Government demands sewer access for fast broadband
By Nicole Kobie
Posted on 8 Jun 2010 at 14:17
Utilities and telecoms firms could be forced to allow access to their infrastructure for high-speed broadband deployment under new plans from the Government.
Conservative MP Jeremy Hunt, the new Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport, said his Government agrees with Ofcom that BT's ducts should be opened up to rivals, but believes it shouldn't stop there.
Hunt said that digging up roads to lay cable is one of the biggest costs of rolling out broadband, noting some companies have already had success running broadband through sewers or via telegraph poles.
Within this parliament we want Britain to have the best superfast broadband network in Europe.
"That’s why I want companies to be able to take advantage of the infrastructure that already exists – the ducts and poles of telecoms companies, the sewers and other utility networks," he said in a speech in London today.
If necessary, Hunt said the Government would put access to such infrastructure into law.
Broadband speeds and rural coverage
While he "warmly welcomed" BT's £1 billion investment into extending broadband coverage and called Virgin Media's 200Mbits/sec trials a "positive step", Hunt said "there has to be a role for Government as well as the market."
Hunt said the current UK plan of 2Mbits/sec should be seen as the "very minimum" level of access, with the Government aiming higher. "Our goal is simple: within this parliament we want Britain to have the best superfast broadband network in Europe."
"It is a scandal that nearly three million households in this country still cannot access 2Mbits/sec broadband speeds, and less than 1% of the country is able to access the internet using modern fibre optic technology – compared to an OECD average of around 10%," he said.
He confirmed that funds from the BBC licence fee for digital switchover would be used to increase coverage in rural areas, adding that the government will unveil details of three new projects to increase rural coverage on 15 July.
Fast broadband is necessary
Hunt said "our regulatory structure has been left long out of date by changes in technology." He added that some people question whether fast broadband is necessary, "when the iPlayer can manage on less than 1Mbits/sec."
"They are missing the point," he said. "Superfast broadband is not simply about doing the same things faster. It’s about doing totally new things – creating a platform on which a whole generation of new businesses can thrive."
From around the web
About time
I've always thought it daft that we have millions of miles of ducts and pipes throughout the country that could be multi-tasked but instead are unavailable to additional suppliers.
By skarlock on 8 Jun 2010 
Fibre roll-out
Why not simply replace the copper core with fibre
http://cable-x.net/default.htm
By slowscrew on 8 Jun 2010
so when in places where the sewer pipes are too small or too many cables in one place - this will lead to flooding when it rains then how is going to start paying for the damage or how is going to control what and when going down the hole - also what will happen when the pipes need replacing or they start to become cloged up and need cleaning out - look at this way you could have up to 3+ cables running in some areas
By mprltd on 9 Jun 2010
Fixes For Fixes
mprltd makes a good point. While laying cables in a sewer system is a good idea, it does pose problems for conventional maintenance later on. Put simply, the parasitic services could get in the way.
The problem is one of a lack of vision. The Victorians had it, but we seem to have lost our way. Back then, it did not seem an insurmountable problem to lay out a sewer network, a train network, a fresh water network, roads, or any other major infrastructure effort that they deemed necessary. We have been happy to reap the benefits of their vision and commitment, but unwilling to follow through with the same fortitude.
We live in a world where not only is the old infrastructure ageing badly, but it is changing in terms of its type and demands almost daily. So, from a pragmatic perspective, we need a system of tunnels under every road and between every town and village that will allow us to easily maintain and change our infrastructure without resorting to the unnecessarily disruptive practice of digging holes in (what could be..) perfectly good roads every time a hole appears in a pipe, or a cable breaks down at some point.
Would it cost a few billion? Trillion? Maybe, but I'd rather see the government spend our money on that sort of project, than give it to incompetent, cynical, bloated bankers, who then lend it back at profit to the government. Now that is what I see as a waste of money and a totally unrealistic scenario - yet it is fact.
By Klobba on 10 Jun 2010
advertisement
- Chrome's shine getting lost in translation
- BytePac: the cardboard hard disk enclosure
- How tech loosens our grip on reality
- Hokum watch: Safer Internet Day
- Why I'm deleting Adobe from my PC
- Prepare to be patronised: it's Safer Internet Day
- Dear Sony, Samsung and every other tech company in the world: stop trying to be Apple
- Will Apple's Final Cut Pro X update placate the pros?
- Smartr Contacts for iPhone review
- Switching to Office 365's Outlook Web App
- ZoneAlarm Internet Security Suite
- Webroot Internet Security Essentials
- Trend Micro Internet Security
- PC Tools Internet Security 2009
- Panda Internet Security 2009
- Norton Internet Security 2009
- Kaspersky Internet Security 2009
- F-Secure Internet Security 2009
- AVG Internet Security 8
- BullGuard Internet Security 8.5
advertisement
Printed from www.pcpro.co.uk