Here's a touchy subject. Broadband over power line technology is here (BPL). It seems like a great answer. The infrastructure is already in place! There are problems though. Power lines are not designed for RF transfer, they're designed for power transfer. They generate a great deal of interference on 1-80 MHZ because they are not RF sheilded cables. They deny it, but they know it does. The physics behind RF say that a wire HAS to emit RF if it's not sheilded or balanced. Power lines are neither. If you had a receiver set to the 60 Hz. AC current freq that your house uses, you would "hear" your power lines. You'll notice they conveniently avoided frequencies used by commercial radio and other commercial interests. That's why they are not using the frequencies used by most household items like TV and radios for BPL. They picked the frequencies used only by small groups on purpose. They're not stupid. They know this project produces interference. This may not seem like a big problem to the average Joe, but the 1-80 MHZ frequencies ARE used by some groups. Maritime communication, some government agencies, shortwave radio stations, and Amateur radio enthusiasts use these freqs. If this system is widely deployed, it will destroy the ability to receive anything but a strong signal because of the background noise. This will render the HF Ham band frequencies useless for world-wide communication, destroy the world audience of shortwave radio stations, it may add static to local AM radio stations, and possibly adversely affect the more critical communications between vessels at sea and shore. Countries have already banned BPL because of the interference, but the FCC seems on the verge of embracing it here in the US. Every other device that generates harmful interference is banned by the FCC, but the economic promise of BPL seems to be luring them to make an exception in this case. The FCC has allocated frequencies to groups. This means that these groups should retain use of these freqs free of harmful interference. That's the FCC's job. What do you think? Do you think the benefits of BPL should negate the fact that it creates harmful interference and destroys the useability of freqs already allocated to other groups? I think if they're so sure it doesn't cause interference, they should use it on commercial band frequencies to prove their point. I somehow don't think they're quite THAT sure of themselves. ;)

[ 10-10-2003, 02:05 PM: Message edited by: Sir Kenyth ]

Being that my Grandpa is a ham operator. I would want nothing out there that would take it away from him. :D

<font color=gold>
Just how wonderful is BPL in the first place and what serious usage does it have? You should outweigh the costs/benefits of BPL to determine wether or not to use it.

At the moment, it seems it should *not* be used, despite it being available everywhere! Tell us more about the benefits!
</font>

BPL is Broadband (internet) over Power Lines. They use the lines to carry communication signal as well as power. They filter the AC signal off the AC power current. This way, the cabling is already in place almost everywhere. It would make the power company LOTS of money and make broadband connections much cheaper to the average person. Exactly how much cheaper, is a mystery. At any rate, it would make broadband available anywhere electricity is available. The problem is that the lines were never designed to carry communication signals and radiate like antennas when used for it. They lack the shielding (coax cable) or balancing (CAT 5 cable) that is usually used to prevent radiation.

[ 10-10-2003, 03:34 PM: Message edited by: Sir Kenyth ]

<font color=gold>
Ok, thats means that internet costs for the common guy could get lower, but I'm sure the power-companies won't drop that much under the currect prices. Furthermore, whats the speed of BPL? Is it a lot faster then ADSL or cable?

Also: since it will interfere with local AM radio stations, will the government allow such usage of the power cables?
</font>

Ehm... I want broadband, so, yeah, sure [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Ehm... I want broadband, so, yeah, sure [img]tongue.gif[/img] </font>[/QUOTE]<font color=gold>
I'm afraid deontology is your way my friend... :rolleyes:
</font>

The government allowing it is what's up in the air right now. It's undecided as of yet, but comments from the FCC seemed to indicate that they were going to give it the thumbs up. Numerous organizations are now banding together to be against it after some preliminary research showed undoubtably that it causes harmful interference. The speed of BPL should be equivalent to DSL.

As to whether it interferes with local AM stations, I misread. It doesn't say that it does. AM stations use frequencies below 1MHZ. There is always the possibility of harmonics when dealing with a chaotic radiating structure like BPL though. So it's possible, if not likely.

<font color=gold>
I guess it is in the hands of the professionals then, who have all the required data to come a conclusion.

Personally, if it proved to be like 30x faster then cable I would be all for it. Imagine: world-wide affordable T1-speeds! :D
</font>

The problem is that none of the data is coming from a truly neutral party. Anyone who knows enough about radio to make an informed decision will be labelled an "Enthusiast" by the pro's. Anyone who isn't in radio technology will be labelled "Unknowledgable" by the cons. There's a lot of money involved here for relatively little investment. There could very well be a lot of dealing "under the table" to pass this. Contrary to popular belief, Hams are a burden to the FCC. No profit at all and lots of work. This means that there's little motivation for Ham interests except for "doing the right thing".


What's it with me and quotation marks today? [img]graemlins/1ponder.gif[/img]

[ 10-10-2003, 06:16 PM: Message edited by: Sir Kenyth ]