Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

FCC's Duplicity On BPL Revealed

Posted by kdawson on Fri May 15, 2009 09:11 AM
from the cooking-the-books dept.
eldavojohn writes "Ars has a summary of the curious events surrounding the death of broadband over power lines (BPL). We've discussed BPL's trials and advances here many times. The Federal Communications Commission's go-ahead was halted last year by a federal court, after a suit by the American Radio Relay League over claims of unacceptable radio interference from BPL. The DC Court of Appeals judge noted, 'There is little doubt that the [FCC] deliberately attempted to exclude from the record evidence adverse to its position.' The ARRL's FOIA request to obtain non-redacted documents finally bore fruit under the Obama administrations more open FOIA guidelines. The ARRL's preliminary analysis of the released documents point out a few critical areas where the FCC redacted data that is clearly adverse to the claims of BPL proponents. By rights, this ought to lay BPL to rest once and for all." A story at Broadband Reports notes that BPL is dying on its own, as most of the vendors who had been testing it "have since moved on to promote smart electrical grid functionality."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Broadband Over Power Lines vs. Radio Relayers 147 comments
amaiman writes "Recently, broadband Internet access has been increasing around the country. These broadband signals, while providing Internet access to remote communities that would normally not be able to receive broadband, are causing enormous interference to the radio spectrum. This article details some of the problems, and a video available on the American Radio Relay League's (ARRL) site shows exactly how much interference the broadband power lines can cause. Detailed information is also available on the ARRL site."
[+] Technology: Electric Companies Get Involved With Broadband 221 comments
Billosaur writes "The Marketplace Morning Report on NPR has an interesting piece on how electric companies are getting into the high-speed Internet business with 'Broadband over Power Lines', or BPL." From the article: "By purchasing the right equipment power companies can quickly offer Internet service to millions of new customers. There are several pilot projects being launched in the US, including one in the Pittsburgh suburb of Monroeville. That service is being offered by Duquesne Broadband -- a spinout of the local power company.'"
[+] Technology: FCC Dealt Setback In BPL Push 177 comments
SonicSpike writes in with word that an appeals court has dealt a setback to the FCC's plans to encourage broadband over power lines. The court ruled that the FCC erred when it withheld parts of the studies it had used in arriving at its position on BPL. The court did not rule that the FCC's decision was incorrect or that it should be revisited. According to the article, about 5,000 people nationwide subscribe to BPL in 35 pilot projects. We've been discussing BPL for years. "...a federal appeals court has sided in part with amateur radio operators who challenged rules designed to speed the nascent Internet service's rollout. When setting rules for BPL operators nearly two years ago, the Federal Communications Commission said it was trying to encourage deployment of a 'third pipe' to compete with cable and DSL services, while establishing limits aimed at protecting public safety, maritime, radio-astronomy, aeronautical navigation, and amateur radio operators from harmful interference. The American Radio Relay League, which represents amateur... radio operators, however, promptly sued the agency, contending that the FCC's approach was insufficient to ward off interference with its radios and inconsistent with its previous rules. On Friday, the U.S. Appeals Court for the District of Columbia on Friday issued a ruling (PDF) that took issue with the way the FCC arrived at its rules."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by Jerrry (43027) on Friday May 15 2009, @09:15AM (#27966001)

    BPL isn't really (and never was) about delivering Internet service over electric lines. It was geared more towards smart power meters that the utilities could read remotely rather than sending an army of meter readers out to every house in the country once a month to read the meters.

    • You don't need much bandwidth to read out a few digits....

      The 'B' in BPL stands for Broadband, which was definitly intended to be used to send consumers large amount of porn....

      • by TinBromide (921574) on Friday May 15 2009, @09:24AM (#27966143)
        Broadband may mean high bandwidth in most marketing contexts, but it also means sending multiple signals over a single line. I doubt that they're sending those digits modulated into the 60hz AC current so they're multiplexing the line in a broadband fashion. Broadband may still apply if each house has its own meter frequency that is sent over a single trunk line coming from the transformer up to the local power station regardless of the bandwidth used.
        • Actually, the way they do this is using an address layer like most any other protocol. A bunch of different topologies exist, but generally speaking, each monitored node will be uniquely addressable with a value embedded in the data frames rather than just by frequency. Multiple frequencies are used to dynamically adjust to the presence of various types of noise.
      • PS, porn from the power company, that is both shocking and electrifying... I'm sure I'm going to catch some static from that, but I couldn't care watt happens to my current karma because of these charged puns.
      • Broadband means sending multiple signals over different frequencies on one line, as opposed to baseband which is one signal on one frequency. It actually has no technical meaning that involves necessarily high bandwidth.
        • Sounds like my old 14.4 modem was broadband.
          • Yes that's ultimately where the term originates for data communications. "Narrowband" referred to the 0-to-8000 hertz bandwidth of a telephone line, whereas "broadband" referred to a DSL line that has no upper limit (except the increasing noise as you go higher in frequency).

