US FCC has given go ahead for broadband over power lines

BigEejit

Just saw this on the register.co.uk:

US telecoms regulator - the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) - has given the green light for operators to provide broadband over power lines in a move which it hopes will increase the availability of high-speed net access and increase competition.

In a ruling yesterday the FCC said it wanted to "encourage the development of Access Broadband over Power Line (Access BPL) systems" while ensuring that the technology does not interfere with other devices. It added: "By facilitating access to BPL, the commission takes an important step toward increasing the availability of broadband to wider areas of the country because power lines reach virtually every home and community. In areas where consumers already have broadband access, BPL can enhance competition by providing another broadband alternative."

In the UK, Southern Electric is one company that is already offering broadband over power cables. The service costs from £19.99 a month for a 150k service although availability is limited. ®

jwt

I can feel a case of deja vu coming on

John

BigEejit

jwt wrote:

I can feel a case of deja vu comming on

John

Ohhhh ... I'm not saying a word this time ....

bminish

Calling 150 kbs broadband is cheeky, isn't 512kbs the more normally accepted figure around these parts?

.Brendan

bminish

http://www.rnw.nl/realradio/features/html/bpl041021.html

Broadband over Power Lines might not be such a problem after all

Analysis by Andy Sennitt, 21 October 2004

The US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has given the thumbs
up to the development of Broadband over Power Lines (BPL) technology,
which at first glance looks like bad news for existing users of
shortwave such as international broadcasters and radio amateurs. But
based on what US computer industry analysts are saying, it looks as
if BPL might not be as big a deal as first thought.

Indeed, not everyone in the industry is planning to introduce BPL.
AT&T, one of the major players, says it has changed its focus, and
has decided to get out of the consumer market. AT&T did some testing
of BPL services with Pacific Gas & Electric, but that project was
dropped. Business analysts in the US feel that if AT&T decided not to
proceed, it can only be because the business model suggested it was
unlikely to be highly profitable.

Alternative technologies
Meanwhile, during the time that discussions have been going on about
BPL in the US, alternative Broadband technologies such as DSL and
cable have been developing and becoming cheaper. Furthermore, many
analysts are now saying that wireless technology is a better way of
bringing Broadband to those who are not already served. The US
already has over 1000 wireless Internet service providers. Investing
in BPL may not be worthwhile for smaller power companies as the
likely profit is not great enough.

Another possible drawback for those who are interested in developing
BPL lies in the need to adhere to all the safeguards that have been
written into the rules to protect the interests of other legitimate
users of the frequency spectrum that BPL will occupy, such as radio
amateurs. The American Radio Relay League (ARRL) has been a fervent
opponent of BPL, but says that the FCC's decisions are a step in the
right direction. "We'll remain concerned about pollution
interference," said ARRL spokesman Alan Pitts. "But the glass is both
half-full and half-empty."

US-based interests protected
The interests of US-based radio amateurs and essential services such
as aeronautical communications are clearly protected in the FCC's
rules. These impose technical requirements on BPL devices, such as
the capability to avoid using any specific frequency and to remotely
adjust or shut down any unit; and establish "excluded frequency
bands" within which BPL must avoid operating entirely to protect
aeronautical and aircraft receivers communications. However it
remains unclear exactly what, if any protection is offered to non-US
users of shortwave such as international broadcasters trying to reach
US listeners.The first large-scale commercial BPL installation is
currently being put in place in Cincinnati, Ohio by Current
Communications Group in partnership with power company Cinergy. This
should be available in 40,000 homes by the end of 2004. This will
provide a good test of how effective the FCC's regulations are, and
determine how widespread the interference problems are.

The situation elsewhere
The situation in many parts of the world outside the US is, if
anything, even less favourable for BPL. Typically, BPL delivers
Internet at 1 to 3 Megabits per second. That was fast when it was
first conceived, but other technologies have moved on, and it's not
exceptionally fast compared to other methods: my own ADSL system at
home is 4 Mbps, and it's possible to get an 8 Mbps Broadband
connection in the Netherlands. So the question arises of just what
BPL has to offer that isn't equalled or bettered by other
technologies. Furthermore, if it has to compete with ADSL, wireless
and cable, it could be that the price has to be pitched so low that
profits are adversely affected. You can be sure that the accountants
are busy working all these things out.

At this moment there are still a lot of people behind BPL, but they
might start falling by the wayside when they realise that it's not
the gold mine some of them hoped it would be a couple of years ago.
In the meantime, efforts continue to protect the interests of
legitimate users of the high frequency spectrum. But ultimately
market forces will decide the fate of BPL, and having read some of
the analyses I am beginning to feel a sense of optimism that
shortwave will become far less polluted than was thought as recently
as a couple of years ago.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the personal
views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of
Radio Netherlands.

Capt'n Midnight

Overhead lines would radiate a lot of EMI
And the overall bandwidth is low.

BUT if they Dropped the bandwidth they could implement a VOIP only solution. Lower bandwidth would mean less radiation and the ESB already have wires into everyones home with a standing charge less than a third of Eircom's

bealtine

Came across this from ARRL:
http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2004/10/21/1/?nc=1


FCC Acknowledges Interference Potential of BPL as it Okays Rules to Deploy It

bminish

Capt'n Midnight wrote:

Overhead lines would radiate a lot of EMI
And the overall bandwidth is low.

BUT if they Dropped the bandwidth they could implement a VOIP only solution. Lower bandwidth would mean less radiation and the ESB already have wires into everyones home with a standing charge less than a third of Eircom's

This is true BUT the big Achilles heel of PLT is the fact that bandwidth is shared between everyone, unlike the phone line which (in theory!) is between just one customer and the exchange so even for a Voip only solution you end up needing a fair amount of bandwidth. it's also prone to disruptions from interference from ESB switchgear, Motors, Thermostats, boiler ignition systems, Switchmode Power supplies (a lot of the new Switchmode Wall warts that are appearing are EMC horrors in plastic cases with no filters fitted) and licenced radio users.

Combine that with the relatively high cost of install for PLT, repeaters every few 100m, bridge taps on each Transformer, possibly having to fit meter bypass equipment in each house and having to do backhaul seperatley (PLT has no real line reach and requires a separate backhaul solution.) .
It certainly doesn't look terribly attractive for the tight profit margins that VoIP offers

.Brendan