[1000mp] Re: [Elecraft] BPL

Sun, 17 Aug 2003 16:19:47 -0000

Milt,
	I have to make a couple of comments regarding your post. I've been an
active ham for 30 years and have moved around the western part of the US a
lot in that time. I have NEVER lived in a area with overhead power lines
that didn't have power line noise. In addition I am active on HF mobile and
constantly encounter power line interference while traveling around the
country.
	The power company people I've had to work with to resolve these
interference issues have ranged from willing but not knowledgeable to nearly
hostile. At my last home I had to virtually train the local power company
radio tech. in finding power line RFI. I even bought him a copy of "Power
line distribution system radio frequency interference, an investigative
handbook" written by the "Dept. of communications, Ontario Region, spectrum
control". (If you're not familiar with this publication I suggest you get a
copy, its very good).
	At my current home I have overhead lines and power line interference. I've
been calling the repair department of my local power company twice a week
for 3 weeks. In one conversation I had with the tech. he told me flat out
that there was so much power line interference because of aging hardware
that they could never afford to repair half of it. They just respond to the
squeaky wheel (me). My experience and observations tend to support this.
	Although the cost of converting to underground power is high, I suspect its
less than the cost a ACTUALLY resolving the widespread RFI caused by
existing overhead power line hardware. If there were a proposal to require
conversion to underground power service I would support it.

Steve

p.s. One issue I've never heard addressed is the problem of RFI from home
electronics being coupled into the overhead power lines. I suspect that
elimination of overhead power lines in residential communities would also
eliminate a lot of RFI from home appliances.

----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of Milt Jensen
Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2003 04:01
To: Dan Allen; Kenneth E. Harker; [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: [1000mp] Re: [Elecraft] BPL

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
>

_______________________________________________
List Moderator: Richard Lubash N1VXW
1000mp mailing list
[email protected]
To Change Options or Unsubscribe:
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/1000mp