            Now broadband is little more than a marketing term which means "fast". It's gradually lost any technical definition. BPL aka Broadband over Phone Lines could just as easily be called "Fast Internet over phone lines". That's really a

          • Not quite. simply utilizing different frequencies within a single base (i.e. sending 00110011 vs 01010101 and so on) is not the same as utilizing several frequency bands.

            Imagine if you could tune to every AM radio station available at once, but instead of music, they were sending information. That is similar to downstream broadband. While your modem is limited in that it can only listen to 1 station and get the audible range of frequencies from 20-15000hz (not sure what the filtering cut off is exactly), b
    • You're years behind the times as that army is already virtually gone. They've long since been replaced by meters that can be read by simply driving down the street and interrogating them as they go by.

    • Now, all we need is BoWL, Broadband over Water Lines!

    • Jerry, with such an obvious "spin" statement, I have to wonder which one of the FCC's pet BPL investors you represent or work for?

      From day one of this fiasco, BPL was touted as the great "last mile" technology for rural America. It was to make easy, fast and reliable Internet connectivity available to Ma and Pa Kettle. Now, that the FCC has been proven to be complicit in foisting this ineffective and flawed technology (that has been similarly abandoned by almost every other country that's tried it) on a g
  • SOP for the FCC (Score:4, Insightful)

    by R2.0 (532027) on Friday May 15 2009, @09:20AM (#27966075)

    The FCC picks winners and losers all the time. Ask the folks who had private mobile radio licenses when the FCC decided that the frequencies could be better utilized - by Nextel. Most of those licenses were for local emergency services, and we all know how well Nextel worked for them when the time came.

    • Yeah but the FCC should pick the winners and losers based on all available data, and then reach a rational conclusion. There's nothing rational about pre-judging who will be the winner, and then refusing to look at data that shows the winner has flaws. That's more like a religion than a proper-operating government. Faith and blind devotion to a cause, not reason.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        Faith and blind devotion to a cause, not reason.

        In other words, the Democratic and Republican parties?

  • by commodore64_love (1445365) on Friday May 15 2009, @09:26AM (#27966171)

    *This* is why I don't want the government running businesses (mail, trains, hospitals, schools). The people in power use that power to censor information contrary to their personal beliefs, and they push agendas we are forced to adopt (like the "feel good" philosophy that is failing to teach our kids anything). It's a rigged system, a monopoly, not freedom or liberty.

    The FCC did exactly the same thing with the Whitespace/TV Band devices -

    - they ignored testimony and in-the-field research that demonstrated such devices interfere with television reception. They shoved through the okay on this, and in a few years, over-the-air reception of television (or FM radio) will be near-impossible. Instead people will just see/hear digital hash because the teenager next door is surfing on channel 8 with his Ipod. The FCC has essentially killed free-to-view TV/radio.

    I hate monopolies, whether it's a private monopoly like Comcast or a government one. A free market is preferable in almost-all cases. We need the FCC monopoly over the radio spectrum, but that doesn't mean we need to extend FCC-style corruption to other areas. We need fewer monopolies, not more.

    • by Gordonjcp (186804) on Friday May 15 2009, @09:28AM (#27966213) Homepage

      *This* is why I don't want the government running businesses (mail, trains, hospitals, schools). The people in power use that power to censor information contrary to their personal beliefs, and they push agendas we are forced to adopt (like the "feel good" philosophy that is failing to teach our kids anything). It's a rigged system, a monopoly, not freedom or liberty.

      But that's the problem. The goverment *isn't* running the show, private industry is.

      Imagine what your country would be like if the RIAA were in charge of running the roads.

      • Imagine what your country would be like if the RIAA were in charge of running the roads.

        I'm sure they would damn well shut down those "performances" of 120 dB thuds coming out of cars driven by dazed and deaf teenagers. I'd cut them a significant degree of slack for that alone.

