Comments on: Broadband's power-line push

Google's investment in a company offering Internet service over power lines has the industry buzzing.

[Earl Benser]

Not so sure it can work....

.... and bandwidth is the key problem for BPL like it is for WiFi.
BPL is broadcast, ie., everyone gets all the packets and selects
the proper packets from the stream. So,in a simple example, to
get 10,000 users with 5 mbps service, you would 50 gbps
bandwidth if everyone was online at once. At a 5% usage rate,
maybe only 2,5 gbps service would be needed. But this can be
sent reliably down a powerline?

I do have my doubts. And until the service can be demonstrated
as clearly superior to DSL or Cable, I'll pass.

[Juster444]

an internet connection on every wall

I hope this takes off. I would love the flexibility that BPL gives me in using any electrical outlet in the house to connect to the internet. I think this will be a major benefit that the power companies can use to sell the service. I assume that they will also offer a way to use the electrical wiring/outlets as a way to create a home network.

[feedbackuser5]

bpl

I will be getting bpl in my city in a few months and hope I is reliable. The company has plains as low as $30 a month. A lot better than what comcast charges.

Lack of high speed internet access in rural areas

It is hard to imagine perhaps but there is no inexpensive and reliable high speed internet access available in rural areas. Most people still use dial up access. Satellite access is not reliable due to weather and it is not inexpensive.
I am paying $112/month for a ISDN connection and I had to buy the router on eBay because no one carries ISDN equipment anymore. Because of the low population density there is no cable or high speed access in rural areas. Internet access over the power lines sounds very interesting to people who live in the country.

[Dachi]

BPL won't make any difference for rural

Just because you have power does not mean you will have BPL any more than having a phone means you can get DSL. Even less so actually.
The data is still sent almost all the way to your home on fiber, it is offloaded on medium voltage lines as RF at very very low power because med. voltage lines are unshielded lines and it would cause severe RF interference if not done this way.
Consequently the signal needs to be repeated like every 300 meters on those lines till it hits the transformer near your house.
This means they purchase brand new equipment and infrastructure and create additional points of failure with the repeaters.
They also have to install a costly CT coupler to bypass the transformer so the RF signal is not stepped down with the power on the lines.
and all this is really only a costly last mile solution to the fiber that needs to be run most of the way which means it requires what is really a brand new infrastructure.
They are not any more likely to reach your rural area than Cable or DSL which have been at this for a much longer time.

Power companies will take huge losses on this and make up the difference on your electric bill and render huge portions of the RF spectrum unusable while they are at it.


At best BPL will eat into cable and DSL profit margins in urban areas making your town even less likely to come out on top of a cost-benefit analysis for deploying there.

WIMAX and Fiber to the Home (FTTH) actually make more sense as an alternate last mile solution.

BPL interference issues ignored in story

In your recent article regarding investment in Broadband over Power Lines (BPL) there were many claims made. Such statements may have a place in the marketing of the BPL manufacturers, but there is a problem with BPL that is being ignored by BPL proponents: radio interference. ARRL, the National Association for Amateur Radio, has participated in testing in a number of the BPL marketing trials and has seen interference to radio reception in almost all of the sites their staff and volunteers have examined. Currently, only those BPL systems that completely avoid the use of spectrum allocated to the Amateur Radio Service appear to have any promise at avoiding most interference that may occur to Amateur Radio. But simply moving to other frequencies can still cause interference to other services.

Regarding the three BPL designs making recent news, there is one exception. Motorola?s LV design for a system that uses only low voltage lines, looks very promising. By working closely with Amateur Radio in their development and by totally avoiding signals on medium voltage lines, as used by most BPL providers, the LV system avoids the interference problems that plague most other manufacturers. In resolving the problems of BPL interference, Current Communications certainly does not have a white hat ?but at least it's beige. They can do better, and now they have funding to hopefully achieve it. Amperion systems have many unresolved complaints of harmful interference filed against them. In most other cases, BPL proponents may pronounce their marketing trials as being ?successful,? but to ARRL?s knowledge, no BPL trial has included a thorough examination of interference issues if deployed on a large scale, so it is premature to pronounce these tests to be a success.

Even past Chairman Powell of the FCC, one of the most vocal proponents of BPL, admitted the seriousness of the interference issues. Simply put, there is no way that radio frequency signals are going to stay contained in a wire designed to carry normal electric power. It will radiate and pollute the radio spectrum. The FCC?s October 2004 Report & Order recognized this danger to communications and totally barred the BPL companies from using frequencies associated with aeronautics and some governmental agencies. Obviously, these concerns about interference and spectrum pollution were not seen as trivial or resolved by the FCC. For the rest of the radio community, there was the FCC promise that if a licensed system experiences harmful interference due to BPL in the area, the BPL provider must either fix it in a timely way or shut their system down. Many BPL trials have already closed after being unable to resolve the interference issues.

