[RFI] PLCA Response to WSJ Article

WA2BPE wa2bpe at infoblvd.net
Fri Apr 16 15:00:15 EDT 2004

Take it from one who worked in industry (R&D) for 40+ years; big spending does
not, by definition, assure or imply success.  IMO, if they really spent this
much, it was $ spent on bad science

What I worry about is when the "public good" spin will suddenly relegate us to
being the problem - remember - "PICON".  A recent NPRM on RFID tags in the
433.5>434.5MHz band will allow higher power and longer transmissions despite the
likelihood of QRM to ATV repeaters (the ARRL opposed this).  This is being
touted as an aid to commerce and homeland security.  Again - "PICON".

Tom - WA2BPE

Eric Rosenberg wrote:

> This is the Power Line Communications Association's response to the Wall
> Street Journal article on BPL.
> It comes from the PLCA website:
> http://www.plca.net/newsandevents.wsjresponse.htm
> Eric W3DQ
> Washington, DC
> ------
> Letters to the Editor
> Wall Street Journal
> 200 Liberty Street
> New York, New York 10281
> RE:       In this Power Play, High-Wire Act Riles Ham Radio Fans
>             By Ken Brown page A-16
> March 30, 2004
> Dear Editor:
> While Ken Brown did an excellent job in his article In this Power Play,
> High-Wire Act Riles Ham Radio Fans I must take issue with the lack of
> balance and facts. Sure it portrayed the mass concern and frustration
> that exists among well-intentioned ham radio operators, but our industry
> has spent hundreds of millions of dollars in exhaustive research and
> testing to eliminate any such claims. Let me say that had the author
> called upon our industry association we would have told him there is
> simply zero empirical evidence that power line communications causes
> harmful interference with ham radio frequencies. There are four major
> reasons: (1) The extremely low power frequency used for this new
> technology has been carefully tested and developed to avoid such
> outcomes; (2) The length of any signal is very short, between 600 and 800
> feet; (3) The system is not always “on” as it runs only when needed, and
> when it does it does so with small, very lower power packets of data; (4)
> In the event of some form of anomaly, BPL systems can have their signals
> notched as to eliminate any interfering signal.
> Perhaps the greatest testament to our confidence in power line
> communications or BPL is our willingness to place our money where our
> mouth is -- in that we have never opposed any FCC rule that clearly
> states that anyone causing harmful radio interference must fix the
> problem or cease operations. We are simply that confident. It would be a
> great disservice, however unintentional, to go against all known science
> and common sense without turning to actual, real-life situations. We
> firmly believe that the public will greatly benefit from greater choices
> in broadband deployments, electric utilities will also realize some
> exceptional internal grid monitoring and other tools benefiting the
> public, and ham operators will continue to operate as if we didn’t exist.
> This is no high wire act -- it is simply a technology ready for prime-time.
> Sincerely yours,
> Alan R. Shark
> President & CEO
> Power Line Communications Association
> ______________________________________________________________________
> Power Line Communications Association
> 200 N. Glebe Road, Suite 1000
> Arlington, VA 22203
> (Direct) 202-835-7814
> arshark at amtausa.org
> www.plca.net
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> RFI mailing list
> RFI at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi

More information about the RFI mailing list