- Related Stories
-
EarthLink aims to evolve
October 11, 2005 -
EarthLink wins Philly Wi-Fi contract
October 4, 2005 -
Google invests in power-line broadband
July 7, 2005 -
Cable wins Supreme Court battle
June 27, 2005 -
Ultra wideband may get wider
September 8, 2004
It may sound nuts today, but a San Diego company called Nethercomm is developing a way to use ultra wideband wireless signals to transmit data at broadband speeds through natural-gas pipes. The company claims its technology will be able to offer 100 megabits per second to every home, which is more than enough to provide voice, video and high-speed Internet access.
Needless to say, there's a big caveat here: These claims have yet to be tested. Nethercomm has no working products and has not tried the technology in the field.
What's new:
A San Diego start-up is developing a way to use ultra wideband wireless signals to transmit data at broadband speeds through natural-gas pipes.
Bottom line:
Some skeptics may scoff at the idea of a natural-gas pipe for broadband, but analysts say it could be much cheaper than technology available today.
"When I first heard about it, it seemed pretty outrageous," said Joe Posewick, president of EN Engineering, an engineering firm that helps natural gas companies build distribution facilities. "But the more we talked to Nethercomm and other experts in the industry, the more we realized that it could be a viable technology that could revolutionize the natural-gas industry.
"Of course, we have to see if it really works," Posewick added. "There's been no proof of concept yet."
So how does broadband in gas pipes work? Nethercomm is adapting ultra wideband radio transmitters and receivers to send wireless signals through the natural-gas pipe at the same time the pipe is delivering gas fuel. Ultra wideband, or UWB, is a developing communication technology that delivers very high-speed network data rates, but at higher power levels it can interfere with other wireless signals.
That's not usually a problem when ultra wideband signals are transmitted in pipes buried underground. As a result, tremendous amounts of data could be transmitted through a gas line without causing problems.
At least, that's the idea. Nethercomm and the technology it's developing is still in the early days. The company hasn't yet announced any licensing deals with ultra wideband equipment makers. The 12-person company, which has no venture backing at the moment, is also trying to raise money to start a pilot program with broadband providers and gas companies by next summer.
Some skeptics may scoff at the idea of using a natural-gas pipe for broadband, but it's not so easy to dismiss the man behind the technology.
Patrick Nunally, founder and CEO of Nethercomm and one of the inventors of gas line broadband, has a hefty track record. Until May 2005, he worked as chief technology officer for Patriot Scientific, a company that designs microprocessor technology for the U.S. Department of Defense. Prior to that, he was president and CEO of Intertech, a company he founded in 1998 that specialized in intellectual-property development for embedded processor and communications systems. He has also served as chief executive and chief technology officer for several other technology development companies.
Nunally holds more than 134 patents worldwide, predominantly in wireless and signal processing. He's been honored with awards from the IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) and was named an IEEE/IAE (Institute for the Advancement of Engineers) fellow in 1994. He has even received a formal citation from former President Bill Clinton for his efforts in furthering technology development in the United States.
If transmitting broadband through natural-gas pipes works as Nethercomm's execs think it can, it could have a major impact on the broadband access market. A recent U.S. Supreme Court decision and changes in the Federal Communications Commission classification of DSL has made it more difficult for independent service providers to use existing cable or phone infrastructure to reach broadband customers.
What's more, the old copper infrastructure that is currently used to deliver DSL service doesn't have enough capacity to support new applications like high-definition television service. While phone companies like SBC Communications and Verizon Communications have already begun spending billions of dollars to upgrade their networks to provide more capacity, technology that uses existing pipes into people's homes could augment these new networks.
See more CNET content tagged:
UWB,
natural gas,
gas company,
pipe,
broadband




I wonder how safe it would be. Gas leak = bad
And yes, if they can get it to work with Natural gas, they should be able to make something like this work with burried water lines.
There are a few problems:
1. You can only go to people who have gas service. We were looking at rural broadband, so that was a showstopper for my application.
