BPL in the news

[W1RKW]

http://www.tvtechnology.com/features/news/2006.09.06-n_BPL.shtml

[k4kyv]

One positive aspect of that report is that it immediately mentions broadcast and other services, including TV reception, and not just amateur radio.  Therefore it doesn't leave the impression to the ignorant public that the only opposition to BPL is from a bunch of nerdy "ham radio" kooks who want to deny the benefits of high speed internet to the public at large in order to protect the "hobby" of one small special interest group.

[W1RKW]

The other thing too that I thought was good about the article was how it stress radio amateurs weren't against BPL but just the potential for interference.

[John Holotko]

The FCC is contradicting itself in as far as their  ruling goes. On one hand they want BPL and they insist that  BPL  muct move forward. At the same time they don;t want interference. They want their cake and they want to eat it too.  The very nature of the laws of physics dictates that when you pass that kind of carrier  current  over long unshielded wires slung high in the air they radiate, and they make quite effective antennas.  You can  mitigate it but mitigation by notching onlymeans the problem may be solved  in one part. Move elsewhere  on the spectrum and it's back. The only true mitigation is to turn the BPL off but then you no longer  have BPL.  You still have your  cake but you  can't eat it   So, how can the FCC advocate something if every high school and college physics textbook will explain that the laws of physics don't allow it.  Heck, I'd love  to be able  to put an object  down by having it stay  suspended in midair where I last lef tt but the laws of  physics don'tallow me to do that.

[W3SLK]

John said:

The FCC is contradicting itself in as far as their  ruling goes. On one hand they want BPL and they insist that  BPL  muct move forward. At the same time they don;t want interference. They want their cake and they want to eat it too.  The very nature of the laws of physics dictates that when you pass that kind of carrier  current  over long unshielded wires slung high in the air they radiate, and they make quite effective antennas.

That occurs when you have politicians, (or wantabe politicians) legislating the laws of physics. I think the technical side of the FCC realizes that this system is crap, (in the current state). But the bean counters and 'YES!' persons who run the business of the FCC, see many $$$ to be gleaned from a system like this. Look at it this way, how many different pieces of equipment would have to get type acceptance? What is the potential of fines being collected? How much money do I stand to get 'kicked-back' to me should I promote brand X's sytem over brand Y? The paramutations are endless.