Could Broadband Over Power Lines be Dangerous? 240
falconfighter writes " Broadband over Powerlines, once touted as the solution to many internet problems (developing 3rd world countries, etc.) has a new hazard. The system basically involves putting high amounts of modulated RF on a power line. The Amateur Radio Relay League has the most informative page on the topic.
The hazards include exceeding MPE (maximum permissable exposure), RF burns, and disrupting the HF bands of radio. This last one would also work in reverse, meaning hams, airplanes, or the military keying up their radios could take out large areas of internet service (with airplanes, potentially over several hundred miles)."
First, and... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:First, and... (Score:5, Interesting)
Being unshielded makes me wonder about the likelyhood of "sniffing" with a receiving antenna and amplifier. It's spread spectrum like the cable 'modems' but ya never know. I'm sure the NSA is ready for any potential rollout.
Re:First, and... (Score:2)
no bad jokes intended, but the russians did it
Re:First, and... (Score:3, Informative)
It works, IFF the impedance across the frequency range that you're using stays the same, or you have the ability to react to the real-time changes in impedance at different frequencies due to motor start-ups, shut-downs, and who's got what on.
The cable wiring is terminated, and is a bus that's designed to carry data. It's the obivous choice.
Broadband over powerlines is only usefull for getting lots of attention from investors (who just se
Re:First, and... (Score:3, Insightful)
I have seen a lot of data and reports on the interference problems which I think we all expected. However, I have not seen anything that this would be actually dangerous. Surely with the testing somebody would have noticed if people were getting zapped.
I would like to see some data before labelling this as potentially dangerous to one's health.
AC
3rd world?!? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:3rd world?!? (Score:4, Insightful)
Exactly.
Considering that they have yet to get power to so many of these areas, wouldn't it be wise to run fiber optic at the same time as they run new powerlines? The fiber could handle all their telecom and network traffic. Even TV, etc.
Re:3rd world?!? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:3rd world?!? (Score:2)
Re:3rd world?!? (Score:3, Informative)
Just raining money over there... (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, how Insightful. I mean, when wiring the third world, obviously money is no problem!
Reality check -- the reason why this is suggested as a solution for the third world is that all they have to do is just run the power cables instead of running the power cables and some other cabling system for phone, TV, and internet. We are talking about people who current can't even afford to run the power cables, much less fiber optic cables too.
Re:Just raining money over there... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:3rd world?!? (Score:2)
Why bother with the power lines at all, just run the fiber cables, then set up a MPLampS network (RFC3251 [sunsite.dk])
Re:3rd world?!? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:3rd world?!? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:3rd world?!? (Score:2, Insightful)
Anyone remotely familiar with technology should know by now that rollouts move from the population centers outward. The simple fact is that there is too much cost involved in BPL for it too start in rural areas.
If anyone seriously believes otherwise, then I have a bridge to sell you.
- Nate >>
Re:3rd world?!? (Score:3, Insightful)
Slashdotted... (Score:4, Funny)
Going both ways (Score:5, Interesting)
HF being global means a jammer in the Pacific can take out broadband in Europe.
Re:Going both ways (Score:2)
This isn't news... (Score:5, Informative)
This doesn't mean that BPL is a good idea. As the ARRL (which stands for American Radio Relay League) correctly points out - and has been covered on Slashdot before - BPL is a disaster for HF radio communications. Government agencies are weighing in strongly against it. I doubt it'll see the light of day in widespread use in the US.
There's no real need for it in the US either (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:This isn't news... (Score:2)
There is no debate about what strong RF signals will do. There might be room for argument about what low levels of RF will do.
Just as swallowing a teaspoon of Mercury every morning would be just plain dumb, eating fish with small amounts might never be a problem in a grown adult for their entire life.
Re:This isn't news... (Score:4, Insightful)
The only thing that matters here is the relative risk compared to other things, which you don't seem to give a fuck about. There's no sense in flying off the handle over imagined risks without evaluating exactly what those risks are and making an informed decision.
Lets hope someone takes a wise decision (Score:3, Interesting)
Until now, the HF spectrum has been carefully regulated to avoid harmful interference. It is just not acceptable to sacrifice it simply to get a cheaper Internet access. There are a good set of broadband technologies available which almost do not interfere with HF users.
Let's hope politicians don't wait to do anything until a true emergency happens...
Re: Lets hope someone takes a wise decision (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.jarl.or.jp/English/4_Library/A-4-1_N
Maybe our lawmakers could have their aides read up on why?
