[1000mp] Re: [Elecraft] BPL

Fri, 15 Aug 2003 21:00:55 -0700

Dan,

Think about what you are saying.  This is unreal as it is not economically
feasable.

I work for a rural elecectric cooperative (35 years) where I am in charge of
the technical services.  One of our services is broadband Internet to our
members via 2.4 and 5.8 gHz. microwave.  I have advised our general manager
that BPL is NOT a feasable method of data delivery in rural areas.

Now to your statement.  At our cooperative we have in excess of 400 miles of
overhead line to serve a few more than 2000 meters.  That is about 5 meters
per mile of line.  We can't afford to put the lines underground.  You do
know that the users of  the lines have to pay for them, don't you?

At our neighboring cooperative in SW  New Mexico, they have about 1,880
miles of overhead line to serve nearly 4,800 meters.  You can readily see
that this is about 2.6 meters per mile.

The cost of putting distribution voltage (7,200 and 14,400 Volts phase to
ground) line underground in our area is about FOUR times the cost of
overhead construction.  Single phase OH line costs about $10,000 per mile in
open country.  Three phase OH line construction costs are nearly $20,000 per
mile.  Line cosntruction costs are amortized over a period of 40 years to
make the cost per kilowatt hour reasonable.

These quoted costs are significantly less than they are in other parts of
the country due to various reasons.  There is much more cost involved in any
lines constructed through State and Federal (BLM and USFS) lands where both
environmental and archaeological studies are required to be performed.
State and Federal lands comprise nearly 90% of the total surface area in SW
NM and SE AZ.

The land disturbance of an overhead line is insignificant in comparison with
that caused by underground line construction.  I agree that the aesthetic
result is better with underground construction.  Beyond the distribution
lines, I really don't think you or any other reasonable person would pay the
costs of putting ten of thousands of miles of high voltage transmission
lines underground.

As to your statement regarding safety and national security, I disagree.
The difference is neglible in either field.

Regarding interference, the potential is there and certainly is the source
of much interference.  However, your campaign time and money would be much
better spent, and in less quantity, by lobbying the FCC to do a better job
of policing these "unintentional radiators".

As an individual intimately knowledgeable of the construction and
maintenance techniques of rural electric distribution lines, I can tell you
that there is NO problem of RFI from properly constructed lines.  Proper
maintenance, addressing problems caused by aging, weather, and subsequent
construction (hanging new transformers for example) will maintain a line
clean in terms of RFI.

This response is NOT to start a debate.  It is simply the viewpoint of one
who has been there and done that.

Milt, N5IA

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dan Allen" <[email protected]>
To: "Kenneth E. Harker" <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>;
<[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 10:28 AM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] BPL

> We should also campaign to have *all* power lines placed underground as
they
> do in Europe.  This is a safety and national security issue as well as an
> interference issue.
>
> Dan Allen
> KB4ZVM
> K2 S/N 1757
>