NATO releases major report on effects of BPL

[g4tut]

NATO releases major report on effects of BPL

NATO (the North Atlantic Treaty Organization) has issued a report of the expected effects that widespread BPL application would have on the HF spectrum.

Particular emphasis is placed on ambient noise in "quite rural" zones and the "Absolute Protection Requirement".
The calculations assume ubiquitous installation of BPL.

The report concludes:
a) High probability that BPL would cause increased noise levels at sensitive receiver sites given the projected market penetration; and
b) The percentages are highly influenced by assumptions on transmitter EIRP, BPL market penetration, and duty cycle."


The entire report (9Mb) can be downloaded at:

http://ftp.rta.nato.int/public....ALL.pdf (http://ftp.rta.nato.int/public//PubFullText/RTO/TR/RTO-TR-IST-050/$$TR-IST-050-ALL.pdf)


Source: Wireless Institute of Australia - http://www.wia.org.au





Daily Amateur Radio News Service: (http://www.southgatearc.org/)
Updated every day - 365 days per year

Get our News Headlines for your Website:
http://www.southgatearc.org/rss/index.htm

Send Us Your News Items:
http://www.southgatearc.org/news/your_news.htm

[KD7ZOS]

Yo: It's about time they do something constructive for people,ie..Hams and Public Service Agencys still using VHF/UHF systems. Now if they could only get smart regarding the disarming of the world!:-( A Armed poplulation are Citizens, with ham Rigs!! DisArmed are Slaves! Oops, there I go again being not politically correct. First get their guns, then their radios! etc. etc. 73's Before you flame me, check the history books, which we are doomed to repeat, if we don't change. When all were armed, we were polite to each other and solved our differences with consideration and kindness. 73's KD7ZOS p.s. can anyone advise about a mobile installation on a camel, regarding antenna height,power limits, etc?! hi hi!

[KC0QIT]

Speaking of "effective organizations" Hi,Hi, why not include "The United Nations" to "opine" on the world-wide "evils" of BPL!http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[kc8pbs]

Utilities have been screwing over the public and bribing or otherwise pandering influence of politicians all over the world for about twice as long as the Arab-Israeli conflict. They don't care if they cause worldwide harm in the name of a few extra bucks. Never have. Never will, until it costs them a LOT of money, the only language they understand.

Look at coal fired power. It's responsible for mercury levels so high that you can't even eat some species of fish, as well as being one of the largest CO2 emission sources causing global warming, and the largest sulfur dioxide emitter causing acid rain. Personally, I think hundreds of people dying in the US every summer from the ever more frequent heat waves, and developmentally disabled children from mercury, and the most obscene, foul thing... Cancer, with above average cases dotting the landscape along the path of prevailing winds from these plants, are a testament to the harm they are willing to do for a buck.

With that in mind, is it any wonder why they don't care about an S-9 noise floor on HF? Or why the administration they OWN isn't doing a darn thing about it, despite solid scientific evidence, good engineering, and even the law on our side?

Hey, that sounds like their argument about PAVE PAWS! They make us shut down because 2 of their sites can measure our signals (which it's pretty clear have never caused harmful interference) but then they let their buddies in the power industry ignore the law and "jam the entire world" to make a few more bucks.

Can you see why the repeater operators in California are pissed at this double standard? Can you see why they are particularly pissed at the HAMS who uphold this double standard?

[wa2rcb]

The bottom line as I see it is this: Power lines were/are #designed to 'transmit' 60 cycle AC (in most standard T&D applications) at various voltages to consumers and commercial interests so they can activate a myrad of products designed to perform a particular task. Telephone lines, wired and more recently wireless, were/are designed to transmit voice communications, and since the 1970's, data telecom up to certain limits of speed.

Mixing telecom data transmission and electric power transmission in a consumer application is kind of like pouring Vermont maple syrup atop a 21" diameter pepperoni pizza. You just don't do that unless you have an esoteric taste and/or dietary regimine.

The real way to go for all datacom IMHO is either by wireless and/or fibre optic. I have Verizon FIOS fibre and it serves me quite well. It's also a comfort knowing that my datacom is going out over light pipes instead of copper wire, especially during thunderstorms and/or when some DUI plows into a power pole on the highway down the street and things go out and I still have FIOS via the APC UPS .

[KG6LFR]

WHAT KD7ZOS SAID!!!!

[va7aca]

If the power companies create the BPL monster and our politicians let this happen against the public interest and current laws, then I see no reason why an Amateur Radio operator should abide by the law. If I end up with a noise floor higher than it is now as a result of BPL then may be a 10,000w (NOISY) amp aimed at the BPL lines will begin to erode there customer base. Or should we invite hackers (http://www.2600.com/) to ruin there BPL system? Denial Of Service (DOS) attacks of all flavors would do it. I see the BPL plutocrats as creating A-symmetric warfare against my rights. I hate to think this way but as I see it the power companies and our politician do not care about the public interest, they only care about money. It is clear to me and anyone who is the least bit technical understands that there are better ways to deliver high speed data such as fibre optic and high speed wireless. RAC has published good arguments against BPL and letters concerning BPL and are worth the time to read; http://www.rac.ca/news/bplnews.htm

73

[KB5DPE]

"Utilities have been screwing over the public and bribing or otherwise pandering influence of politicians all over the world for about twice as long as the Arab-Israeli conflict."