        Now, quit driving your Rice Krispy or whatever on my lawn.

      • Excellent Sig.

        Your analogy on the roads is a little...strange. outside of Federal roads, most localities in the U.S. are responsible for maintaining their own roads, and it's usually a blatant crony deal.

        • Your analogy on the roads is a little...strange. outside of Federal roads, most localities in the U.S. are responsible for maintaining their own roads, and it's usually a blatant crony deal.

          Didn't know that. In that case, you already see the problem ;-)

          • Another flaw with your analogy is that RIAA is only a threat because government gives them the power to sue $150,000 per song downloaded. Without that collusion with the government, RIAA would be powerless.

            So the real threat is not RIAA, which by itself is no more harmful than a puppy. The real threat is the government and its use of force or coercion against the citizens. Giving the government even MORE power is only going to make things worse. A better solution is to make government impotent, then the

      • Imagine what your country would be like if the RIAA were in charge of running the roads.

        The difference between RIAA and the Government is that RIAA can't send well armed goons to knock down your door if you choose not to do business with them......

        • You should probably tell them that [laweekly.com]. It looks like their prior strategy of just borrowing actual feds for raids wasn't good enough for them.
          • Sounds like the man should have had the balls to stand up for his rights rather than meekly surrender them to a bunch of private citizens with zero actual power. If they attempted that with me I would tell them to fuck off and come back with an actual court order or law enforcement officer. If they persisted I'd take whatever steps I deemed appropriate to defend myself.

          • The "RIAA mall cops" have no more power to arrest me than you do. This news does not cause fear to rattle my bones. House Speaker Pelosi on the other hand.....

            - Tax
            - Jail
            - Draft into army and send you to die in some mudhole in 'Nam or Afghanistan

            I love my country but fear my Congress. And my president (both current and previous).

      • Imagine what your country would be like if the RIAA were in charge of running the roads

        I think you are confusing things a bit, the problem with the RIAA is not that it's a private organization, but that it's a monopoly.

        Private roads exist in many countries. In France and Italy, where I sometimes travel on business, the main roads are private, you pay for each kilometer you drive. The system works fine, at least the pavement is in *much* better shape than most of California's state freeways.

      • >>>The goverment *isn't* running the show, private industry is.

        I cannot make any sense of your sentence, unless I conclude you have your head buried in the sand. Government runs the local mail business, they run the K-12 schools, and they run passenger rail, and in every case it's a monopoly with all the negative facets thereof (lack of choice, poor service, mistreatment of customers).

        Perhaps you were thinking of healthcare, which you are correct is still private, but that's still better than a go

    • ...whether it's a private monopoly like Comcast...

      I think Verizon is showing that isn't the case anymore.

      • A duopoly's not much better. For both Cable and Phone internet providers, they are granted an exclusive license by the local government, which means blocking-out competition.

      • Yes, in select areas. I see 20 states that have no FIOS at all and and lots of major cities lacking it.

        FIOS map [dslreports.com]

    • by fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) on Friday May 15 2009, @09:44AM (#27966493) Journal
      While I agree that the FCC is riddled with rot, and I'm very much in favor of freedom as a goal, the notion that the free market is more honest seems dubious at best.

      The trouble is, private entities are generally quite responsive to customer requirements. This is their virtue, in most cases; but it can also be a huge vice. Institutional Review Boards, for instance, are supposed to verify that clinical trials are being conducted with adequate safeguards for the welfare of research subjects. The companies that hire them, though, are attempting to buy IRB approval, which is what they want, not ethical oversight, which is what they need. Shockingly enough, "customer service" quickly goes from basic efficiency to telling the customer exactly what they want to hear. Arbitration agents tend to work the same way. Any large company that habitually includes mandatory binding arbitration clauses in its contracts(this almost definitely means your bank, your credit card company, often your telco, quite frequently your car dealership, among others) will be a repeat buyer of arbitration services, probably hundreds or thousands of cases a year. You, on the other hand, might be buying a few instances a lifetime. Wholly unsurprisingly, arbiters overwhelmingly find in favor of their real customers, and ones that don't typically find themselves without work.

      Regulatory capture is a real, and very important, problem; but government corruption is only one of its forms and it crops up, more or less inescapably, anywhere you have a situation where somebody needs to be told something they don't want to hear in order to protect the rights and interests of others. More specifically, it usually crops up when one party has a small, but extremely concentrated, interest in something, and a much larger party has a larger; but highly diffuse countervailing interest in the same thing. It is a hard problem.
    • *This* is why I don't want the government running businesses (mail, trains, hospitals, schools). The people in power use that power to censor information contrary to their personal beliefs, and they push agendas we are forced to adopt (like the "feel good" philosophy that is failing to teach our kids anything). It's a rigged system, a monopoly, not freedom or liberty.

