bugle533
join:2004-06-16
Schaumburg, IL
| reply to moonpuppy
Re: Gee, talk about sugar coating it......
said by moonpuppy  :Yep, not one mention of any possible interference problems. From the Cincinnati Enquirer:
"Joe Phillips of Fairfield, the Ohio section chief for the American Radio Relay League, says that so far the Cinergy roll-out hasn't created the radio interference many ham radio operators had feared." |
|
moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD | Now that is weird. Didn't see that part of the article the first time around. 
Maybe this browser didn't fully load the page or the work proxy has been acting up again. |
|
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| reply to bugle533
said by bugle533 :said by moonpuppy :Yep, not one mention of any possible interference problems. From the Cincinnati Enquirer: "Joe Phillips of Fairfield, the Ohio section chief for the American Radio Relay League, says that so far the Cinergy roll-out hasn't created the radio interference many ham radio operators had feared." It's been rumored that Cinergy has stayed out of the HF radio spectrum (1-30 Mhz), so this would explain why there hasn't been interference issues with ham radio operators. |
|
JKrums
join:2002-03-18
Allentown, PA | BPL has, in all cases I know of, not caused any harmfull interference with HAM Radio operators. True, the potential exists, but welcome to any technology using RF. |
|
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| said by JKrums :BPL has, in all cases I know of, not caused any harmfull interference with HAM Radio operators. True, the potential exists, but welcome to any technology using RF. There has been interference at several sites. Three sites were shut down with open interference complaints, and there are numerous filings with the FCC »p1k.arrl.org/~ehare/bpl/NPRM_hyperlinks.html . The potential has been modeled and proven to exist in the field. The way to make interference not occur is to not use frequencies used by licensees in the area. |
|
Transmaster
Don't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY
 ·Qwest.net
1 edit | reply to rf_engineer
They probably moved it to the frequencies used by the fast food drive up windows.
"I want a triple with cheese no mayo, no ketchup, diet coke and please Biggie size it.
All this time the Wendy's employee hears BUZZZZZZ!!!*^*^%*
Snap-snap-snap wizz bang pow. Making a good faith effort
this poor person fills the order.
the customer looks at his order....Hey I didn't order no dam salad....;)
--
Low voltage Tech's are wimps, Real tech's use 45 pound filament transformers, plate voltages no less then 2400 volts with at least 10 amp's lighting 8877 triodes...BPL I'm coming to get you.
|
|
FTCXtreme
join:2005-03-14
New Braintree, MA | I thought fast food things were wired. That woudl be funny if someone was DLing a porn video and all of a sudden they hear sex noises on the fast food mics. LMAO |
|
Hall
Premium,MVM
join:2000-04-28
Dayton, OH
·EarthLink
·AT&T Midwest
 ·Earthlink Cable Mo..
| reply to moonpuppy
said by moonpuppy :Now that is weird. Didn't see that part of the article the first time around. Wouldn't surprise me as I've seen CNN do it all the time: They edit the article continually without noting that they do so... |
|
yock
TFTC
Premium
join:2000-11-21
Fairfield, OH
1 edit | reply to bugle533
said by bugle533 :said by moonpuppy :Yep, not one mention of any possible interference problems. From the Cincinnati Enquirer: "Joe Phillips of Fairfield, the Ohio section chief for the American Radio Relay League, says that so far the Cinergy roll-out hasn't created the radio interference many ham radio operators had feared." And we in Fairfield are nowhere near the rollouts.
[edit]It would be interesting to know if he is talking about in Fairfield or if he takes reports from operators in the serviced areas.
--
Search first, ask questions later. |
|
wolfox
Gentle Wolfox
join:2002-11-27
Dunnellon, FL
| reply to FTCXtreme
Nope, I have a Bearcat hand-held scanner that picks up drive-through window chatter all the time. It's fun sometimes listening to what the patrons put the poor window clerks through. 
--
Nothwest Arkansas' ONLY all Techno Radio Webcast, powered by SBC DSL! |
|
N3EVL
join:2004-12-13
Shrewsbury, MA | reply to rf_engineer
What flavor of BPL technology are they using at this site? Specifically, what frequency range? The only non-HF flavor that I'm familiar with is the Corridor Systems product that uses Microwave and, as far as I know is well behaved. |
|
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| said by N3EVL :What flavor of BPL technology are they using at this site? Specifically, what frequency range? The only non-HF flavor that I'm familiar with is the Corridor Systems product that uses Microwave and, as far as I know is well behaved. Current Technologies is the vendor. It's my understanding they can use HF, but tend not to. Here's a summary of vendors »www.qrpis.org/~k3ng/bpl.html#73 .