Re: Lets hope someone takes a wise decision (Score:2)
One analogy that hasn't been made is to that of light pollution.
RF and light are just at different points of the spectrum.
While nobody doubts the value of having light delivered over electric power lines, we are still struggling with the effects of light pollution on astronomy (both professional and amateur).
Let's not extend the pollution problem down the spectrum to HF radio!
Re: Lets hope someone takes a wise decision (Score:4, Informative)
FEMA submitted comments to the FCC Notice of Inquiry that pretty much say "if you do this you will disrupt official government communications affecting the health and safety of US citizens". The NTIA didn't like it much either.
I'd say there will be some trials conducted with FEMA and NTIA watching very closely. The first time it increases the noise floor in their receivers 1-2dB BPL will be a dead issue in the US.
Re: NGO's (Score:3, Informative)
NGO = Non-Governmental Organization. [reference.com]
The logical conclusion from your post is that all Organizations should be Governmental.
My church is a Non-Governmental Organization.
So is the company who happens to pay my bills.
Obviously, you must live in a country where private ownership of property has been abolished, and you like it there.
Down already? (Score:4, Informative)
Then again, I didn't think anyone really believed this, did they? I mean, any first-year EE student can tell you that mains cable is no good for signalling on, even at modest frequencies. Bah.
Re:Down already? (Score:2)
So if it's no good for signalling on, why are there commercially deployed Broadband over Power Line projects in mainland Europe and Commercial trials [hydro.co.uk] in Scotland and England offering 1Mb symmetrical connections.
Neighborhood popularity of amateur radio (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Neighborhood popularity of amateur radio (Score:2, Informative)
K0OOK
Re:Neighborhood popularity of amateur radio (Score:2, Interesting)
I read (think it was in Hints & Kinks 15, but I am not sure) about someone who put up a tower. Nothing else. A neighbor complained to the local authorities that it was interfering with broadcasts and someone came over to check it out. Turned out there were no antennas in the tower that could cause any interference. Duh. .... ..
From what I understand, someone also pulled the plug on BPL in Austria. BBC also made some measurements and concluded that it had the potential to seriously disrupt short wave r
Wonderful.... not (Score:4, Interesting)
Not to mention won't people who choose not to receive broadband via power still be able to tap into the transmission signal and so monitor other peoples traffic easier than trying to splice into the fiber backbone (oh hang on.... wonder if the gov't might not be keen for this very reason)...
You think that's bad... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:You think that's bad... (Score:2)
Laugh Test (Score:5, Funny)
"Let's put something that looks like high-power broadband RF noise on long, unshielded, untwisted power lines, suspended in the air, otherwise known as antennas."
Re:Laugh Test (Score:3, Interesting)
Wire Length (Score:2)
Re:Laugh Test (Score:3, Insightful)
We use separate pipes for drinking water and sewage.
We use separate bags for produce and cleaning suplies.
We have separate tanks for fuel and coolant.
Who on earth thinks that sending power and data on the same lines is a Good Idea?
-- MarkusQ
Re:Laugh Test (Score:2)
While I am not particularly an advocate of BPL, there have been a number of successful trials in different parts of the world. IMO (I do technology assessment work professionally from time-to-time), the technology lends itself more to building local access networks than to long-haul transmission. Also, power network architectures in Europe and South America are better suited to such applications than North American architecture (an issue of the number of house
Aircraft ILS and power-line transmissions (Score:3, Interesting)
The Instrument landing system (Score:3, Informative)
This story doesn't pass the smell test, or would you have us believe that planes run the risk of their instrument landing systems just "switching on" and attempting to land the plane automatically every time they pass an airport with ILS aids?
Re:The Instrument landing system (Score:2, Informative)
What the hell was ILS doing on... (Score:2)
His story makes no sense at all, in any capacity, and a search of crashdatabase.com finds no crash matching any of the "Facts" of his poorly remembered, almost assuredly appocryphal story more than 30 years old.
Re:Aircraft ILS and power-line transmissions (Score:2, Informative)
Far more likely, was an IFR NDB approach where they were trying to use the NDB to avoid the mountain, unfortunately they managed to avoid the interfering power lines instead, thus hitting the mountain..
NBD freqs are in the 200 to 500 khz range which is adjacent to some of the signalling done in the sub 200 Khz range.
"Dangerous" is overstating it (Score:5, Insightful)
The interference caused to more traditional RF communications is likely to be significant because you are, in effect, stringing miles and miles of antenae across the countryside. The best bet might be to modulate on bands that are presently home to digital communication and in coordination with those present modulation schemes such that they don't interfere with each other.