      You're deluding yourself. *Whoever* is running businesses, government or private, will use what whatever power they have to censor informatio

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      With a decent signal, whitespace devices are supposed to avoid that channel. So in areas served with a local transmitter, that shouldn't be an issue. Those that will be negatively effected will be those in "fringe" areas. While that sucks, it is a small minority and they were likely receiving out of area transmissions. IMO, if the signal can't be received with "rabbit ears", it should be OK to use another device there. That might mean that some people have to get better antennas for TV. And some might lose

    • As bad as government agencies are, businesses running things for profit can and does cause MORE damage. When corporations censor facts they don't like, they're not even breaking the law and there is no FOIA that might eventually force them to cough up the evidence. Just look at the fine job the Federal Reserve did keeping the economy stable!

      Corporations don't even have to maintain a facade of being primarily in the public interest, much less actually BEING in the public interest.

      Of course, it IS possible to

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 15 2009, @09:27AM (#27966203)

    It's still working in Manassas, Virginia. If you want full duplex 32 kbps for $24.95/month that is.

    The contractor, Comtec, that ran the program has pulled out and it is now managed directly through the city's utilities department.

    • If you want full duplex 32 kbps for $24.95/month that is.

      My v.34+ USR Courier gave me that sometime around 1996 as I recall......

  • by MrSaxonite (1521355) on Friday May 15 2009, @09:36AM (#27966335)

    The real problem with broadband over powerline is you need alot of bandwidth, at the low frequencys that are called the AM band, and the shortwave band; which would not be so bad, if the cables they used for this were like the one the cable tv company used, but the powerlines are not shielded cables, anything that goes over them leaks energy all over the place, basicly overloading all the cheap electronics with rf recievers in them, yet unlike the cable tv companies, the power companies don't think you want to steal their signals... although I've read of many stealing power when the lines go right over their house or barns, which have huge transformers hidden in em

    it's bugs us ham radio people the most, cause, the way to test if it was causing crazy ass static to overwhlem all the nice signals we used to get from foriegn countries, (which is how we make our free long distance phone calls, be it analog, or digital, wheather talking, typing, or sending pictures) was not to listen to the radio, no, instead it was the signal level at the closest powerlines and the fcc's version of how quick the signal is supposed to drop off.... hence this ugly argument, and the desire to hide the facts as to how it was decided.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      although I've read of many stealing power when the lines go right over their house or barns, which have huge transformers hidden in em

      That's an urban legend. The Mythbusters tried it [wikipedia.org] and were able to steal a whooping eight millivolts.

    • I didn't understand most of what you said (especially paragraph two which read like English that's not). In brief, I think you were saying BPL turns the power lines into giant transmitters, and these transmitters block AM, Shortwave, FM, TV, Cellphone, and other wireless communications. In other words, it's a bad idea.

  • Good Riddance (Score:3, Insightful)

    by brain1 (699194) on Friday May 15 2009, @09:36AM (#27966349)
    It's about time this whole lamebrain flawed "technology" finally was put in the grave. There was a lot more than just Amateur Radio at stake. Military, Shipboard, and Aircraft use the 3-30 MHz band as well an I think they wouldn't have been as nice as the ARRL.
  • Yay. After seeing the reports on what it would do to the radio spectrum, I was worried some guy in his office somewhere would just stamp the 'OK' on it. Thank you ARRL and all involved. Maybe I should renew my membership now... meh.
    • by Gordonjcp (186804) on Friday May 15 2009, @09:48AM (#27966577) Homepage

      In contrast to BPL, powerline ethernet is doing quite well and has some nice products (I'd suggest it to anyone over wireless in a home any day - much faster and better range).

      Unfortunately it causes the same sort of interference as BPL. One of my neighbours has just recently had his powerline ethernet kit taken away because it was causing interference from broadcast AM at 500kHz or so right up to about 150MHz. Two doors down it was enough to completely disrupt the 2m amateur band, and a couple of hundred metres away it was enough to disrupt the VHF lowband railway signalling system...

    • The problem with powerline ethernet is the price. I'm essentially paying $150 for two network jacks.