Google, etc. drop $100m on broadband over power lines
Listen up, Google's sick of you slowing up their operations with your dialup service, making their servers wait around to send the results of the 800 searches you each perform every day. So they're stepping it up by dropping $100 million into Current Communications Group, LLC (along with The Hearst Corporation, and Goldman Sachs), who are apparently England's biggest broadband over powerline company. Take that, NetZero.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Sawhney89 @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM
That is awesome........ Good Move on Google's Part.... It's going to help both companies stock.
No Spin Wizard @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM
Is "broadband of powerline" supposed to be "broadband on powerline"? Any mention of broadband on powerline should include a reference to how it affects amateur radio operators.
doctord @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM
BPL is a proven failure, and wherever it has been tested around the nation it has been shut down or severely restricted within a short time. The reason: first, power companies are in the power business, not the communications business, and don't have the ifrastructure to keep the equipment maintained and operating properly. So, they outsource that job, which places another layer of bureaucracy (read cost and time) between them and the customer. Second, and most important, the multiplexed data signals are carried over the powerlines by RF signals which interferes with any nearby police, fire, ambulance, aircraft, ham, and other radio services, and try as they might, the BPL folks can't get the interference to clear up so that reasonable radio communications can take place near powerlines. Can you think of where you might drive in a city and NOT be close to a powerline? The Bush administration is pushing it, so the FCC keeps on flogging it as viable, but even they have begun to lose heart. If Google knows something all the scientists don't, then more power to them -- otherwise, they are going to lose their shirts.
Galley @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM
My friend lives in Bumfuck, SC. His crappy phone line can only manage 33Kbps. Ouch!
Ryan @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM
Obviously Google sees some future in it, $100m isn't something you just throw aound. Even when you're Google.
Gary @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM
This is very, very sad. It boggles my mind how something so scientifically unsound has made it so far. It has been proven time and time again how BPL totally trashes not only nearby, but distant radio communication. The signals are radio frequency, and power lines make perfect antennas. How can it get any more simple than that? Seems like with enough lawyers, we should be able to litigate the earth to the center of the universe again. Way to go Google, for biting off the hands of not only the Ham Radio operators, but local, state, and government authorities that depend on long-distance HF. The only consolation is that when terror strikes, it may knock out the power to the BPL infrastructure so dire communication can take place.
Matt @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM
If Google's involved, and they're plugging millions of dollars into it, then there's something they know that you don't. End of story.
TJ @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM
All the above trashing of BPL is sad and mis-informed. Studies have shown that there is no interference to HAM by a properly functioning BPL network. Full scale deployments in Ohio and Virginia have been rather successful, as have many deployments in Europe and Asia.
The main question isn't really about interference; it is a matter of cost effectiveness and real usable bandwidth.
R. DEN @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM
It takes GOOGLE`s $100 Million to bring BPL- Hi-speed Broadband Over Power Lines to the spotlight !!!
Con-Edison, Ambient and Earthlink BPL demo was a success in New York City but wasn`t given much priority until Google annouces BPL investment !!!
re: http://ambientcorp.com/cmt/downfile/298_9_file.pdf
doctord @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM
Actually, it depends on how you define "success." If success means you give broadband service to one group while trashing all the services in the neighborhood that depend upon traditional RF communications, the yeah, it was a success. And to the earlier post that said a properly functioning BPL does not interfere with RF users, all those "studies" were done by industry-supported groups. When you get an independent group to do such a study, why, lo' and behold, that pesky RF jus' keeps poppin' up all over the spectrum and every time those poor ol' BPL folks stomp out one spur, another pops up in another part of the spectrum. Yep, sure sounds like "success" to me.
RE: http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/HTML/plc/
Gary Pearce KN4AQ @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM
"Studies have shown that there is no interference to HAM by a properly functioning BPL network. Full scale deployments in Ohio and Virginia have been rather successful, as have many deployments in Europe and Asia."
As they used to say in math class: show your work. What studies show BPL doesn't cause interference? None! But the ARRL has tons of evidence, some gathered by the NTIA, some by the ARRL lab, some by hams in the field (including me) and other testing organizations that shows that there is significant interference. Most of the trial areas are still very small, so few hams are affected... so far.
The Cinergy trial in Ohio has been fairly successful in reducing interference to hams. But they still cover up Shortwave Broadcast stations.
A full-rollout BPL system will fill the HF radio spectrum with "radio pollution." That's a bad idea when there are plenty of alternate technologies available.
R. DEN @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM
GOOGLE`S $100M new ACCESS BPL investment just proves that INNOVATION for the GOOD OF MAJORITY is a PRIORITY !!!
Although hams, or Amateur radio lobbyers OVERREACT to this new technology no matter what... saying... planes will collide from interference... emergency transmission will be blocked... but wait.... PPL in Philadelphia, in Virginia, in Maryland... in Ohio.. rolling out BPL trials and some Commercial deployments BUT WE NEVER HEARD OF AIRPLANES COLLIDING, HELICOPTER CRASHING... what does this means... who paid the hams lobbying against BPL... the big telecoms or CABLE operators ????
FYI: AMBIENT CEO and CON-EDISON`s Cris Olert interview direct links:
http://www.etopiamedia.net/bplw/audio/coned1.wma
http://www.etopiamedia.net/bplw/audio/johnjoyce1.wma
Matt L. @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM
This disturbs me for all the reasons mentioned here already. Google's 100 million would have been better spent adding systems designed to carry high speed data, not 50/60hz alternating current. These systems were not designed to carry radio frequency and are seriously inefficient when pushed to do so. Shame on you, Google.
