BPL in the Carolinas

What EMI "mitigation"?
You're sending a modulated signal across miles of UNSHIELDED power line. It's going to radiate that energy no matter what you do.

you guys are dorks.

This is the kind of comment that shows how ignorance results in misinformation

I have seen in the posts reasonable discussion about how interference issues affect more than just amateur radio bands. Spectral pollution is a somewhat complex subject, and the needs of the many are served by dealing with it, since the radio spectrum is a public resource.

I have seen cases in my work where unchecked spurious emissions can mess with radio navigation aids used by aircraft. I dont think anyone would want to compromise the established safety margins for these systems so people could surf the web.

This is the issue here, and if you take the time to investigate and understand what the issues are, you would see that. But that takes a willingness to learn, and a capability to understand.

The posters that have actually thought about the subject and tried to understand it know this already. You know who you are.

rf_engineer makes a great point.

Think about how great DDT was a few years ago. Sure it got into the groundwater and caused cancer and thinned out a few bird eggshells, but what the heck, that didn't really bother the vast majority of us in everyday lives, right?

So with this BPL thing--while it'd be nice to get a simple cheap broadband solution for those folks out in the rural areas, do we need to wreck a large swath of our airwaves to do so? What would be the harm in finding an actual solution to the shielding issues before BPL is implented widely? An ounce of prevention...

What'd be even better is if the TELCOs got off their butts and out their money where their mouths were. Just my $.02 .

He didn't mention anything about DSL or cable. He specifically said Dial-up and BPL. All I have here is dial-up, I am all for BPL, living in a rural area.

Tests have been run by other authorities besides the ARRL, but they are knocked down. Why? Because the people who do the testing are Ham Radio operators. Do you think that the Amateur radio community wouldn't embrace BPL, if it didn't create so much interference? I know I would [not for myself, I live in a urban area, but I have friends who live in rural areas. If you live in a rural area with only dial up, I feel for you, really. My DSL went out for a while & I was stuck on my back up connection - which is dial-up. But that's besides the point - go to any library, get some books on physics, antennas and you will find out. There seem to be a lot of people who either 1)have their heads in the ground or 2)just don't care. rf_engineer has made some very good point & told it all, so I'm going to stop here.

WA2YEU

That is my point
BPL EMI mitigation is like using diesal to suppress a fire
it sorta works but not really

rf_engineer makes some good points some people dont consider what uses RF's
if they implemented BPL on my street wouldent that mean that it would interfere with my directv signals, cordless phones and even cell phones? its all RF
if the telco's arent going to step up with dsl every-which direction what makes people think that the power co's will tear down all their power lines to replace them with shielded cables, iam under the impression that those lines are still bare wires, hence when a tree falls on a line you see a spectacular explosion of sparks from the transformers on the poles
if you asked me i would say the government or some affiliate more qualified should be making strides to Reduce the cost of fiber to where it could be implemented to one house every mile
the local cable co has a minium of 25 houses per Mile before they even consider building lines on the street, but they seem to make the dumb move of building them on streets with enough houses before leaving calling cards on the doors to confirm that the residents would even buy into it

Since you apparently haven't read the many previous explanations of why people are against BPL, let me offer an explanation or two...

1) Serious, significant testing has been done that clearly demonstrates the negative impact this technology has on the HF spectrum - this is not just some 'skeptic' who thinks it might be a bad idea - it really IS a bad idea - unless of course, you think that trashing the only part of the radio spectrum that provides low infrastructure global communications is acceptable.

2) The only interference mitigating option that is available to the power cos is some form of frequency notching i.e. they elect not to use one or more chunks of spectrum out of the available 2 - 30 MHz (or 80MHz) they have usurped. This has proven ineffective. The only viable notch, IMHO, is one that starts at 2MHz and ends at 80 MHz As much as I would like to see the amateur freqs protected, I don't believe it is fair or reasonable to interfere with ANY HF Spectrum.

3) The interference produced by BPL to HF is a coincidental byproduct of its operation - it (BPL) in no way depends on propagation of radio waves but just happens to do it anyway.

4) Most radio amateurs are all in favor of legitimate broadband options - because of its spectrum polluting nature, BPL does NOT fall into that category.

5) BPL equipment has no legal or technological protection against incoming interference from licensed radio services. Unless the BPL proponents can simultaneously rewrite the laws of physics and the communications act of 1934 then they gotta suck it up when I get on the air.

Does this answer your 'Why'?

Your comment entirely misses the point that BPL interferes unnecessarilly with the HF spectrum - period, fact, proven. Whether or not you are 'concerned' about it is immaterial. Trashing this spectrum is way too high a price to pay, especially when there are alternative, better-behaved technologies available.

