From: JBellows K0QB

To:
;n0b
etcom.com

Cc: ;

Sent: 4/27/2004 2:32:10 PM

Subject: [TCDXA-list] BPL Comments of President Bush im
Minneapolis on April 26th

The following is from the President's speech in Minneapolis on
April 26, 2004. Note the last line of paragraph four.
Particularly note the comment "(s)o technical standards need to
be changed to encourage that."

"Now, the use of broadband has tripled since 2000 from 7 million
subscriber lines to 24 million. That's good. But that's way short
of the goal for 2007. And so -- by the way, we rank 10th amongst
the industrialized world in broadband technology and its
availability. That's not good enough for America. Tenth is 10
spots too low as far as I'm concerned. (Applause.)

Broadband technology must be affordable. In order to make sure it
gets spread to all corners of the country, it must be affordable.
We must not tax broadband access. If you want broadband access
throughout the society, Congress must ban taxes on access.
(Applause.)

Secondly, a proper role for the government is to clear regulatory
hurdles so those who are going to make investments do so.
Broadband is going to spread because it's going to make sense for
private sector companies to spread it so long as the regulatory
burden is reduced -- in other words, so long as policy at the
government level encourages people to invest, not discourages
investment.

And so here are some smart things to do: One, increase access to
federal land for fiberoptic cables and transmission towers. That
makes sense. As you're trying to get broadband spread throughout
the company, make sure it's easy to build across federal lands.
One sure way to hold things up is that the federal lands say, you
can't build on us. So how is some guy in remote Wyoming going to
get any broadband technology? Regulatory policy has got to be
wise and smart as we encourage the spread of this important
technology. There needs to be technical standards to make
possible new broadband technologies, such as the use of
high-speed communication directly over power lines. Power lines
were for electricity; power lines can be used for broadband
technology. So the technical standards need to be changed to
encourage that.

And we need to open up more federally controlled wireless
spectrum to auction in free public use, to make wireless
broadband more accessible, reliable, and affordable. Listen, one
of the technologies that's coming is wireless. And if you're
living out in -- I should -- I was going to say Crawford, Texas,
but it's not -- maybe not nearly as remote. (Laughter.) How about
Terlingua, Texas? There's not a lot of wires out there. But
wireless technology is going to change all that so long as
government policy makes sense.

And we're going to continue to support the Federal Communications
Commission. Michael Powell -- Chairman Michael Powell, under his
leadership, his decision to eliminate burdensome regulations on
new broadband networks availability to homes. In other words,
clearing out the underbrush of regulation, and we'll get the
spread of broadband technology, and America will be better for
it. (Applause.) "

I thought you would be interested. Perhaps you might think about
expressing your views on the BPL issue to President Bush. You may
want to check the ARRL Website on this. I expect Jim Haynie will
be sending a letter to President Bush on behalf of ARRL. The mail
and email address for the President should be available on the
Web page.

73,

Jay Bellows, KØQB

In article .net,
says...


The following is from the President's speech in Minneapolis on
April 26, 2004.

"Now, the use of broadband has tripled since 2000 from 7 million
subscriber lines to 24 million. That's good. But that's way short
of the goal for 2007. And so -- by the way, we rank 10th amongst
the industrialized world in broadband technology and its
availability. That's not good enough for America. Tenth is 10
spots too low as far as I'm concerned. (Applause.)

Looks like his arithmetic is almost as good as his
grammar. He wants us to be 0th? 8^)

--
+----------------------------------------------+
| Bob Schreibmaier K3PH | E-mail: |
| Kresgeville, PA 18333 | http://www.dxis.org |
+----------------------------------------------+

Bob Schreibmaier wrote:
availability. That's not good enough for America. Tenth is 10
spots too low as far as I'm concerned. (Applause.)

Looks like his arithmetic is almost as good as his
grammar. He wants us to be 0th? 8^)

Well, that could just mean he's been spending his spare time learning
how to programgrin...
--
Doug Smith W9WI
Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66
http://www.w9wi.com

"Doug Smith W9WI" wrote in message
...
Bob Schreibmaier wrote:
availability. That's not good enough for America. Tenth is 10
spots too low as far as I'm concerned. (Applause.)