2. Ultrawideband will have big problems with frequency dispersion and resonances. Single carrier broadband will probably work better.
3. Everybody is sharing the same bandwidth, so its like a cable modem. Even if you use 5 GHz as the carrier, there will be problems if some teenager sets up a BitTorrent server.
Finally, there will be the usual regulatory hassles. I would suggest going to co-op and municipal gas networks first, and then approach corporations in reverse order of size. (i.e. call PG&E last.)
1. The footprint for gas services (residential and business) are substantial.
2. UWB actually works out well because of its constructive use of multipath and the fact that the pipes don't move.
3. OFDM helps out here.
1. Gas is explosive. You don't want to be messing with gas pipes. Putting high power RF into them is probably not a good idea, either.
2. They're plastic here in the Northeast, because steel rusts and becomes weak, allowing the gas to leak out. See #1, above. Plastic waveguides don't work very well.
3. Multipath and reflections if the pipes are steel. Gas pipes look like trees, with trunks and leaves. RF doesn't like that. You get reflections and it's harder to sort out the information you want, never mind tring to send information the other way, from your house to the network.
3. What percentage of homes have gas? Bet more of them have cable and phone lines. The ones that don't have cable, probably don't have mainline gas, either. Going to be a lot cheaper to get DSL or fiber or cable broadband.
4. Wireless
I'm left wondering why this company got two pages of coverage.
2. Plastic pipelines are in fact becoming the standard replacement for faulty, old metal pipelines. Fortunately, without power limitations, we characterize for intermittment plastic sections, and dynamically increase the power.
3. We refer to it as either a star or mesh configuration - UWB propagates effectively with either. We use signal processing to handle all reflections and echos we create.
Keep in mind the build out cost of wireless verses fiber - full HDTV, video, voice and data for starters for the end user cost of DSL not to mention 100Mbps++ per end user
__________________________________
R.K.
http://www.Remove-All-Spyware.com/
You don't need every person in the world to have your product/service...but it does help.
whenever needed, I get the impression that ANY accidental gas leak
is guaranteed to ignite if not detonate. With a leak, we do have the
full combination of gas, oxygen, and the high power ignition
source.
That makes a very loud KaBOOM.........
I wonder what the reaction of the cable/dsl companies would be considering they have spent a bomb laying fibre.
would they try to shutdown this new method of internet distribution that undercuts them totally?
2) Will a pig running in a given section of pipe break a signal? I assume the packets would take another route...
3) For areas lacking "last mile" gas service, couldn't you pull the signal out of the pipe and route through a WiMax tower?
1. This is a terminal distribution system within a city. No pumps
involved
2. Pigs run only in liquid product pipelines, not in local natural
gas lines. So, no problem.
3. For areas beyond the gas lines, any other solution could work.
But, considering the limited number of customers per square
mile, WiMax might not be economically feasible.
But why? We already have fiber optics and Ethernet. They're all we really need to connect homes and small businesses to the Internet at rates far beyond existing "broadband" technologies like DSL or cable. They have not yet been widely deployed only because, until now, Internet penetration has been relatively low.
Cable and DSL were designed back when the Internet was in its infancy, to ride piggyback on existing cable TV and telephone networks. They made sense -- then.
But now, every other home, on average, is on the Internet. The Internet has grown up, and it's time to deploy a new infrastructure designed specifically to support it. We shouldn't waste any more time on "magic bullet" technologies that kludge IP onto some infrastructure originally designed to do something totally different.
than 100 megabits/sec if movie and TV downloads are going to
be time feasible. And I have a hunch that the 100 Megabit speed
quoted for the gas pipe is max under optimal conditions.
Fibre optics is the way to go for households and businesses
operating from fixed sites. And since the telcoms are going to
be installing it just to modernize their own plant, there's no
sense playing any other half way games. Those aren't even
'magic bullets'.
- Basic
-
by Stkr47
November 15, 2005 6:58 PM PST
- Basics are one thing but what about reality??
-
Reply to this comment
-
(33 Comments)