But you're probably in the worst position for BPL if you don't have cable or DSL. Just because you have power lines to your home doesn't mean it's easy or economically feasible to bring BPL to you. You have to consider that the utility needs to install feedpoint equipment to get the signal on the lines and install repeater every couple hundred feet to regenerate the signal. Also, the Internet needs to be brought out to the feedpoint using fiber or classic T1 lines. The ROI time is astronomical, if ever.

I realize that you're probably supportive of BPL because of the perception that it will be your only option, but BPL is to rural areas as is snow skiing is to Florida.

i love porks, porks taste good

Give me 2.0/1.0 for 29.95 and you got me as a customer for life!!!

If I had stock, It would be in Amperion or Griffin...

"This is the kind of comment that shows how ignorance results in misinformation"

Nothing to do with ignorance or misinformation, I just dont care.

"People need lumber, so we should take the trees from your rural land. People need water, so we should suck your well dry. People need food, we should take your land to grow crops. You could then live in the city and get broadband. The needs of many outweigh the few -- you."

The government does it all the time, its called
"Eminent domain"

said by Nighttime:

---

It would be nice but would be cheeper to use those right of way and cost to pop in fiber. Much better concept.

---

BAM! You hit the nail dead on about what power companies should be focused on and doing instead of this BPL crap. Since most poles are owned by electric companies and they (are/have) already (paying/paid) for right of ways they could be stringing fiber like mad across this nation for much cheaper than anyone else. Essentially building an infrastructure all the way from backbone to last mile on which to sell bulk services to residential/commercial resellers. It would end the line sharing (bell) litigation crap by put more ISP choices into the marketplace. And might bring broadband deployment closer to 100% in this nation than the current state of the industry has.

Your desire for cheap, fast Internet service is not nearly as important as infrastructure-free wireless worldwide communications. If you think it is, I'd call that ignorant and rather self-centered.

You would care if you were in an aircraft that had its navigational system (which relies on radio communications) compromised from inadequate protection of its spectrum

If you dont think that thats a problem that is ignorance, or you have not understood any of the posts on the topic

Heh, but you gotta admit, the other guys got pwned.

Self-centred is right, and that's what he said, (and I quote) "I just don't care".

People like him do not raise any valid reason to support their side of the argument. I wouldn't mind reading well-thought out posts arguing for BPL, but so far, most if not all of it is of the same type of drivel as spouted by our friend here. Personally, I was undecided about the technology, but after a few months and a whole lot of reading up on dozens of articles, I'm forced to conclude BPL isn't a feasible alternative.

GREAT?????????

I feel bad for all those ppl living down there trying to listen to thier am radio,cb,shortwave,etc.......

THIS PLAN SUCKS AND SHOULD BE ABORTED BE4 ITS TOO LATE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I live right down the road from the DukePower nuclear plant, maybe i will get to try some BPL..

I really don't think the government is going to allow a system to be activated that would bring air craft down. Maybe the government will just push everybody out of the frequencies that BPL inter fears with. BUT if you can point me to a site that says that BPL messes up all these frequencies and at all distances from the power line then I might change my mind. But my best guess is that the people that don't want BPL are just looking out for their own best interests. JUST LIKE I AM....I want broad band. And I don't care if AR is SOL.

I can see Amperion; they're positioned better than the other BPL manufacturers to jump to fiber with a wireless last 100 feet due to their current use of wireless. This will be a plus when it's realized HF BPL is more trouble than it's worth.

Do you have any links for Griffin? I wasn't able to Google anything. Thanks

You've said you really don't care, so what does it matter? You obviously haven't researched BPL and are really only concerned with your interests, as you've stated above. Relocating current HF spectrum users isn't practical, but if you did any bit of research, you would know this. The information is out there if you just look, but I doubt it matters in this case because you just want Internet at any cost, regardless of who it affects. You continue to focus on ham radio, but it's really a non-issue when you see the bigger picture.

If you want to get some facts, visit this site »www.qrpis.org/~k3ng/bpl.html .

It's no easier or cheaper to bring BPL to a subscriber if they live right next to a generation plant, or 20 miles away (ignoring telco mileage costs). The Internet has to be brought to a point in your neighborhood with fiber or copper and fed onto the lines with BPL equipment. It is not created at the generation plant with the power and distributed out to the customer.

"The Internet has to be brought to a point in your neighborhood with fiber or copper and fed onto the lines with BPL equipment"

That makes no sense at all, if they gonna run fiber or copper to my neighborhood why should i settle for BPL? I thought BPL was for people that DIDNT have fiber/copper/cable access? O well, maybe ill get to try some BPL.

You don't seem to get it ...

Look at cable TV ... Cable operators have to go to enormous lengths to ensure that the cable doesn't "leak" radiation because it interferes with all kinds of other users, including television, radio, emergency services, aircraft etc. This is a "contained signal" within a shielded coaxial cable.

