[LINK] BPL

[Richard Chirgwin]

stephen at melbpc.org.au wrote:
>> OK, so we can't use the (power) lines ..
> 
> 
> Haha, somebody should tell the ACMA then, and the companies NOW doing it.
> 
> 
> Of the seven BPL trials currently reported on by the ACMA (Tas, NSW & Vic)
> 
> and reported here: http://www.acma.gov.au/WEB/STANDARD/946967/pc=PC_2846
> 
> notes at 45M/bps, ONE ham operator, from ONE trial, reported interference.

SL,

The page is somewhat out of date. For example, Aurora in Tasmania
launched commercial trials, and these were discontinued as uneconomic.

> 
>   http://www.acma.gov.au/webwr/lib284/measurements%20bpl%20emissions%
> 2011_01_2007.pdf
> 
> for which the ACMA report, "if Australia adopted the same limits as the
> FCC have mandated, the emissions detected at the premises would be below
> the limits,  and therefore of an acceptable level .. the levels detected
> would meet FCC limits"
> 
> 
>> .. do you mind not getting facts in the way of people's beliefs?
> 
> LINK doesn't mind at all putting facts in the way of people's beliefs :-)
> 
> BPL is important .. does anyone have any additional FACTS regarding this?

Let's line up a few facts.
- Aurora in Tas was discontinued ages ago.
- SP Ausnet discontinued its trial in about 2007.
- I cannot find any evidence that Country Energy turned its trial into a
commercial service.
http://m.zdnet.com.au/339285857.htm

- All wide-area (ie, excluding in-home) BPL systems are fully
proprietary. This makes the viability of a commercial service completely
dependent on the system vendor. Standardisation efforts have gained no
headway. There is no completed IEEE standard.

RC
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> Stephen
> _______________________________________________
> Link mailing list
> Link at mailman.anu.edu.au
> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
>