National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) studies have determined that broadband over power line creates a ?high risk? of radio wave interference, and that harmful interference to public safety mobile radio receivers can be expected at distances of 75 meters from the power line where broadband over power line is in operation, and at distances of up to 460 meters from fixed stations, such as VHF police or fire dispatch communications facilities.

Many public safety agencies and support services, including emergency medical services, fire, and law enforcement, utilize Low-Band VHF (30-50 MHz). Thirteen states--California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, West Virginia and Wyoming--use the band for state police operations, while it's the primary public safety radio band in nine states.

The Association of Public Safety Communications Officials Inc (APCO), and the National Public Safety Telecommunications Council (NPSTC), urged the FCC to withhold final action in the BPL proceeding for at least a year, pending a "conclusive determination" of BPL's potential to interfere with public safety and other licensed radio systems operating below 80 MHz. Unfortunately, the FCC acted prematurely and now there is a resolution, HRes-230, in the Congress calling upon the FCC to reconsider their hasty decision of October 2004.

The article also did not address the reverse problem of interference to BPL by licensed, legally operating radio systems. Since BPL will be using radio frequencies, it is likely that BPL service will be slowed or even stopped by radio transmissions in the area. Tests have been done by Amateur Radio operators that show that even a few watts of transmitter power nearby can cause some BPL systems to temporarily stop working.

Amateur Radio Operators are not against BPL. In fact, hams have historically been one of the first groups to adopt new technologies and possibilities. What the amateur operators and many other radio user groups are so concerned about is the pollution of wide areas of the radio spectrum by interference from BPL.

If you would like more information on this problem in order to present a more balanced picture for future articles about BPL, see the ARRL BPL web page at http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/HTML/plc/.

[sanenazok]

to be fair

They did mention that radio interference was one of the reasons why the technology has not taken off. I think these problems may not be overcome by just throwing more money at BPL. Products using it have been around 1998 (I used a disappointing BPL product called Passport for a while) and the same problems continue. However, regardless of what happens, the research in this area will be beneficial, even though it may end with no useful products.

[malabrm1]

Broadband Channels Redux

In the case of a electrical power failure like a blackout or brownout, everything crashes except for your hardwired telephone line.

I rest my case.

[Juster444]

then you have dsl, but no computer

I don't think that is much of an advantage unless you have a power generator to give you electricity to run your computer. The only advantage is if you had a laptop that could run for a while on its battery - that may give you an hour or two of interent access during a power outage.

But I think the benefits of BPL outweigh the the fact that I lose my internet connection during the occasional power outage.

[fyrfyter]

no power, no internet

What about the fact that, most DSL modems need an outside power source to function anyways? So what, you still have 56k dialup and a laptop with a limited battery power supply? Yeah, like that's gonna work for a long time. I think before it is all said and done the BPL will take off, but in a varied for. Think about it. Every power company already has the largest network available. I think in the end, BPL is not gonna be the end all be all of internet access, but what about using the power system and all the poles to provide wireless internet city wide? Would that not be feasible? Not every pole needs an antenna and, you get very easily connected to the hardwire part.

the technology is flawed.

http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/HTML/plc/degrade.html
outside radio transmitters cause disconnects of BPL users. BPL companies are FCC part 15 users and have no recourse to interferance from mobile transmitters. As little as 5 watts from a mobile can cause internet users to disconnect and force them to reconnect.

Current Communications

I have been keeping my eye on a company that does this already, Current Communications. A friend of mine has used their service and says it is as good as the cable company's, yet it is also $20/mo cheaper.

They are still expanding coverage, so not everybody has access to it yet. I will love it when they hit my neighborhood. I will also like to see competition within this field, it will drive the price of internet access down a lot.

[obiii]

It's About Time!

Rural areas would greatly benefit from this type of technology. Cable companies have no interest in spending millions of dollars for areas that have only several homes per square mile. WiFi suffers from the same problem, only imagine how many towers would be needed to accomodate sparsely populated rural areas. I am currently paying $50.00 a month for a >500k download speed via Satellite, not to mention the cost of the equipment and the installation fee. Rural areas are the target market that they should be shooting for.

[allrepellents.com]

Broadbandfocus.com

At BroadbandFocus.com we're following the Broad over power line evolution, and find it's increasing fast around the U.S. with recent FCC regulations.