Tom (kc8dhx) @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM
"Who paid the hams lobbying against BPL... the big telecoms or CABLE operators ????"
Uhh no, We pay out of our pockets to protect a service and hobby we use to provide communication in the event of a disaster. The ARRL is membership based and we pay out dues to protect this service/hobby by joining the group.
Every year we are put into service by various communities that are in need of communcation when that pesky hurricane or brush fire destroys thier communication gear.
I personaly have gone into disaster areas and provided police/fire and FEMA when they need 2 way communication to do their job. BPL will stand in the way of us providing this service.
Craig @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM
We've had Current's BPL service in Cincinnati for about a year now and it's excellent. Fast download speeds (2-3mbps), blazing upload speeds (3-4mbps), fixed IP, and no bandwidth limits for under $45 a month. The fact that it comes in through a wall outlet is interesting, but not particularly important IMO.
Craig @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM
Oh, and my neighbor's a ham and he's not seen one iota of interference since the system was installed.
Spec @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM
http://www.gobpl.com/
BPL is as big of a joke as a water powerd car or he so called 'hydrogen economy'. Do a google search for BPL deployment. The providers I've seen are offering 256K for ~$30/mo. Pathetic. If that's all they can muster, then BPL is going suffer a still birth.
Al @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM
"We've had Current's BPL service in Cincinnati for about a year now and it's excellent. Fast download speeds (2-3mbps), blazing upload speeds (3-4mbps), fixed IP, and no bandwidth limits for under $45 a month. The fact that it comes in through a wall outlet is interesting, but not particularly important IMO."
Craig, my girlfriends brother lives in Cincinnati and was seriously considering getting it. Would you recommend it over cable?
Richard @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM
TJ: You have no idea what you're talking about. Time and time again the ARRL has shown, with unequivocal proof, that even when the power companies claim they've stripped all the interference out of the air, they've done no such thing. Notch filtering only goes so far.
I suggest you take the power-company-colored blinders off and do some research. You are sorely mistaken.
DanAmpX @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM
Excuse my ignorance guys, I'm not too knowledgable when it comes to all this data transmission over power lines, but couldn't something be developed to prevent any interference that might come as a result? Or something else, I don't know...
Or is doing something like that as feasible as expecting Microsoft to release the Longhorn OS within the next five years? (note the sarcasm)
In theory though, you can't deny that BPL would be awesome if it were more widely available. Without all this 'drama' of course. =)
Colin Miller @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM
Until a ham radio signal can deliver porn faster than broadband over powerlines, broadband over powerlines will win over the people of this planet.
14355BPL @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM
imho... this is the reason why GOOGLE is heavy on HI-SPEED BPL INTERNET ACCESS:
http://www.uplc.utc.org/file_depot/0-10000000/0-10000/7966/folder/23284/UPLC_broadband.ram
K4WGE @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM
Colin (#22), you are a cynic.
And you're probably right.
14355BPL @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM
http://ambientcorp.com/cmt/downfile/298_9_file.pdf
14355BPL @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM
GOOGLE wants hi-bandwidth upload/download BROADBAND OVER POWERLINES internet access for speedy web searching...imho !!!
imho...this is the reason why it chooses CINERGY/CURRENT COMMUNICATIONS BPL that just Commercially rolled out last March 2004:
www.current.net/WatchTheVideo/
Watchout for CON-EDISON/EARTHLINK BPL rollout in New York City too !!!
www.conedplc.com/index.phtml
www.earthlinkconed.net/index.html
AMBIENT BPL modem they are using:
http://www.earthlinkconed.net/images/EarthLink_QSG.pdf
Harry-O @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM
BPL has obvious potential not just in rural areas of the US, but in many developing countries of the world where the electric infrastructure is relatively well developed compared to the telecom. This would open up new opportunities for growth for VOIP, internet, etc. in areas where such services are needed. Even if there is "proven" RF interference, I doubt ham operators are very big in Africa and Asia. C'mon guys - it's a cute hobby for us rich folk! Google thinks big and they look at the world - not just a few hammies in the US....
Mark Nallick @ Dec 19th 2005 1:02AM
I think the problem starts with the FCC authorizing BPL as a test rollout. Michael Powell was the one who ok'd it and then moved on to work in the private sector... hmm I wonder where he is working now..(I didn't Google his name). Anyhow BPL (broadband over powerline) uses unshielded transmission lines (your power lines to your house and home wiring), to move data. The problem is that you will get a mixed bag of problems using this technology. Never mind affecting Ham Operators who saved the day during the recent hurricanes, what about the other interference from the harmonics (a naturally occurring product caused by RF transmission of a signal). Harmonics can be described as a multiple of the fundamental frequency used to generate a signal. As an example a 25mhz signal might have harmonics at 50mhz, 100mhz, as well as other frequencies. I chose 25mhz to demonstrate the effect on your FM radio. That signal might "block" your reception of that favorite radio station.
BPL supporters have claimed they can "notch" or filter any problems. My question is that with broadband (high speed) internet access needing so much bandwidth how do you notch or filter ALL the interfering frequencies. Lastly what happen to all the FCC Engineers that were at the FCC prior to Clinton. They have more lawyers than the State of Florida on staff. I'm sure they understand frequency auctions but I seriously doubt they have an clue as to what RF theory is.
By the way there have been several complaints from licensed radio operators (i.e. public service radio, aviation, etc.) when BPL is employed. The technology just isn't ready for prime time yet.....