 2463MHz. But look! Your microwave is "transmitting" from 2450MHz to 2452MHz, right on top of the bandwidth used by your AP. Not only that, part of that energy is right on your center or carrier frequency, which is part of what makes this all work.

Now it's time to talk about noise. Imagine that you're trying to hold a conversation across a table in a crowded room. If you're in a quiet restaurant, you should be able to hear each other across the table easily. If you're in a diner with music playing, it because a little more difficult to hear because you've got the constant level of background music. If you're in a bar, it's a little more difficult to hear since the background noise is even louder. If you're in a dance club, it's going to be even more difficult. As the background noise becomes louder, you have to increase your speech volume to overcome the background noise.

The signal to noise ratio is the amount of received signal compared to the amount of noise in the environment. In the conversation scenario, it's how much louder your voice is than the other noise in the room. As the background noise increases, you have to increase your volume (power) to be heard over the noise.

The same thing happens with your wireless access point. There is a certain amount of radio noise in the environment. As long as the AP signal is a certain amount stronger than the noise, when measured at your computer's antenna, the computer can communicate with the AP. If the signal isn't stronger than the noise, the computer can't talk to the AP.

Now you decide to turn on the microwave. It starts generating additional energy (noise, as far as your computer and AP are concerned) right on the frequencies used to communicate. If the new noise level is higher than the signal level, you're offline. (I know of one installation where I can reproduce this exact scenario on command. Turn off the microwave and one computer can't talk until the microwave is turned off.)

The same thing happens with ham radio. If there is an emergency and BPL goes offline, I can receive fairly well because the noise level just dropped significantly. When I try to transmit (most likely at a reduced power level, since I'm running on emergency power), my signal has to be received by someone else. If that person is right next to a BPL source that is leaking lots of noise, he isn't going to be able to pick up my signal because the background noise masks the my signal.

thc69 wrote Damn the ham....

Let's look at potentially affected spectrum. Here are a couple of important links:

Re:Hams

[LiquidCoooled]

Ahhhhhhh, I have heard this before, and your kind of right, but thats only half the problem.

There has been a hurricane in YOUR town, your local power is out, you have no inteference and you are sending out SOS signals.

People in another unaffected town who would normally be able to hear your weak signal can no longer hear anything but static caused by their own localised BPL fuzz.

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

[Goody]

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

Hams use only 10% of the bandwidth. The rest is military, aeronautical, maritime, government, and shortwave broadcast.

Something to keep in mind is that BPL doesn't actually use the wireless spectrum, it pollutes it because it can't keep the frequencies it uses within its medium (like cable and DSL). Otherwise, BPL could probably vie for a licensed frequency allocation. So, it's really just an intruder in wireless spectrum due to a bad design.

Re:Hams

[j0nb0y]

If there was a clueless mod, you'd get it. The reason those devices fall under FCC Part 15 is that they are operating on frequencies for which they are not licensed.

Since HAMS are operating under frequencies that they *are* licensed, it is the BPL that would have to accept interference, not HAMS. Under current rules, if someone deployed BPL, and it interfered with HAMS frequencies, the HAMS could have it shutdown under FCC rules.

This is, of course, why BPL advocates want to change the rules. Which is what the current fight is about.

Re:Hams

[Winkhorst]

Shortwave broadcasters are already complaining about noisy power lines. Listen to Allan Weiner sometime at 8:00 PM EDT on Friday evening on his station, WBCQ, at 7.415MHz. Even now he has to filter out a lot of garbage.

Re:Hams

[Goody]

Shortwave broadcasters are already complaining about noisy power lines. Listen to Allan Weiner sometime at 8:00 PM EDT on Friday evening on his station, WBCQ, at 7.415MHz. Even now he has to filter out a lot of garbage.

Interference from BPL and power line transmission noise are two different things. Transmission noise which has plagued wireless services for decades can be cured with good line maintenance. BPL interference occurs even when the system is operating properly.