I suspect the whole issue may be moot, as I doubt that BPL will ever see a largescale rollout for other technical reasons besides these.
Here in Spain (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Here in Spain (Score:2, Informative)
Certainly that's the case here in Ireland - ESB (Electricity Supply Board) hope to offer broadband soon by piggy-backing fiber on the transmission network.
The ESB has also done small-scale tests of broadband over the powerlines themselves. The radio amateurs were up in arms. I think I heard that the ESB may have been committing an illegal act in causing interference.
I don't know what the results of the test
Trouble in Spain (Score:2, Informative)
"About PLC, a strong movement against it has been started in Spain, led by the Union de
Radioaficionados de Espana (URE).
Accurate measurements done in Zaragoza have demonstrated the h
What a way to go (Score:5, Funny)
Re:What a way to go (Score:2)
Solution? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Solution? (Score:3, Insightful)
You can't realistically shield everything in the current state of the power distribution network...
Gimme a break (Score:3, Informative)
You do anything to your home grid serious enough to pose an RF risk to humans, and you'll blow the hell out of your breaker box.
Come on. Next cell phones really do cause cancer, I bet.
Re:Gimme a break (Score:2)
Which is only relevant if the unshielded, in-house bit carries the full signal of the shielded version, which it won't.
That's like saying electricity isn't safe in your house because transmission lines carry 4000 Volts. Well, yeah, but it gets stepped down a couple of times on the way in
Re:Gimme a break (Score:2)
In most other countries they use higher v
Re:Solution? (Score:2)
When alternating current passes through a power line, it creates an alternating magnetic field which is concentric with the power line. This field induces AC currents to flow in any nearby conductor. If the cable is buried inside a conductor, such as moist earth, the amount of energy sapped from the cable becomes extremely large.
So basical
Re:Solution? (Score:2)
Unless your city is a hundred miles in diameter, then it hardly qualifies as "long distance" transmission underground :-) Of course people run wires underground in cities, so they don't have to look at power lines hanging everywhere. It doesn't work as a solution for transmitting power hundreds of miles, however.
A coaxial shield can't stop a coaxial magnetic field, unless it's made of something highly ferromagnetic, which wou
Re:Solution? (Score:2)
If you're going to dig up the entire country to bury power lines, why not just run fiber while you're at it ? The additional costs would be minor and fiber is essentially "future proof" and would provide all the bandwidth needed well into the future. BPL has no higher bandwidth migration path and it's flawed technology.
broadband over powerlines, it's just silly. (Score:5, Funny)
I mean, really, who expects this to work [fiftythree.org]
Support (Score:2, Funny)
Now, a different wave of support questions.
Support Monkey: Sir, do you see lighting like things on your computer? Sir... Sir...
(To his colleague monkey) Looks like he hung up
Re:Support (Score:3, Funny)
Gene Roddenberry truly *was* a visionary.
Suggested before (Score:3, Informative)
the article [wired.com].
Bush Administration thinks this is dangerous... (Score:2, Funny)
Don't use RF (Score:5, Interesting)
What some power companies here (norway) have done is to use a special kind of machine (it looks like a really clever invention) that "spins" fibre optic cable(s) around high voltage power lines. This doesn't work for buried power cables, ofcourse. This technique gives several advantages: Cheap, the cost is the cable and a helicopter, no digging, no new cable masts, no buying right of way. Security (I'd think twice before trying to mess with a cable wrapped around a high voltage line :D ). And since light won't be disturbed by the magnetic fields generated by the current there is no need to worry about power and data interfering with each other
Re:Don't use RF (Score:2)
BTW, Faraday effect WILL change the polarization state of the light.
Re:Don't use RF (Score:4, Interesting)
I remember reading a very interesting article years ago, may have been 1980s, about a device for measuring leakage currents in metal pylons(towers) on very high voltage power transmission lines. It was a fibre optic device, you wrapped it round the base of the pylon and measured the amount of light you could transmit through it. It seems that the magenetic field generated by the leakage current affected the refractive index of the fibre, varying the amount of light that could escape, thus you could non-intrusively measure the current by measuring the amount of light you lost.
Of course, they probably used a special fibre optic material with the right properties, but I have often wondered how they get round this with the fibre-on-powerline systems. Sadly I cant find anything about it on the www.
Re:Don't use RF (Score:2, Interesting)
FAQ (Score:5, Informative)
Here's a BPL and Amateur Radio FAQ [qrpis.org].