There have been "Utilities" for in excess of ten thousand years??? #That's how long they have been "bickering" in that part of the world. #BOY, you learn something new every day. #"The world according to hams!" #A TOTAL embarrassment! #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif
Tom

[ve3sre]

Quote[/b] ]If the power companies create the BPL monster and our politicians let this happen against the public interest and current laws

Fortunately in Canada, BPL has not really gone anywhere. There were a few tests done in the downtown area of Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario a couple of years ago and alot of press about how "wonderful" it supposedly was. But since then there's been no talk of BPL that I'm aware of...and that's a very "good" thing. Hopefully BPL is "dead" in Canada.

Where I live (Toronto), the local publicly owned utility "Toronto Hydro" has setup up a municipal wi-fi service using wireless mesh networking. They "bought" all of the electric light poles from the municipal government and are making their money back through this service by mounting all of the wi-fi stuff on top of the light poles.

Quote[/b] ]The real way to go for all datacom IMHO is either by wireless and/or fibre optic. I have Verizon FIOS fibre and it serves me quite well. It's also a comfort knowing that my datacom is going out over light pipes instead of copper wire, especially during thunderstorms and/or when some DUI plows into a power pole on the highway down the street and things go out and I still have FIOS via the APC UPS .


I saw a documentary on PBS a while back where they were dealing with the whole "net neutrality" debate. They explained that a decade or so back the cable and telephone companies in the U.S. got all kinds of tax breaks and deregulation with the promise that they would build out a massive fibre to the home network that would cover most of the U.S.

What happened though (according to the documentary) is that the cable and telcos pocketed the cash and never built out the fibre optic network that they promised. The cable and telephone companies were arguing that they now needed to charge "content providers" in order to have the cash to build out the fibre network...and thus the whole "net neutrality" debate.

Apparently there was a small local utility in Lafayette, Louisiana that tried to "go it alone" and build their own "fibre to home" network and the cable and telephone companies really gave these folks a hard time.

I think in alot of ways the whole BPL thing is just another aspect of this...looking for a way to provide broadband connections without forking out the costs needed to build out a massive fibre optic network. Fibre, wifi and satellite as many others have said is really the way to go.

When it comes to fibre to the home connections the South Koreans are way ahead of everyone else in the world.

73

[N0WVA]

Quote[/b] (va7aca @ Sep. 08 2007,14:22)]If the power companies create the BPL monster and our politicians let this happen against the public interest and current laws, then I see no reason why an Amateur Radio operator should abide by the law. If I end up with a noise floor higher than it is now as a result of BPL then may be a 10,000w (NOISY) amp aimed at the BPL lines will begin to erode there customer base. Or should we invite hackers (http://www.2600.com/) to ruin there BPL system? Denial Of Service (DOS) attacks of all flavors would do it. I see the BPL plutocrats as creating A-symmetric warfare against my rights. I hate to think this way but as I see it the power companies and our politician do not care about the public interest, they only care about money. It is clear to me and anyone who is the least bit technical understands that there are better ways to deliver high speed data such as fibre optic and high speed wireless. RAC has published good arguments against BPL and letters concerning BPL and are worth the time to read; http://www.rac.ca/news/bplnews.htm

73
Then what will happen is the FCC will have some sort of law at thier disposal that will shut you down- and even fine you if you are caught trying to interfere with the precious BPL. All other laws will be thrown out the window and ignored.

There is no logic to the way our government handles things.....all they know is money, and better not anyone stand in thier way.

[W1RFI]

Although I would encourage amateurs in BPL areas to continue to operate, doing so to intentionally interfere with any device is a monumentally bad idea. #Interference happens, and much of it is the fault of the affected equipment, but that is not a valid reason to intentionally interfere with anything. #Posts by hams encouraging intentionally interference or DOS attacks on BPL are irresponsible, IMHO. Fortunately, this approach does not reflect the values of the Amateur Radio Service I know and love.

If BPL can address its interference issues, and the industry is making some progress with respect to Amateur Radio, Amateur Radio would give it no more mind than it does DSL or cable. Both can be an interference source, but as a rule, the DSL and cable industries address interference responsibly, so they are not seen as a widespread interference problem.

Hams or shortwave listeners in BPL areas that do have interference should address it by filing complaints, first with the BPL operator and then, if needed, with the FCC.

Ed Hare, W1RFI/5

[W9WHE]

W1RFI writes:

"Although I would encourage amateurs in BPL areas to continue to operate, doing so to intentionally interfere with any device is a monumentally bad idea. #Interference happens, and much of it is the fault of the affected equipment, but that is not a valid reason to intentionally interfere with anything. #Posts by hams encouraging intentionally interference or DOS attacks on BPL are irresponsible, IMHO"

Ed is right.
Causing malicious interference to another service is a road to trouble. It will reflect poorly on not just the individual involved (who would be subject to fines, license revocation, jail and civil actions) but the amateur service in general. Remember Jack Gerretsten? Want to wind up as his cellmate?