BPL proponents claimed BPL was good for fixing transmission noise as utilities had to cleanup the lines which reduced the noise so BPL could work (lower noise = higher signal to noise ratio = better BPL data transmission). This in part was true, but they replaced the transmission noise with an often stronger, more concentrated modulated BPL signal that was even worse than the original power transmission noise. Half-truths abound in BPL press releases and articles, and most of the general public doesn't know any better. The industry has claimed to have fixed the interference problems with frequency notching which usually isn't "deep" enough, or precise enough to prevent problems. Unfortunately journalists (like in the recent NPR report) make it sound like the problem is solved.

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

Apparently?

[Anonymous Coward]

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

And anyone else who uses any kind of radio. BPL still has massive radio interference problems, fullstop. Every trial so far has resulted in cancellation of services because the interference ruins too many other things.

Once again it'll be announced, it'll be trialled, it'll fail. I said it almost every other time someone else comes up with this too good to be true notion.

Re:Apparently?

[ziploclogic]

I listened to a topic on NPR this morning regarding these issues. Engineers have stated that radio interference has not been effectively prevented and that no trials have passed with favorable enough result to limit this type of interference. I'm curious what ideas are being kicked around to solve this problem.

Re:Apparently?

[Crispin Glover]

Cinergy is still running successful BPL trials here in Cincinnati with no complaints or signs of cancellation.

Sounds like a good thing

[mattkinabrewmindspri]

because according to this report, this is sorely needed.

Lower Prices?

[J_Meller]

Interesting article. The power companies may be just the competition the marketplace needs to bring down some of the prices associated with having too few (inferior) competitors. Imagine the power company offering a vonage like service as well. They could probably rope a bunch of people on the bill convienence alone.

Australia has already announced trials...

[pasamio]

If you look about the web, Australia has already announce trials in Canberra for it and in some other places the progress, I believe, is more advanced.

The Trinity

[Anonymous Coward]

Great, now instead of the Cable companies or Telephone companies having the stranglehold over my broadband connection, I got the Power companies too!

Its like the Trinity of Evils controlling all of the Broadband access.

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?

10 years ago

[hachete]

This was mooted 14 years ago. I can't see any big changes. Bypassing the local transformers will still cost a shit-load of money.

Re:10 years ago

[eggstasy]

If by that you mean that getting broadband internet over powerlines is terribly difficult or expensive, I am happy to inform you that my own ISP here in Portugal has been offering powerline internet for ages at very attractive rates.
http://www.oni220.pt/oni220.htm

I'm told other european countries are also deploying it. The upstream is massive compared to similar ADSL offerings, instead of 8:1 it's a 2:1 ratio! Great for eMule :)

Powerline internet is a very attractive option in countries where the telephone lines are owned by a giant monopolist telecom.

Third option?!

[wbren]

"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."

My first and best option has always been satellite Internet service! I get blazing fast downloads at 20KBps and a low monthly bill of only $89.95. I don't need to use it on cloudy/rainy days anyway. Cable and DSL have always been a distant second and third. BPL might make it into the number four spot. Oh, and let's not forget about "Broadband over gas lines"... that's at least my fifth or sixth pick.

BPL is great idea

[el_womble]

Provided they take down the exisiting powerlines and replace them with high tension co-ax. It's not just Ham radios that this will irritate, its everyone. The FCC and its international counterparts have restrictions on EM waves not just because they interfere with communications, but because they interfere with everything from aeroplane and medical electronics to cell division.

However it's provided, it should be disaster-proof

[ReformedExCon]

It's an interesting technology, for sure. According to the article, the signals are sent over a fiber optic network, whereas I would have expected that the signals would piggyback on the main electrical signal. If this is true, I'm not sure how it is different from the fiber optic lines available from the phone company. Maybe the power company has more lines available?

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 my satellite television is any indication, satellite internet is at the mercy of storm clouds. A heavily-clouded storm will typically knock out my satellite reception for a while.

