This isn't a viable option...... in http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r16612722 en Sat, 28 Nov 2009 00:49:14 EDT Sat, 28 Nov 2009 00:49:14 EDT Re: This isn't a viable option...... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16627028 moonpuppy :
said by W1RFI See Profile :

For the most part, electric utility companies are not interested in providing access broadband to retail customers. They are looking at BPL primarily for utility applications. Meter reading, voltage monitoring, outage detection, video monitoring and load shedding are the primary first-generation targets.
Ed, I agree with you except for the point above.

The phone company's regular POTS line are regulated but their optional services (Caller ID, Call-Waiting, etc.) are not so they are free to charge what they like for those services.

While power has been de-regulated in certain areas, memories of Enron are still fresh. BPL is seen, by some, as another non-regulated revenue source. What was sold to the power companies are a quick money maker turned into a technical nightmare.

This reminds me of how the first home computers were sold (Atari, Commodore, etc.) Checkbook and recipe programs were the "new thing" that these things could help out with. Turned out they were more suited for other things like games and the occasional book report that kids would do. ;) ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16627028 Wed, 02 Aug 2006 08:26:47 EDT Re: This isn't a viable option...... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16626699 W1RFI : The following is a repeat of a post I made on »www.eham.net:

For the most part, electric utility companies are not interested in providing access broadband to retail customers. They are looking at BPL primarily for utility applications. Meter reading, voltage monitoring, outage detection, video monitoring and load shedding are the primary first-generation targets. For the future, the blue-sky goals are to develop an intelligent grid that could, if done correctly, have value by improving reliability, helping to route power more effectively, leading to improvement in the efficiency of power generation, etc. Some utilities do want to have excess capacity to sell, either retail to customers or wholesale by leasing the lines.

Each individual application may not require broadband, but in the aggregate, a significant amount of bandwidth is needed. And if technological history has any bearing, there is little doubt that if a high-speed communications channel is available, application will be developed to fill it.

It is arguable about whether BPL is the best way to accomplish the above goals. On one hand, the wires are there and there is great appeal to the utilities to utilize existing infrastructure. OTOH, the channel is noisy and the wires were not intended to carry RF signals and at RF, they are much better antennas than transmission lines. After all, if niceities like coaxial cable and Cat 5 twisted pair weren't needed, why were they developed.

We should leave the industry to work that out for itself; as licensees, our only concern with BPL is its interference potential. And that potential has been realized in spades, especially in early deployments.

If BPL operates at the FCC limits, 30 uV/m at 30 m distance, that will translate to S9+ noise levels locally. This has been seen in a number of systems, and early deployments were using the ham bands, based on statements by the BPL industry leaders that BPL operating at the FCC limits will be inaudible. (Laughable to anyone who knows EM theory).

ARRL worked with one of the vendors 3 years ago. Together we found the expected strong interference... and nothing was done. They apparently thought our working with them was all that was needed, and that the interference found was being reported to them only for their information. A local amateur in the area who regularly operated mobile there filed a formal complaint. At that point, the company has gone through rounds of denials, trying to "notch" the ham bands in part of the area, reporting to FCC that it is completely notched.

Especially in the early days, this is a pattern that was repeated in area after area, and if Amateur Radio had not stuck by its guns, there is no doubt that BPL would have been deployed at full strength in the ham bands.

At this point, in response to the pressures brought by interference complaints, more of the industry is trying to address the very real EMC problems associated with BPL. Motorola, for example, worked with ARRL directly in the design of their product, with the effect that its emissions in the ham bands were inaudible when a Motorola system was installed at W1AW. Current Technologies uses a system that operates 32-48 MHz on overhead power lines, and 4-21 MHz on premise wiring, but with the ham bands notched using HomePlug technology.

Amateur Radio should not be "against" BPL. If it can be implemented in a way that does not cause harmful interference, then we should be no more against it than we are against DSL or cable. Cable systems can and do cause interference. Yet cable is an industry that has addressed those interference problems head on. When the BPL industry chooses to do the same -- and it appears to be on that track, at least in part -- we can all breath a collective sigh of relief and move on to more interesting things.

IMHO, BPL has a way to go. Its leadership is still taking the premise that interference to mobile operation is fine because the mobile station can just drive away. That is not possible if BPL is built as big as an entire state and they certainly would not take that stance if even 10% of the coverage they enjoy right now for their mobile phone system were subject to interference.

Amateurs need to remain firm about harmful interference and we need to remain cooperative and help this industry do what needs to be done to truly address interference. IMHO, this will be a tough nut to crack, but if this industry is serious about fixing its EMC problems, we should be serious about helping them do it.

Amateur Radio has a long track record of working successfully with industry to resolve interference. Our cooperation with the cable TV industry, DSL, home-phone-networking and HomePlug are all examples.

What is ironic is that arguably, the most successful BPL to date is the Current Technologies system installed in Cincinnati. It has deployed without major interference problems. It uses HomePlug G1 technology. I find it somewhat ironic that this BPL success is building on work Amateur Radio helped to do:

»www.arrl.org/~ehare/rfi/HomePlug···ARRL.pdf

We need to stay the course on BPL interference until this industry designs BPL that does not interfere with Amateur Radio. The industry is not entirely there yet. But we also need to stay the course on recognizing that it is the interference that is the issue and ensure that the things we say and do are focused in that direction.

Ed Hare, W1RFI
ARRL Laboratory Manager
225 Main St
Newington, CT 06111
Tel: 860-594-0318
email: W1RFI@arrl.org]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16626699 Wed, 02 Aug 2006 06:18:18 EDT Re: This isn't a viable option...... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16616081 lovewomen : The electric company already reads my meter without a meter reader. My meter has a radio in it that sends the meter reading to a central box hanging from a light pole that relays the reading elsewhere.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16616081 Mon, 31 Jul 2006 19:27:24 EDT Re: This isn't a viable option...... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16613254 TKJunkMail :
said by moonpuppy See Profile :

With the amount of bandwidth consumed by the average person getting higher and higher, BPL will not be able to keep pace with cable or fiber. Even DSL is a better option if you can get it.
It is starting to look more and more like BPL will be a non-starter in the marketplace. It was never as cheap or as fast to deploy as claimed, and with Wimax getting the big push now from technology companies like Intel, its opportunity to become a viable broadband competitor appears to have passed.
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
BLOG tkjunkmail.blogspot.com
My Web Page]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16613254 Mon, 31 Jul 2006 12:06:43 EDT This isn't a viable option...... http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16612722 moonpuppy : With the amount of bandwidth consumed by the average person getting higher and higher, BPL will not be able to keep pace with cable or fiber. Even DSL is a better option if you can get it.

Combine the interference issue and you get a lot of pissed off investors and power companies wondering what were they thinking. :D]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16612722 Mon, 31 Jul 2006 10:37:15 EDT