Looks like his arithmetic is almost as good as his
grammar. He wants us to be 0th? 8^)

Well, that could just mean he's been spending his spare time
learning
how to programgrin...
--

A friend of mine, K0TO, said If this wasn't the same Man who
declared that he was going to start a program to go to Mars, the
he was going to build an anti-missile system, that he was going
to..... he would be more worried. It is an election year(has been
for more than 36 months) and the objective is to promise
everything and anything in a way the makes some other group of
people responsible for its failure, not you. [This is political
party independent by the way -- all of them utilize the same
methodology].

73, de Hans, K0HB

Yes, the technical standards need to be changed to allow BPL: require
all power lines to be shielded.

Alan AB2OS


On 04/27/04 10:07 am KØHB put fingers to keyboard and launched the
following message into cyberspace:

The following is from the President's speech in Minneapolis on
April 26, 2004. Note the last line of paragraph four.
Particularly note the comment "(s)o technical standards need to
be changed to encourage that."

On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 12:37:23 -0400, Minnie Bannister
wrote:

|Yes, the technical standards need to be changed to allow BPL: require
|all power lines to be shielded.

The ones under ground and under water already are.

The problem will be when every house in your neighborhood is a big
#&%*(*& radiator. Or even worse when your KW wipes out the entire
Internet service in a few square miles.

I'm a rural customer of an electric cooperative. (I happen to use
them for my dialup ISP also)

A couple of years ago when I was having a bout of power line
interference I happened to talk to their VP for new technology,
engineer to engineer.

Among other things he told me that reading meters was a big expense
since their service area is huge, covering good parts of three
counties, one of which is the size of Connecticut. They (we, I'm a
part owner) have 29,000 customers and 2,400 miles of lines.

So they (we) tried a system of reading the meters remotely, using
(very) slow-speed data on the power lines. They couldn't even solve
the technical challenges of doing this and wound up changing out most
of the meters to ones with built in transmitters that can be
interrogated by a guy driving around in a pickup truck.

If they can't read my meter remotely how in the hell are they going to
supply me with high-speed data transmission? BTW, I've strongly
suggested that they don't try.

Wes Stewart wrote:
If they can't read my meter remotely how in the hell are they going to
supply me with high-speed data transmission? BTW, I've strongly
suggested that they don't try.

I've done the same with our cooperative here.

Personally, I think attempts to fight BPL through the political system
are a waste of time. The amateur radio community doesn't have the
financial resources to outbid the utilities for legislation.

What *will* stop BPL is economics.

Many of the expenses of offering broadband communications are
independent of transmission technology. Obtaining a backbone
connection, providing mail & web servers, customer support & billing are
all expenses that are the same whether you're providing BPL, DSL, or
cable modem service.

BPL has the additional disadvantage of requiring well-trained personnel
with expensive safety gear to maintain the infrastructure. Most cable
and DSL maintenance can be done on the ground.

BPL is at an advantage ONLY in very rural places, too small for cable
and too far from the CO for DSL. Such places don't have enough
customers to pay for the fixed infrastructure.

IMHO a few utilities will try full-scale rollouts of BPL - and will find
it doesn't sell enough to pay the expenses. It'll go the way of the
picturephone.

=============

If that doesn't work, we can tell the freeband community what's wiping
out 26-29MHz, and post a few photos of the BPL access equipment, and
then be sure to not get anywhere near a power pole without a bulletproof
vestgrin...

--
Doug Smith W9WI
Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66
http://www.w9wi.com

"Wes Stewart" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 12:37:23 -0400, Minnie Bannister
wrote:

|Yes, the technical standards need to be changed to allow BPL: require
|all power lines to be shielded.

The ones under ground and under water already are.

The problem will be when every house in your neighborhood is a big
#&%*(*& radiator. Or even worse when your KW wipes out the entire
Internet service in a few square miles.

I'm a rural customer of an electric cooperative. (I happen to use
them for my dialup ISP also)

A couple of years ago when I was having a bout of power line
interference I happened to talk to their VP for new technology,
engineer to engineer.

Among other things he told me that reading meters was a big expense
since their service area is huge, covering good parts of three
counties, one of which is the size of Connecticut. They (we, I'm a
part owner) have 29,000 customers and 2,400 miles of lines.