Hopefully we can come up with some way to provide uninterruptible broadband service. Better yet, several ways of providing such a service. I think we are only scratching the surface as to getting ubiquitous broadband service to the entire country.

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.

Not just HAM radio...

[Knightsabre]

Yes, the Amateur Radio community is in opposition to BPL, due to the high degree of RFI (radio frequency interference) that BPL puts out. The problem that not as many people are talking about is that this will also affect many fire/rescue/police radio frequencies, which occupy the same radio spectrum as the BPL systems interfere with. This could potentially cause severe problems in emergency situations. So no, it's not just a bunch of us HAMs whining about BPL "ruining our hobby". We also interact with emergency personnel in emergency situations, severe weather, natural disasters, and yes, even terrorist attacks.

Tradeoffs

[Iriel]

I remember a reading a lot of /.ers talking about how BPL is infinately more feeble in comparison to things like fiber lines and other forms of broadband connections in the works. Now, though, news of BPL comes at a relatively opportune time:

DSL carriers no longer have to share thier lines with everyone else, so all the little guys may whither and die. Here comes a new technology to rescue! And it comes through your powerlines! However...

This idea still rubs me the wrong way when I think that a blackout will leave me without my desktop AND internet access through what's left of my laptop battery...

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.

Already available in England

[wellard1981]

Southen-Electric are already providing broadband over powerlines in some locations here in the South of England, and have been doing so for some time. The broadband side of the company are known as BlinkBroadband.

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.

Cancellation?

[Snags]

Every trial so far has resulted in cancellation of services because the interference ruins too many other things.

I've actually had BPL in the Allentown, PA area for a year now. What cancellation?

BT Line Rental

[Bob Bobbinson]

I think the most interesting use of this would be here in the UK, as currently to get any form of internet connection you're pretty much locked in to a telephone company.

If you want an xDSL you have to have a BT phone line, no two ways about it, this means that even if I want to exclusively use a service such as Vonage, or Skype I still have to pay the line rental for a phone line.

If I could get BPL I wouldn't have to have the extra cost of a telephone line, and could freely use Skype, or Vonage for all my calls.

Similar technology has been around

[Sierpinski]

This sounds strikingly similar to what X10 has been doing for a long time. Using a special outlet plug-in, you can control various fixtures (lights, fans, etc) via a remote control, as well as using a timer and motion-detectors. A friend of mine has been using X10 motion sensors in his house for a while now, so that his kitchen light comes on whenever anyone enters, and turns off 2-3 minutes afterward.

I'm not up to par on the technology used in the X10 devices, but it can't be all that dissimilar to sending any kind of digital "internet" signal over the power lines as well. Actually I'm surprised it took this long to surface (granted I haven't been scouring the net looking for this information either.)

powerline dead in germany for years

[dunkelfalke]

RWE, a very big electricity company in Germany used to sell powerline internet access in towns Essen and Muelheim an der Ruhr in july 2001. It only lasted until september 2002.

According to RWE it was shut down because some frequencies used by powerline were reserved for security services. The real reason was though that almost nobody used it - RWE had only some 200 paying customers - because internet access via ADSL was much cheaper and in both Muelheim (I used to live there back then) and Essen widely availiable.

Re:and before you all start whining...

[Iriel]

When it comes to underground wires, I can say this much from experience:

1. If they didn't install it underground to start, it's not going to get there any time soon (at least not in the US). I know there are probably exceptions to this rule, but there aren't that many in the vast majority of the country. If lines were put above your head, they're going to stay there.

2. When you have lines that are underground, they get damaged less often, which is a good thing. When they do, though, you can be without Utility['$foo'] for quite some time. I have a friend who lived in a brand new neighborhood with underground cable lines for TV and internet surrounded by people still working with the same old structures. And when something went wrong, it could take up to a month until they could watch TV or check their email in their own home.

So without a fast enough maitenence crew to service them, underground lines can be quite a hazard.