I wish (Score:2, Insightful)
RF Hazard? (Score:2, Informative)
Um, you just made that up didn't you? I have never seen anyone, including W1RFI (Ed Hare), state that there was any type of RF hazard from BPL. It does pose a serious interference problem for anyone using HF, but not a health risk.
Re:RF Hazard? (Score:2)
I suppose you have an antenna that is really low to the ground and are operating at frequencies above whole body resonance. Compare your station to one operating at say, 14Mhz with 50 Watts into a dipole at 30 feet, you can be in compliance 2 fe
Re:RF Hazard? (Score:2)
Dozens to hundreds of watts at HF frequencies means little in the way of RF exsposure. Even during the first wavelength from the head end, there is not enough power to cause problems for people walking under the power lines. (IF they are about 30Ft in the air
Jury is still out on the danger. (Score:4, Interesting)
The interference problem is the greater of the two. Yes it will interfere with radio communications but the interference will be worse for BPL. Aircraft have the potential to cause interference over a wide area due to their altitude, but the tranmitter is relatively low power. The real problems will start when a ham operator can't talk to his buddy 20 miles away. They get tired of the interference so they kick in the linear amplifiers. Since the max leagal power for most of the bands is 1500 watts they have the potential to take out BPL in a very large area.
Power company has a network here in NY (Score:5, Informative)
They used the fact that they already own the poles, to string up their own fiber optic cable.
This, to me, is the primary indication that broadband over power lines just isn't going to happen. When even the power company doesn't believe in it, you know it's a dud.
Re:Power company has a network here in NY (Score:2)
One more time folks, say it with me "the USA is not the entire world"
Re:Power company has a network here in NY (Score:2)
FERGUS YE MUPPET THASH' THE WRONG HO.. *ZOT* *sizzle*
Ah buggrit, we'll jush' tell 'er Yanksh itsh fasht innernet...pash me the drambuie.
Are there 2 types of broadband-over-powerline? (Score:3, Informative)
Am I right in gathering that the systems described here use high power HF on powerlines to distribute over much longer distances than this?
Re:Are there 2 types of broadband-over-powerline? (Score:2, Informative)
1. Broadband over power line systems described here are all last-mile access systems for use on medium voltage (approx 1 kV to 35 kV) and low voltage (under 1 kV). These are for linking internet users to an ISP (either the power utility or someone partnering with the utility). These are broadband speed systems.
2. In home power line broadband for linking computers and other devices within the home over short distance. These are all low voltage
Power grid already has fiber... (Score:2, Informative)
ARRL! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:LANs (Score:2, Informative)
I have the power! (Score:5, Funny)
More voltage means more bandwidth!
Let me just up the wattage a little bit more!
Ahh! Ahh!
(Slump)
Yes, BPL is harmful (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not quite so ready to believe the health-realated concerns, but the interference problems that will result from an implementation of BPL are very real. I've seen a demonstration of BPL's interference at a local hamfest here in the Washington, DC area (For those interested, AMRAD will also be giving a presentation at the DC area Winterfest [viennawireless.org] hamfest in February). BPL makes a lot of noise on an HF receiver, across the entire tuning range! But what is potentially even worse is that a relatively small amount of power (I believe they gave the example of 10 watts into a dipole at reasonable proximity) is enough to cause a link to fail.
Undoubtedly, a ham radio operator's neighbors, and perhaps the power company, will put a lot of pressure on him to cease operating a ham radio. This is totally backwards! Let's revisit the Part 15 rules for a minute - the regulations that apply to unlicensed services, including BPL. It says that an unlicensed device MAY NOT cause harmful interference to a licensed service but an unlicensed device must accept any harmful interference received.
This basically means that the burden for resolving any interference problem is on the head of the unlicensed service, in this case, the power company - at least in theory. I have a hard time believing it will play out this way though. In fact, when the FCC asked for comments on a notice of inquiry with regards to relaxing part 15 standards, many power companies claimed that NO INTERFERENCE PROBLEM EXISTS, and it is up to other users to PROOVE it, before they should be required to act on it. This is a total reversal of the roles established by Part 15! And that is leaving aside the fact that there are several studies done by hams, including a very good one from AMRAD [fcc.gov], that do proove, both empiracally and mathematically, the interference threat. BPL promoters, including the heads at the FCC, have turned a blind eye.
HF radio is used to provide long-distance communications during disasters by many groups, including ham radio organizations, and FEMA. (FEMA has recently weighed in [fcc.gov] on the debate) It also carries shortwave broadcast from other countries, which would be sqaushed by interference.