Power cables are NOT shielded RF transmission lines. They are open radiators. In fact, they are horribly mismatched open transmission lines that turn them into radiators.

The power that must be injected into the power lines is very high because of the mismatches, causing even more of the hash that the lines generated to be broadcast to the world.

Put X-10 devices in your house. These connect at very low wattage ... turn the lights on and off ... a radio tuned to various frequencies will emit a chirp around your house. Its range is limited because the power of X-10 is low AND the power lines are a poor match for the RF signal. So many devices have RF supressors to filter off signals. The very nature of the power cables will sap the signals.

Now, imagine a constant stream of X-10 chirps on a broad spectrum that has to travel not just 50' around your house, but a few miles to the signal injection point ... the power needed for the injection is ridiculously higher. So that constant stream of chirps is radiated for MILES as well without nothing like buildings to absorb the signals.

This isn't a technology that can improve with maturity. It is based on a fundamentally flawed concept - that one can efficiently transmit RF signals over an open transmission line that is not matched for this purpose.

The problem is not fixable. It's a fundamental flaw.

There are alternatives ...

Cable
FTTH
Wireless (Although this is uncontained, it is frequency shifted to places it doesn't matter)

Even DSL is a problem for radiation because phone line twisted pairs are subject to leakage, but because the transmissions are over shorter distances, the problem isn't as intense.

Noise radiation (egress) is one thing I agree needs dealt with - Firstly because of what you mention, and Secondly because if the PowCo's don't have to deal with emissions then why do the Cable Co's have to spend so much money to keep their emissions clean. Is there a double standerd here?

MORE IMPORTANTLY TO ME, however, is who is paying for the research and implentation of BPL? Local PowCo's are a monopoly in EVERY since of the word. And if I don't have a choice on who I am sending my electric Bill to then I do want a choice on how they use that doller.
It's no secret that the PowCo's get Gov't susidation for one reason or another. Are they getting further subsidation for research and implimentation of BPL - and is this fare that they are getting extra funds and Cable and Telco's are not getting these funds? NO!
OK let's say they are not getting public funds to pay for research and implementation then that could mean that they are using income from our utility bill!!! That would be totally unexaptable.
If PowCo's are getting 3rd party financing (bank loans, or bake sales and the such) that are kept seperate from their finances envolved in the business of power distributing - thereby leaving no effect on my electric bill - then I will have no problem with BPL. Otherwise BPL has an unfair advantage over Cable and Telco's (dsl)
Let's go further into the cost seperation issue as I ask will the costs of troubleshooting be seperated when it comes to allocating these costs towards Power issues and ISP issues? For example: is the PowCo going to pass full expense of troubleshooting an ISP issue on to its' ISP customers. let's say I can't get online, (let's pretend I know nothing about computers) but the lights in my house work - maybe it's a problem with my computer, maybe it's a problem with the equipment they send or maybe it's a problem with their link - either way - I'm going to call a tech-support line for my BPL connection. In this example the initial call I give will be answered by somebody - and for at least a while the call will be at no cost to me - maybe they determine the problem is with my computer, and they will charge to go on, or they determine the problem is with their equipment - in either case somebody had to answer the phone and had to answer it at an expense to the PowCo. - Who ultimately is going to bear that expense - whether it's a tech support rep, or a PowCo Linesman, I don't want to see any of that expense "trickle down" to my electric bill - and I don't see any way that it "WON'T" trickle down to be an added expense to me.

BOTTOM LINE - UNLESS THE POW-CO'S ARE HAVING BAKE SALES TO PAY FOR RESEARCH AND IMPLENTATION AND MAINTENANCE OF BPL THEN I WANT NO PART OF IT, AND WILL FIGHT FOR IT TO NOT COME INTO MY NEIGHBORHOOD

Duke Power is a very respected power company in the South, where I used to live. I highly doubt that Duke would implement a service that would seriously disrupt communication traffic as described by some of the forum posters above. If BPL is such a horrible thing, Duke will end it and move on in life. It's not like internet service would ever be a major profit center for them. No, I'll give Duke Power the benefit of the doubt that they are/will do the right thing and if BPL is not good for consumers are the public at large, they'll end their trials. Personally, I think it's great that they are trying. Getting broadband in many parts of the rural carolinas can be difficult. I was amazed to live in Chester County, SC, where Chester Telephone implements DSL Lite in almost the entire county. I lived 5 miles out in the forest (deer, rabbits in the yard, no neighbors) from the nearest 1 red light town and 12 miles from a "city" (well to us it was the city, not to most of you) and I had very good DSL service. Few providers in the U.S. would do this but Chester Telephone did/does. I applaud Duke Power for trying.