Old News

[Snags]

When behind-the-times media outlets cover old news, Slashdot shouldn't help them make it sound state-of-the-art. Even a cursory search of slashdot for BPL turns up:

• Hams Complain about Powerline Broadband - Aug 8, 2003
• FEMA Opposes Broadband Over Powerlines - Dec 15, 2003
• First Canadian High Speed Internet over Power Grid - Feb 5, 2004
• Broadband Over Power Lines: Coming Soon? - Feb 24, 2004
• Field Day 2004 - Jun 25, 2004 (specifically mentions "all the coverage BPL has gotten")
• Utility Cuts Short BPL Trial - Jun 30, 2004
• Broadband-over-Powerline Experiences? - Aug 24, 2004 (Ask Slashdot)
• FCC Approves BPL Despite Interference Concerns - Oct 15, 2004
• BPL: The Internet's Fool's Gold - May 17, 2005
• Motorola to Marry BPL and Wireless - Aug 13, 2005 - This is how PPL Broadband in Allentown, PA does BPL.

More than Web

[Nyhm]

"Web Access Over Power Lines" ... why, whith an Internet Protocol (IP) packet exchange capability this technology could provide any Internet service, not just HTTP Web access! (Please mod +1 Insightful)

Editorial note: Read with heavy sarcasm

Re:watch all the lobbyists & "libertarians" sl

[Kris_J]

It's because we understand the issues, dumbass.

See and hear BPL interference

[wherley]

the AARL has a collection of video and sound files demonstrating BPL interference.
Vid:
http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/HTML/plc/aud-vid.html
Sound: http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/HTML/plc/aud-vid.html #Audio

i use it ... i like it

[ren-tzu]

My little corner of the world was just graced with this technology a little over a year ago through a partnership with Cinergy (power company) and Current Braodband (the ISP).

As a long time user of cable broadband, I've listed my top three pics for "best parts of this technology".

1) Most homes have a great deal more power outlets than phone or cable outlets. This greatly increases the chance that you won't have to run cable across your room to your desktop/wireless router.

2) I get to see the people's faces when I tell them that I have broadband coming over my power lines.

3) $30/month. Wait, did I say that right? Yeah, I did...$30/month. Not an introductory rate, not a special "we don't want you to cancel your service" deal. Just straight up $30/month. The cheapest alternative in my ares is $45/month for DSL, followed closely by $50/month for cable.

Military communications will have problems too

[apharov]

When I was in the army there were some BPL performed. It was considered a fact that if BPL would be generally implemented the background noise within kilometers or tens of kilometers from powerlines the increase in background noise / interference would considerably reduce the maximum range of man-portable VHF radios.

Electronic warfare would be even more badly hit as the devices used to gather radio intelligence can operate at the level of background interference.

We have it here in Linz, Austria, and it's crap

[quigonn]

Linz AG, the local electricity provider, sells it, but it's really slow and expensive compared to other ISPs.

The fastest thing you get is 768/375 kbps up/down, costing you EUR 69,- per month. Compared to that, Liwest, a local cable TV/internet provider, gives you 6/1.5 mbps up/down for the same money.

Another negative side effect is that certain radio frequency are being disturbed by it, and Linz AG tried suing people that put measurement results of these disturbances online.

We don't NEED it!

[starsoverbama]

Ever heard of WIMAX? BPL is an not needed, not cost effective, and a poorly engineered solution to the problem. And the hams are right...

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:MOD G-PARENT UP

[Alex P Keaton in da]

My other option, and I am not trying to be funny here, is to latch onto a neighbors wireless broadband... That is the ultimate in billing simplicity, no bill! Plus, savings of $40 a monthx12= almost $500 which of course, would be two months payments on basic transportation, or almost a months payment on my truck... Gosh, sometimes being honest isn't easy...

another PHB project

[Anonymous Coward]

BPL is a great idea if you have the technological sophistication of a politician, lawyer or businessman. In other words, you are a classic PHB.

On the other hand, if you have the technological sophistication of an EE or even a junior level physics major, you understand that the basic concept of BPL comes with a serious technical problem of interference to users of the radio spectrum. That's ALL users, not just hams.