So they (we) tried a system of reading the meters remotely, using
(very) slow-speed data on the power lines. They couldn't even solve
the technical challenges of doing this and wound up changing out most
of the meters to ones with built in transmitters that can be
interrogated by a guy driving around in a pickup truck.

If they can't read my meter remotely how in the hell are they going to
supply me with high-speed data transmission? BTW, I've strongly
suggested that they don't try.


Tell me about it. Another thing that hasn't been considered is the
condition of these lines. I have been fighting for 5 years here in Alabama
to get the 20/9 noise level (at times past) fixed. Two years of that was
educating the fools what to do about it.

Can you imagine how much trouble its going to be getting BPL through that
noise?

Dan/W4NTI

And so here are some smart things to do: One, increase access to
federal land for fiberoptic cables and transmission towers. That
makes sense. As you're trying to get broadband spread throughout
the company, make sure it's easy to build across federal lands.
One sure way to hold things up is that the federal lands say, you
can't build on us.

Most fibre optic cables use railroad right of ways. The railroad
already exists and
has direct paths from one city or town to another, and is one entity for
the firbre
company to lease from. And the railroads like having the extra income.
They bury
the cable off to one or both sides of the tracks and railroads are used
to heavy
equipment work being done. Railroads need communications for their signals
and keeping track of where the trains are and such anyway. So they throw in
extra fibre for that when installing the other fibre. And from those
towns fibre
is strung along telephone poles to reach that place out in the sticks.
Imagine
a high speed 'net link to Ted Clampet's shack he had before he got his
oil money....
"Wee Doggies, look at this porn"..... :-)

So how is some guy in remote Wyoming going to
get any broadband technology? Regulatory policy has got to be
wise and smart as we encourage the spread of this important
technology. There needs to be technical standards to make
possible new broadband technologies, such as the use of
high-speed communication directly over power lines. Power lines
were for electricity; power lines can be used for broadband
technology. So the technical standards need to be changed to
encourage that.

Yeah, BPL serving an entire remote town will give individual users
service that will
make 300 baud modems seem fast. How much stuff can you multiplex on one
set of
power cables feeding that town? Else you'd be talking about microwave
freqs to
get enough bandwidth.


And we need to open up more federally controlled wireless
spectrum to auction in free public use, to make wireless
broadband more accessible, reliable, and affordable. Listen, one
of the technologies that's coming is wireless.

Then we won't need powerline *wires*.....

And if you're
living out in -- I should -- I was going to say Crawford, Texas,
but it's not -- maybe not nearly as remote. (Laughter.) How about
Terlingua, Texas? There's not a lot of wires out there. But
wireless technology is going to change all that so long as
government policy makes sense.

And we're going to continue to support the Federal Communications
Commission. Michael Powell -- Chairman Michael Powell, under his
leadership, his decision to eliminate burdensome regulations on
new broadband networks availability to homes. In other words,
clearing out the underbrush of regulation, and we'll get the
spread of broadband technology, and America will be better for
it. (Applause.) "



And make sure we never see another bare breast again at halftime.

In (rec.radio.amateur.misc), Robert Casey wrote:

Most fibre optic cables use railroad right of ways. The railroad
already exists and has direct paths from one city or town to
another, and is one entity for the firbre company to lease from. And
the railroads like having the extra income. They bury the cable off
to one or both sides of the tracks and railroads are used to heavy
equipment work being done. Railroads need communications for their
signals and keeping track of where the trains are and such anyway.
So they throw in extra fibre for that when installing the other
fibre. And from those towns fibre is strung along telephone poles to
reach that place out in the sticks. Imagine a high speed 'net link
to Ted Clampet's shack he had before he got his oil money.... "Wee
Doggies, look at this porn"..... :-)

An increasing amount of fiber is being buried on (or under) highway
right-of-way. I know; I work for a state department of transportation,
and we worked deals to get some very nice free bandwidth out of the
fibers along some Interstates. I expect we'll be able to do the same
for fibers buried along federal and state highways, once the carriers
recover from the dot-bomb and start building bandwidth out again.

--
Mike Andrews

Tired old sysadmin