If all the equipment manufacturers moved to 30 to 50 Mhz rather than HF, alot of these interference problems could go away. Other than Corridor Systems (which is an entirely different animal) I don't know of any that have made the move. |
|
N3EVL
join:2004-12-13
Shrewsbury, MA
| reply to JKrums
said by JKrums :BPL has, in all cases I know of, not caused any harmfull interference with HAM Radio operators. True, the potential exists, but welcome to any technology using RF. I'd be interested in knowing which specific trials you're referring to. The cases of actual interference have been well documented as has the lack of action by the FCC and the BPL industry's sad attempts at denial.
I'm puzzled by your last sentence - are you implying that BPL's potential for causing interference is something we (legitimate spectrum users) should just meekly accept? If so, what is the basis of this statement? |
|
N3EVL
join:2004-12-13
Shrewsbury, MA
| reply to rf_engineer
Have the ARRL or any other organization published figures regarding potential for interference from low VHF based BPL systems? I don't remember seeing any. What are the power-line-as-antenna characteristics in this freq range?
My concern would be that they (Cinergy) would permit their system to creep below 30MHz if/when they begin to saturate their current chosen spectrum. |
|
revuney
join:2003-03-22
Somerville, MA
| reply to N3EVL
Honestly, I see the Hams/ARRL being shut out on this eventually. The BPL industry has or will have better legislators, and they might just force a spectrum share or have the FCC ignore the hams.
Personally I think the hams are a bit "The sky is falling" about this, but at the same time, they are getting shafted just a bit... |
|
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| reply to N3EVL
said by N3EVL :Have the ARRL or any other organization published figures regarding potential for interference from low VHF based BPL systems? I don't remember seeing any. What are the power-line-as-antenna characteristics in this freq range? My personal opinion is it wouldn't be as bad as HF interference. Most low band VHF is FM, whereas HF is SSB. Receive signal levels are much higher, especially when local repeaters are used. On HF signal levels are often just above the noise floor.
My concern would be that they (Cinergy) would permit their system to creep below 30MHz if/when they begin to saturate their current chosen spectrum.
That's probably why you don't see any BPL manufacturers designing their systems specifically for low band VHF. They're going to need all the spectrum they can get to keep up with bandwidth needs, especially in the face of competition with cable and DSL which are already gearing up for higher speeds. |
|
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| reply to revuney
said by revuney :Honestly, I see the Hams/ARRL being shut out on this eventually. The BPL industry has or will have better legislators, and they might just force a spectrum share or have the FCC ignore the hams. FCC Commissioner Powell was their ace in the pocket. He's gone now. For the hams to get shut out, it would require regulation changes that would cause the US to be in violation of international treaties. It would also put in danger other services in the HF radio bands. But the FCC can't do this since the NTIA pushed the FCC to prohibit BPL in several aeronautical bands. In essence the FCC would be giving primary status to something they already acknowledged would be detrimental to the services in the HF band.
Personally I think the hams are a bit "The sky is falling" about this, but at the same time, they are getting shafted just a bit...
It depends if the meteorite is heading for your house or the neighbor's |
|
PDXPLT
join:2003-12-04
Banks, OR
| reply to rf_engineer
Explanation: Most BPL trials have used one particular Silicon vender. These guys do not notch out the HF ham bands by default, you have to turn it on explicitly. Most utilities must not be doing this: pretty dumb IMHO, since they're deploying in residential neighborhoods, and hams are the one population in residential areas that have alot of very sensitive HF receivers, and are well-organized ('not too many shortwave listeners left, these days, and they're not organized politically like the hams are).
If you look at Current's website, you see they used HomePlug technology. HomePlug notches out the ham bands, just for the above reasons: they didn't want to PO the policially powerful hams, and they knew they were the predominant HF users in most residential areas, and thus were most likely to generate interference complaints. |
|
california 4 BPL
@optonline.net
| reply to Hall
Re: Susan P. Kennedy, Commissioner, California PUC
Listen to her interview:
»www.etopiamedia.net/empnn/audio/···y3.0.wma
re: etopiamedia.net/empnn/pages/cpt-emnn/cpt-emnn326-5551212.html |
|
california 4 BPL
@optonline.net
| Bill allow Internet over power lines in TEXAS
RE: »news.search.yahoo.com/news/searc···=20&fl=0
Bill would allow Internet over power lines
By R.A. Dyer
Star-Telegram Austin Bureau
AUSTIN - High-speed Internet could be wired into Texas homes through utility power lines -- meaning more homes would get access to the technology -- under a bill pending in the Texas Senate.