Broadbanded signals on an unshielded, unbalenced wire will radiate. That's basic physics. Powerlines are long pieces of wire that make fair transmitting antennas. The wiring in your house makes a fair transmitting antenna. This is what the PHBs appear to not understand.

Hams are typically early adopters of new technology and do not oppose BPL per say. Hams oppose sources of interference. BPL in it's trial systems has typically destroyed all communications in the low VHF and down frequency range. That includes direct broadcast TV channels 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 (in the US), CB radio, shortwave broadcast, standard AM broadcast and (oh yeah) ham radio.

Why don't other users of radio spectrum oppose BPL? Hams tend to be technicaly savvy and vocal about their concerns. The folks with the authority to speak for other radio services are mostly politicians, lawyers and businessmen. In other words PHBs who understand politics, law and economics but are often technologicaly illiterate.

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.

Cinergy (Cincinnati Area BPL)

[skrowl]

I live in the Cincinnati area and have been patiently waiting for the Cinergy (our local power company) BPL service to be deployed to my area. My message to anyone waiting for BPL to come to their area: DON'T HOLD YOUR BREATH!!

Cinergy had a huge multi-year beta test, followed by a production rollout.... that ONLY covered the area that the beta test did. That was over a year ago, since then, they've yet to expand their coverage area AT ALL.

It sounds too good to be true at $35 for 3mbit SYMETRICAL (no more DSL/Cable 20x download that you have for upload BS)

Current (The ISP that cinergy partnered with):
http://www.current.net/ServiceAndPricing/Residenti al/PricingAndBenefits/

Press release from Cinergy:
http://www.cinergy.com/News/default_corporate_news .asp?news_id=420

Recent investment in Cinergy BPL by Google:
http://news.com.com/Google+invests+in+power-line+b roadband/2100-1036_3-5777917.html

BPL a HAMs prespective

[Nonillion]

As a licensed amateur radio operator I was beside myself when the FCC gave BPL deployment the green light. It proved to me that none of the commissioners have ANY technical competence at all, and that any decision right or wrong is made entirely for political reasons.

Current BPL technology is a kludge at best, it is the equivalent of duct tape and bailing wire. The interference that is created doesn't just effect the ham bands, it effects every service that is found between 1.8-80 MHz. The "interference mitigation" card is pure bull shit. For non hams how would you feel if I developed a Internet delivery method that disrupted your cell phone service? And every time you attempted to use your cell phone you disrupted your neighbors Internet access.

BPL is a bad idea, the laws of physics will never make it viable or economical, how many of you would get pissed off if I was constantly disrupting your Internet service for minutes or hours with my HF transceiver when I drive through town, I know I would.

Re:FUCK Ham radios? How about FUCK corporate contr

[hllywood]

Because the lines are leaking RF radiation (and acting as (good?) antennas), what is stopping the equivallent of wardriving for BPL? In theory, couldn't you just set up a van under a powerline somewhere? If both of the above are true and knowing the current state of wireless security (AES, etc.), what will be done to protect content and access?

It's NOT a noise floor problem...

[Svartalf]

A weak signal right on top of an antenna will swamp a powerful one at a distance if the power levels are equal at the reciever. I can cripple a Ham or CB setup by simply leaving a little 9v powered transmitter (in the case of CB, a walkie-talkie dead-keyed on the channel of most offense...) nearby. You won't be able to hear ANYTHING on the reciever wherever you do this to- it was a common fix for some idiot running a Linear being a problem on the CB band- they could get out, but they couldn't recieve over the little walkie-talkie on their fav channel. They'd think there was something wrong with their rig and quit doing it typically.

What the real big problem is that the BPL systems are largely interfering with a piece of spectrum that has really good propagation characteristics. It's used by everyone for emergency communications worldwide in the case of a disaster; not just Hams have a problem with this- FEMA and other orgs like them does too.