W9WHE

[W1RFI]

Quote[/b] (W9WHE @ Sep. 09 2007,08:38)]W1RFI writes:

"Although I would encourage amateurs in BPL areas to continue to operate, doing so to intentionally interfere with any device is a monumentally bad idea. #Interference happens, and much of it is the fault of the affected equipment, but that is not a valid reason to intentionally interfere with anything. #Posts by hams encouraging intentionally interference or DOS attacks on BPL are irresponsible, IMHO"

Ed is right.
Causing malicious interference to another service is a road to trouble. It will reflect poorly on not just the individual involved (who would be subject to fines, license revocation, jail and civil actions) but the amateur service in general. Remember Jack Gerretsten? #Want to wind up as his cellmate?

W9WHE
Now that has to be a first -- Ed and Jonathan in agreement. #I knew you'd come around, Jonathan. :-)

I don't know as intentionally interfering with BPL would end up being a jailable offense, as under Part 15 rules, unlicensed devices are offered no protection from harmful interference. #However, the Part 97 rules are pretty specific about what constitutes a legal one-way transmission, and that isn't one of them. #A short test to assess the impact of an amateur transmitter on any piece of equipment seems legitimate to me, but beyond that, it is not, IMHO.

Even it were considered "legal," intentionally causing interference to anyone or anything is not the Amateur Radio that I want to see us become under any circumstances.

Interference to BPL is a very real problem, however, and to date, the BPL industry has not really wanted to explore it much. #In controlled tests being done with a cooperative ISP, 5 watts of transmitter from an HF or VHF mobile took it down hard. #After 30 seconds of carrier, when the PTT was released, there was silence for a few seconds, followed by modem negotiation sounds as the system re-established its communications link. # After about a minute, the system operation returned.

We then used OOK CW and voice SSB and found that the system slowed down, but didn't go down. Enough data got through in between voice words and code elements to keep it from crashing. To speculate a bit, non-time-critical functions such as most utility applications, web browsing and email checking would be slow, but usable. VOIP and video streaming would be in some trouble.

We also saw some sensitivity change as we transmitted inside of or outside of the harddware passband filtering used by that system. (Some notches are inside the filtering). #The Motorola system, with its hardware notch filtering, proved to be virtually immune to interference at amateur power levels.

There is a fine line between operating and causing interference, but if hams in BPL areas continue to operate normally, the line has not been crossed. If that includes an interest in digital modes or full-carrier, double-sideband AM, so be it, as long as the transmissions are made under Part 97 rules. #Especially if incidental interference may be involved, this would include following the minimum necessary power rules, too, although from a practical point, I am sure FCC would not ask a ham to reduce power below the barefoot level, typically 100 watts. #That is considered to be very low power by HF transmitter standards.

I have done some independent brief testing to assess the impact of my transmissions on a few BPL systems, even without the cooperation of the BPL operator. #I think that to be reasonable and acceptable. #But it would not have been reasonable for me to conitnue these brief test transmissions for hours on end just to screw the system up. #I do not drive to BPL areas just to transmit.

Now, if BPL comes to my street, I will operate and that would include digital modes. But that operation would be primarily two-way communication with other amateurs and brief test transmissions for station adjustment.

But I think that we need to run an ARRL Letter story that we agreed on something, Jonathan. I'm not sure that this has ever happened before. #Maybe this will open up a new era of communication and understanding!

Ed, W1RFI

[K8MHZ]

BPL requires total integrity of the power lines from one end to the other. This requires that the power company keep the lines in perfect operating condition. All on a budget that has competition from wireless services which need no such requirement.

My prediction is that BPL will be a thing of the past very soon without our attempts to shut it down. Especially when people using Internet telephone systems lose their telephone service every time the power goes out instead of having it stay on. I can see where a single instance of that would be enough to change ISPs.

I sure know it is very comforting to have both telephone and Internet service independent of AC power which fails once a year or so. Sometimes more.

What puzzles me is that BPL is supposed to be a service for remote rural areas where other services are not feasible but all the BPL installations so far are in fairly populated areas.

Kind of make you want to go 'Hmmm....'

[ve3sre]

Quote[/b] ]What puzzles me is that BPL is supposed to be a service for remote rural areas where other services are not feasible but all the BPL installations so far are in fairly populated areas.

My guess is that the BPL operators aren't testing in rural areas for the exact same reason that cable and DSL companies aren't setting up in rural areas. They don't want to spend the money.

This idea that BPL will be used to increase broadband coverage in rural areas is just so much of that stuff that comes out of the south side of a horse that's headed north!

Quote[/b] ]The Motorola system, with its hardware notch filtering, proved to be virtually immune to interference at amateur power levels.


I suppose that it's because Motorola has been in the radio biz for a very long time and their engineers actually know what they are doing!

73