It does not make sense that the FCC should allow an unlicensed user to render this huge chunk of spectrum totally useless to it's intended users. It's selfish and shortsighted.
Please write your congressperson. Make them aware of the problems BPL could bring.
Re:Yes, BPL is harmful (Score:5, Informative)
"As pointed out in numerous stories and reports from countries where BPL implementations have been tested, the unavoidable radiation from power lines and associated modems raises noise floor limits to an unacceptable level. This interference will severely impair FEMA's mission-essential HF radio operations in areas serviced by BPL technology. Tests have shown that in order for licensed transmitters to compensate
for this noise level, there would have to be an increase in the signal level on the order of
+30dB
6. FNARS utilizes transmitters that range from 1 kW to 10 kW in output power. An
increase in power of +30 dB to offset the increased noise floor would require a 10 kW
station to increase power output to 1 MW."
And the 30db figure came from tests in Finland, where they also shot down BPL.
FEMA's quotes: See Gerhard Latzin, "PLC for the present rejected by Finnish Telecommunication Minister", 25 May
2001, published on the Internet at http://www.darc.de/referate/emv/plc/plc-oh.pdf; Ministry of Public
Management, Home Affairs, Posts and Telecommunications, Japan, "Announcement of report by Power
Line Communication Study Group" 9 August 2002, published on the Internet at
http://www.soumu.go.jp/joho_tsusin/eng/Releas
Fockens, "PLC Measurements", 7 May 2002, published on the Internet at
http://www.darc.de/referate/emv/plc/VERON_PLC
And one other gem section:
"Currently, there is no alternative to HF radio
communications in terms of meeting national security and emergency preparedness
requirements at the national, state and local levels.
10. FNARS HF radio stations are normally located in residential areas that would be
serviced by Power Line Communication (PLC) systems. FEMA also utilizes HF radio
stations from other Government programs, including the Military Affiliate Radio System
(MARS), the US Air Force Auxiliary - Civil Air Patrol (CAP), and the Radio Amateur
Civil Emergency Service (RACES), which are similarly situated. The interference from
PLC would render these essential communications services useless.
2002, published on the Internet at http://www.radio.gov.uk/topics/interference/docum
Once upon a time... (Score:3, Informative)
The training was designed to simulate an major accident (if I remember it correct, it was an explosion of a chemical plant) and to practice the coordination of firefighters, the Red Cross, the police and several other organisations.
Linz, wich has some 18,000 households, is "Austrias powerline city", wich means, it has about 900 working powerline installations.
But these 900 installed plc units were enough to completly suppress the radio units used by some of the participants (e.g. the Red Cross).
These teams had to abandon the training, since communication was near impossible!
Imagine an real accident: No Red Cross or other ambulance teams! (In Austria, the Red Cross still has the major peace of the ambulance-business-pie).
Id rather get hurt on the countryside!
BPLis not an RF-safety proble, (Score:4, Informative)
Jackleg scheme (Score:2)
Piping RF onto the power transmission lines is a hair-brained idea put forth by the same crowd that brought us power brokering. Oh boy, that sure has been a panacea. Not! The Hams are up in arms for good reason. If this is deployed, we'll have lots of long wire antennas bristling with hash. Why is the FCC even considering such a cockamaimy notion? Michael Powell
It's here where I live (Score:2)
Re:FUD (Score:4, Informative)
Do you really know what the amateur radio community does for the public, rtp?
New radios for everybody! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:New radios for everybody! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Ham radio FUD (Score:5, Informative)
What? (Score:5, Insightful)
As far as "no clear TV or radio signal for you" goes, interference cases almost always trace back to poor shielding on consumer electronics devices, not dirty ham transmitters. If your TV can't deal with 1500 watts next door, I'm sure your local ham would be glad to put a passband on it. Which, as a result of ham radio, he knows how to do.
KB3CAX
Re:Gross Disinformation (Score:3, Interesting)
HOWEVER, the interference concern is VERY real. 250mW can go a long way - I'm not sure where you get your "few hundred meters" figure from. I know people who operate "QRP", a low-power mode, who regularly use similar power levels to talk to ham operators hundreds of miles away!
Let's not forget, a "transmission line" at 60 Hz is much more like an ANTENNA
Re:Judge for yourself (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Ham Radio vs. The network (Score:3)
I still say protecting the Ham Radio folks is the better option. In an emergency, those frequencies serve well as backup (sometimes primary) communication. This is one of the main reasons we have the FCC, to make sure that one group doesn't