Satellite Industry Struggles to Communicate Rural Broadband Advantages

[Satellite TODAY Insider 10-29-10] The Broadband Stakeholder Group (BSG) recently commissioned global telecoms, media and technology adviser Analysys Mason to study the costs and capabilities of wireless and satellite technologies in order to inform the U.K. government of the advantages satellite can provide in delivering broadband to unserved and underserved regions throughout the country.
    Do these arguments sound familiar? After several years of developing plans to bridge digital divides and deliver broadband to a majority of its citizens, governments in Europe and North America continue to leave satellite out of the solution.
    BSG CEO Antony Walker said the Analysys Mason report shows that while satellite is more expensive to deploy than terrestrial wireless, it can “still play an important complementary role by delivering broadband services to homes that lie outside the coverage area of terrestrial wireless and those that are located in ‘not-spots’ within the coverage area.”
    Analysys Mason Senior Manager Philip Bates acknowledged that a majority of the broadband discussion in U.K. government circles centers on the deployment of new fiber networks but also hopes that the report will “help to raise awareness about the many factors that have an impact upon the cost and performance of wireless and satellite technologies; provide a basis for a more informed comparison of different technologies; and help stimulate a more detailed and nuanced policy debate.”
    Unfortunately for satellite, these arguments are the same ones that remain either misunderstood or ignored by governments. In September, the European Commission (EC) revealed plans to deliver broadband to remote locations across Europe with little minimal inclusion of a satellite element. European Satellite Operators Association (ESOA) Secretary General Aarti Holla Maini told Satellite TODAY Insider that inconsistencies between satellite’s outlined role in the EC’s Broadband Communication and its Radio Spectrum Policy Program (RSPP) show a lack of homogenous understanding of satellite’s ability among different units of the commission.
    “While the EC’s Broadband Communication took a more negative slant towards satellite, the RSPP was much more positive, providing research into satellite and some source for optimism for European satellite operators. Clearly, some in the commission have taken the time to engage with and understand the satellite sector. Others appear to have made up their minds independently. The two communications pass very different messages,” Maini said.
    Avanti Communications CEO David Williams agrees with Maini’s assessment. “Policy makers have not covered themselves in glory in addressing the digital divide. It is certain, as the U.K. government said in the Digital Britain report last year, that mobile phones do not provide the answer to rural broadband problems, and the recent introduction of 0.5 GB download caps demonstrate why. Thankfully, the market is delivering, with several Ka-band satellites launching to serve Europe — two from Avanti — in the near future, so consumers don’t need to worry.”
    The situation is nearly identical in North America. In January, U.S. broadband stimulus funds fell short of the expectations of some industry executives, as $100 million was specifically set aside for satellite projects in the U.S. Rural Utilities Services’ (RUS) and U.S. National Telecommunications and Information Administration’s (NTIA) notice of funds available.
    Satellite executives proposed that $500 million be set aside to fund the program and that the RUS and NTIA combine elements of the existing plan’s “broadband infrastructure” and “sustainable broadband adoption” categories to provide a maximum subsidy of $1,000 per new end user. The combination would cover up to 80 percent of the incremental infrastructure cost of reaching such end user, the executives said in a November 2009 letter to the agencies.
    Despite satellite’s effort to work together with government agencies and propose new solutions and ideas, executives found the first broadband stimulus-funding window and application process oriented for local terrestrial models and applicants and their satellite solutions not fitting within eligibility requirements.
    The good news for satellite is that these communication issues are not universal and examples of satellite recognition in national broadband plans do exist. In Australia, satellite fleet operator Optus finds itself in a position to take advantage of the government’s significant investments in broadband connectivity, including the Australian Broadband Guarantee policy that provides subsidies for users in rural areas to buy broadband satellite equipment.
    Optus Director Paul Sheridan told Satellite TODAY Insider that Australia’s broadband plan could have a major impact on the future progress of the operator. “From our point of view, terrestrial and satellite technologies are complementary. Satellite has to be involved because of the vast distances in Australia — a fact that has been recognized by our government.”
    There are several possible reasons why the same arguments work in some regions and fail in others. Geography could play a part, but Australia’s interior shares several characteristics with the U.S.’ Midwest and Southwest regions. The power of terrestrial lobbies also could be blamed and explain why these arguments fall on deaf ears in North America and Europe. Until then, satellite should work on a new way of communicating its potential role in broadband expansion strategies.

Latest News

Satellite Industry Struggles to Communicate Rural Broadband Advantages

Related Stories-