Spy chip plans scrapped



Fitting all motorcycles with electronic tags would not be cost effective, DVLA has concluded.

MCN revealed last year that the agency was researching the viability of electronically tagging motorcycle number plates to help tackle road tax evasion.

The tags, called remote frequency identification (RFID) chips, would have allowed police to remotely identify bikes using handheld readers or roadside beacons.

But the DVLA concluded the measure would cost over £100 million while only £27 million could be made from 100% motorcycle road tax compliance.

A DVLA report published today states: “RFID for this specific purpose alone would not add sufficient value to justify implementation at this stage.”

The report says the “favoured option” is to “pursue alternative methods of tackling evasion” including impounding untaxed bikes and using automatic number plate recognition cameras to detect offenders.

Good

Common sense prevails for once

Now this is the bit I have a serious problem with.

We already know that Red Ken is looking into road pricing for bikes in London and this is EXACTLY the solution he'll be looking for.

Clearly they've decided that they can't pay for it using this alone but with road pricing it'll more than pay for it's self

Do we?

I don't know - he keeps denying it, and all the number plate readers on the roads read the rear plate so bikes wouldn't pose a problem.

What I'm more worried about is that he's also "denying" that he intends to extend the charging zone to entire inside of the M25

The phrase in this release to consider is

God, I'm becoming one of those who never trusts the government - off to lie down

And just how much did it cost to even decide that?

having used RFID at work and at about 75p a chip that as a range of just 6-10inches i cant see it being cost effective for roadside checks

And that's the problem. The RFID tags are activated by the energy in a radio signal tuned te the frequency of the tag. Basically, it energises the circuit long enough for a teeny chip to fire up and send a signal back with a unique ID. Because of the nature of the way radio signals propagate (in an expanding sphere), the signal strength drops off as a function of the square of the distance to the transmitter. In laymans terms, it drops off faster and faster the further you go from the source.

If it takes (say) 10mW to travel 1 metre, it'll take 40mW to travel 2 metres. If you want to do drive-by checks, you'll want a range of at least (say) 10 metres, which would be 1000mW. And then you have to have the RFID tag send a signal the same distance back, using only the energy from the original signal, so double that range again and you're spewing out 4000mW from the radio, and 1000mW from the RFID tag.

Suddenly you're in the realms of serious radio broadcasting, and having these transmitters going all the time, spewing over the adjoining frequencies, and generally being noisy and awkward with electronics around them. Not to mention the health risks of having a 1000mW transmitter parked under your seat, and the difficulties of building an RFID circuit that can take the kind of load we're talking about again and again, reliably.

We're a long way from the 4" range of an Oyster Card (and by the same example numbers, the 0.4mW radio strength from those devices). Even as and when the technical difficulties of having an RFID tag accept that kind of abuse without burning up are overcome (and they're designed as throwaway devices that are quite fragile in the real world), you still have to get past the health implications of firing a surprisingly high-energy radio beam at everyone driving along the road.

I said it before - shout "Health and Safety" or "think of the children and pregnant mothers", and public opinion swings against these mysterious transmitters quite quickly...