If knowledge is power, the Internet is its embodiment. High-speed Internet pushes this knowledge/technology nexus even further, offering unparalleled access to information and opportunities for economic growth.
Jennifer Chidester
Jenna Gasper
Broadband over Power Lines, or BPL, could be the answer to bring high-speed Internet to the next level.
BPL vendors have promoted this solution as a cost-efficient alternative to cable-modem or DSL services. And legislators have hopped on the bandwagon touting BPL as a necessary competitor to phone and cable companies, who currently corner the market on high-speed Internet.
The Challenges
In addition to the "wait-and-see" attitude common to the appearance of any new technology, there are some significant interference issues related to BPL. Cable and telephone companies use shielded coaxial cable, which protects the signal wire from interference. Power lines have virtually no shielding. Also, a BPL modem is considered an unlicensed device, similar to a cordless phone or garage-door opener. The FCC governs these devices to ensure that CB radios, air-traffic control and government channels can communicate free of interference. In October 2004, the FCC amended Part 15 of the rules to establish specific interference mitigation requirements for BPL systems.
A third risk to BPL market entry is lack of industry standards. Until the FCC is able to work with existing vendors and establish standards, many vendors will continue testing and deploying proprietary solutions. This non-uniform approach further contributes to ambiguity about how successfully this technology will play out on a larger scale.
Challenges to this technology will most likely come from both the utility and telecom industries. According to the FCC, at least two companies provide high-speed service in nearly 75 percent of all U.S. ZIP codes, so BPL could be seen as a serious competitive threat.
Additionally, there is inconsistency in terms of federal regulation that might discourage BPL development by utility companies. While DSL is subject to regulation, cable is not. BPL would likely be regulated because it is controlled by the utilities. It is expected that there would be concerns within the utility industry over federal interference and regulation in this new market.
Pilots Begin
In 2004, the U.S. began tests with BPL in Manassas, Va. Since then, BPL pilots have launched in Europe, Austria, Spain, Italy and Portugal. Intel recently announced plans to launch a trial phase of broadband Internet over power lines in India in the next eight weeks. In 2005 a Senate Bill was introduced that directed the California Public Utilities Commission to encourage the deployment of BPL.
Some recent headlines from U.S.-based BPL pilot programs show
the experiment is moving ahead. The primary reasons listed in these articles for deployment include access and cost-efficiency. From historic homes without fiber-optic access to new Manhattan high-rise projects, pilot programs are emerging across the country.
In September 2005, San Diego-based SDG&E stepped-up its efforts and deployed a Phase I trial in Kearny Mesa. While this pilot consists of only 10 SDG&E employees, it does mark a step forward in terms of local interest in BPL's technological promise.
The FCC, California state legislators and those involved in pilot programs are open to exploring BPL as a solution for bridging the high-speed Internet gap -- bringing broadband access to all communities, regardless of geographic reach or socioeconomic status.
With knowledge as power in the Information Age, and technology a pivotal component of the global economy, communities across the United States must develop a progressive plan for broadband infrastructure if they want to attract and maintain the creative class of workers who are vital to ensuring global competitiveness.
Reader Comments
Roger Halstead:
Something that should be realized. Proponents keep saying no new costly infrastructure would be needed, but unfortunately due to the very nature of BPL that is not quite true in most cases. Also BPL has been touted for use in rural and sparsely populated areas, but those are the areas where it is the most expensive to implement.
By their nature, power lines carrying BPL signals radiate and thus the signals grow weaker. That means they must be re-amplified every few thousand feet or less. Running those signals through repeaters adds latency (delays) which can quickly create problems for streaming video, VOIP, or gamers. To avoid, or minimize this, the signal must be re-fed periodically. That means some sort of infrastructure must be set up pretty much in parallel to re-feed the signal to the power lines.
Another problem already mentioned is the susceptibility of some BPL installations to relatively low powered transmitters near by. It is possible in some cases for one of these signals to not just block a single frequency, but to completely block the segment of the system. If low power can do this you should be able to imagine what would happen if a BPL installation runs any where near a high powered transmitter that operates on a frequency to which the repeaters would respond.
At present there are apparently a couple of systems that appear to be working well, quite a number of trials that have failed, and a few that claim to be doing well even though they have outstanding complaints against them.
For BPL to truly become both economically and operationally competitive with more conventional systems a lot of work remains to be done.