But there's a catch: As currently written, the legislation could spread the multimillion-dollar cost to all utility customers -- even those who don't need Internet service or want it. The utility would then get to keep 60 percent of any resulting profit -- while only 40 percent would be returned to electric customers through a credit on their bills.
Utility representatives say the legislation makes sense, consumer groups say it's a bad deal for customers, and the Republican lawmaker who is carrying the bill said controversial details are likely to change before it becomes law.
"The theory is to try to get broadband to areas that are not currently being served by DSL or cable companies -- to get another choice out there," said state Rep. Troy Fraser, R-Horseshoe Bay, about Senate Bill 1748.
Welcome to the complicated world of broadband over power lines, or BPL, which holds the promise of spreading Internet service to the farthest reaches of the state -- but which also carries a substantial price tag.
With BPL, special equipment known as nodes would be connected to power lines that run between electric substations and individual homes or businesses. The nodes would inject the Internet signal into the power lines; individuals would receive that signal through modems.
A company called Broadband Horizons has already begun serving about 25 businesses through pilot projects in two small Central Texas towns, Burnett and Weimar. Mike Bates, the company's vice president, says the new technology works -- although it's not yet economically feasible to serve isolated homes.
He estimates the cost of equipment upgrades at $300 to $400 per house. Others have put the cost at about $1,000 per home.
"We find this technology conducive to bringing broadband service to [small and medium-sized] communities -- the underserved communities -- primarily because the line is already there," Bates said. "We've been up and running since last summer [with the pilot projects], and the results have been very good."
Universal access
On at least one point, consumer and utility groups agree: The reach of the Internet should be extended as far as possible. Tom Morstad, a policy analyst for the Austin office of Consumers Union, likened the goal of "universal" Internet access to the rural electrification projects of the last century.
"The state should certainly continue to explore alternatives for expanding broadband access statewide," Morstad said. "Broadband is to the 21st century what telephone and electric service was to the last century. This is economic development. It's tele-medicine, and it's education."
But where consumer and industry groups part ways is on how Texas should get there -- and who should foot the bill. Many detractors believe that the new technology is being oversold and -- despite the limited pilot projects -- remains largely unproven.
They also complain that under the deal that TXU and some utilities want -- the plan as outlined in the initial Fraser bill -- power companies could get into this very risky venture at no risk to themselves.
Rather, the utilities could pass on 100 percent of the upgrade costs to their electric customers, and then reap 60 percent of the profits. Electric ratepayers would receive the remaining 40 percent through a credit on their bills.
"That is what offends me the most," said Geoffrey Gay, an attorney who represents Fort Worth in utility matters. "It's not just the silliness of making the electric customer pay the cost -- but that [the utility] can make profit off this through some other mechanism, and then tell the ratepayers that they can get credit for just 40 percent. That's really offensive."
But Stephen J. Houle, TXU's vice president for corporate technology, said passing on the cost to electric customers makes sense because BPL potentially improves the overall efficiency of the utility's electric operations.
For instance, broadband over power lines can let utilities remotely monitor their electric substations, it allows them to detect equipment failures and it can provide technicians with real-time data about equipment operations in remote locations, Houle said.
Houle estimated the cost at $300 million to $600 million to make BPL available throughout TXU's North Texas service territory. "Hopefully, after we get this installed and you get just outstanding service ... you'll be so happy that you'll think it's a bargain," he said.
He said that under Fraser's bill, utilities could lease out their lines to independent BPL operators -- theoretically at little or no cost to ratepayers.
Fraser, chairman of the Senate Business and Commerce Committee, described the legislation as a starting point for discussion. He said that the bill was brought to him by utility representatives and that the final version will incorporate changes to protect consumers.
"The intent is not to spread the cost to everybody over the system -- that is not what we're trying to do," Fraser said. "This is an unproven technology -- there are pilot programs going forward, but we don't know for sure if this technology is going to work."
But he said it's important to consider BPL because of the potential to extend the Internet's reach, and because it could eventually lead to lower Internet prices by bringing more competitors to the market.
"The technology is not there yet, but it could be over the long range that all services for the home -- electric, telecom, cable and high-speed Internet -- possibly could be delivered from the same source and could be monitored from a remote location," Fraser said. "But what we can't do is give the [electric utilities] an unfair competitive edge."
Senate Bill 1748 will probably come up for discussion in Fraser's Business and Commerce committee within a few weeks. |
|