What pisses me off about all of this is that there's no real need for this BS- BPL can be done, done well, and it won't interfere with any critical services when it's done.

Corridor Systems has developed signal launchers and repeater systems to allow them to transform each line on a pole into a 10+ Mbit segment using 802.11 technology. This is accomplished by turning each of the lines on a power pole into a G-line waveguide (yes, you CAN do that sort of thing) that propagates the microwaves from an 802.11 system along the surface of the wires...

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.

BPL is a random noise generator

[speedlaw]

As a ham, I can tell you that where BPL is in use, like Briarcliff Manor, NY ( Route 9 A), almost all ham and shortwave frequencies are hit with a 20-+9 digital noise carrier. This is not an inconvenience, or a work around. It is finding your local swimming pool no longer clear, but full of someone else's waste products. Since you didn't *need* to swim, it's OK. CB users also comment on the interference. While "not cool", CB is still probably the most heavily used public radio system, and despite the 1930 AM technology, still important to our commercial drivers. The FCC should move it to VHF, but that's for another time and topic. I live about 5 miles away from Briarcliff, and fortunatley cannot hear it. If this came up my block, though, I'd have to sell all my HF ham equipment. Multiply this by thousands, and the safety net that is ham radio would be gone. The internet's nice, but in an emergency we are all just writing on tissue paper. Note also that in many areas, like mine, we have Cable and DSL, so the chances of any BPL takers, unless it was free (snort) is small. Having worked a few ham radio emergency events, often a few volunteer hams are the stitching between dissimilar professional radio systems. You'd be amazed how often agency one can't talk to agency two. It's a trivial thing to use one channel, but governments don't think that way. I agree that the concept of transparent broadband is a great idea...even if it will be used to verify if your HD-DVD player is "legal" and whether the DRM chip in your Vista OS will be allowed to let you copy that CD. BPL will eventually fail due to the business model. The point will be to keep it from destroying the natural resource that is the HF spectrum. Of course, our current administration never met a natural resource they didn't like !

Canaries

[leighklotz]

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

Hams are just canaries in this fight, not villains.

BPL has been shown to cause radio interference to all users, amateur, military, and commercial. Michael Powell, then FCC chairman, squashed a report from the NTIA that said it causeinterference>/a, and the FCC required that frequencies allocated to government use be "notched out." That leaves just us citizens unprotected and ungagged (at least for now).

And before you say that HF radio isn't necessary anymore, and everyone who is anyone uses cell phones (of if they have buckets of money Iridium satphones) take a look at just one of thousands of uses, NOPAC. Last night on 10.148 Mhz (square in the middle of the band that BPL trashes), I heard a Singapore Airlines flight over the Pacific contacting a NOPAC control station in Alaska asking for route planning information, right on the heels of a JAL flight doing the same thing. The NOPAC instructions have detailed accounts of how to use HF radio when over the Pacific, which is what I heard last night.

Finally, the FCC didn't grant any license to BPL systems. Instead, it said that they would be allowed under Part 15 regulations. Those are the same regulations that govern radio controlled cars; in essence, they're allowed to use low power if they don't cause interference and if they accept interference. The NTIA and others argued that BPL was fundamentally different from a kid with a radio controlled car on 27Mhz, because BPL will be widespread both geographically and in spectrum -- occupying the entire area beteween 2MHz and 80Mhz.

The result: a few critical government frequencies get notched out, and everybody else gets told to call the power company and complain "if" there is any problem. And in the few test cases where this has happened, even in test trials, getting the power company to do anything has taken months, and only a few even tried, and of those few that tried, all but about three had to discontinue the project becuase they couldn't resolve the Part 15 complaints.

So yes, it hasn't happened widespread yet, and it hasn't caused widespread problems yet, but don't blame the people who are technically savvy enough to see what's going to happen.

And finally, don't you think it's strange that energy companies are getting a big help from the current administration to get into the ISP business? I mean, it's not like there's any connection between energy companies and the Bush administration, is there?

If you want fiber, push on getting fiber.