In the course of our public research into BPL, we've published an article by engineer Bill South that claims that consumer radio devices such as baby monitors and garage door openers operate on similar frequencies to BPL, and that use of these devices could interrupt the broadband connection over powerlines.

We also published a letter by Fred Stevens, a retired US Army Signal Corps Lieutenant Colonel who's also an Amateur Radio operator. The plain-spoken 24-year veteran makes the claim that BPL will adversely affect military tactical communications, that BPL will interfere with a major, classified drug smuggling detection and interdiction project, and that BPL is a clear and present danger to the nation's security in times of disaster and war.

Computing Unplugged analysis
We subjected the ARRL to considerable scrutiny in our investigation and while their supporting data is relatively thin (only 46 people are have filed interference reports out of the 150,000 ARRL members), it is also compelling and well documented. Further, if there is even the slightest risk to ground-to-air communications, emergency response communications, and police and fire communications, BPL should come under further scrutiny.

When entities such as FEMA, the Department of Homeland Security, the Society of Broadcast Engineers, and the ARRL all complain about a technology, it's worth our time to listen and think.

Countering the risk arguments
As we continued to research this issue, we had the opportunity to interview designers and manufacturers of BPL equipment. Not surprisingly, these individuals felt the BPL detractors' viewpoints were not completely valid.

Chano Gomez, who represents the company that makes the chips powering many of the BPL deployments, tells us that many of the complaints date back to earlier, first generation technology and that the current second generation technology overcomes many of the reported problems.

Glenn Elmore, the designer of a BPL implementation and a ham operator tells us that some of the ARRL complaints are valid, but that there are alternative designs (his company's being one, of course) that overcome many of the objections of the original BPL.

Even Allen Pitts, Media and Public Relations Manager for the ARRL (the organization most vocal about the problems of BPL) tells us that the ARRL isn't against BPL itself, but, rather, dislikes a particular design for BPL that the organization claims provides the most interference.

Computing Unplugged analysis
It is clear that BPL is a technical feasibility. It is also clear that there are a variety of designs, some of which are more problematic and some of which are less so. Given the risks outlined in the previous section, we believe that, with the proper design, BPL is something that is deployable. Our concern is whether the safe designs are the ones that will be deployed or whether BPL implementations will be determined by the lowest bidder.

Ham radio and BPL
At the heart of this debate has been a group of people with a lot of heart: the ham radio operators. Through the course of our investigation, we've denigrated ham radio as a non-essential hobby of secondary importance to universal broadband. Most of the time, ham radio is a hobby. However, during times of emergency, ham radio is an essential link in a critical chain of response.