Australia
This page deals with the framework for powerline communications
(BPL) in Australia.
It covers -
- introduction
- the shape of BPL in Australia
- regulation
- who regulates BPL trials and implementations
- exploration
- community consultation and field trials
- trials
- what is happening
- expectations
- irrational enthusiasm about technologies, markets
and outcomes?
introduction
Australia has embraced BPL more cautiously than some of
its overseas peers, a caution that reflects industry structures,
the wariness of regulators about problematical solutions
and the lack of resources needed for transforming visions
of market demand into commercial reality.
Deregulation and privatisation in Australia has resulted
in a mix of telecommunication
and electricity providers. Power utilities typically have
a regional or state base. Some are government owned, although
operating on an increasingly commercial basis. Others
are privately owned. Most have dabbled with ISP and voice
services. Some have considerable political clout, reminiscent
of the era when the Tasmanian HydroElectric Commission
was characterised as the 'permanent' government of that
state.
The national government in Australia does not claim exclusive
powers over energy and surface transport infrastructure.
Under the 1901 constitution,
however, it does have broad powers regarding telecommunications
and the radio frequency spectrum. Those powers encompass
commercial and other broadcasting - unsurprising, as spectrum
is a shared and scarce resource - along with the operation
of traditional telephone services and internet services.
Policy responsibility is centred in the Communications,
Information Technology & the Arts portfolio.
That portfolio includes the Australian Communications
& Media Authority (ACMA),
a specialist agency that is a counterpart of the US Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) and the UK OFCOM. It resulted
from the amalgamation of the former Australian Broadcasting
Authority (ABA) and the Australian Communications Authority.
The portfolio also includes the Department of Communications,
Information Technology & the Arts (DCITA).
ACMA administers a range of legislation, including the
Radiocommunications Act 1992 (RA),
the Telecommunications Act 1997 (TA)
and the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 (BSA),
discussed in more detail elsewhere on this site.
Aspects of those enactments and subsidiary legislation
are directly relevant to BPL activity. The 1992 Radiocommunications
Act in particular features provisions regarding offences
relating to radio emissions (Part
4.2), conciliation of disputes and administration
and enforcement (Part
5), and licensing (Part
3).
regulation
ACMA's objectives derive from the federal government's
commitment to
- meet
international obligations regarding broadcasting and
telecommunications, including minimisation of shortwave
interference
- a
viable commercial and non-commercial broadcasting regime
that recognises the needs and aspirations of the television
and radio networks (including community broadcasting),
defence and other specialist broadcasters such as marine
and onshore emergency service organisations, aviators
and non-commercial RF users
- encourage
access by all Australians to telecommunication services,
including provision and uptake of broadband connectivity.
It
thus commented
in 2004 that the challenge
is
to establish regulatory arrangements that do not unnecessarily
inhibit BPL deployments but, at the same time, provide
measures to protect radiocommunications services from
unacceptable interference.
ACMA
has accordingly been proceeding through a consultation
process in accord with the legislation (concurrently authorising
small scale trials and seeking community comment), examining
overseas developments, liaising with other agencies such
as DCITA and receiving representations from advocacy bodies.
There has been no specific federal or state/territory
government parliamentary inquiry or royal commission into
BPL. Powerline technologies featured on the periphery
of submissions to wideranging public inquiries about the
shape of Australian telecommunications, particularly the
adequacy of networks and services outside metropolitan
areas.
Regulation is informed by the activities of Australian
and overseas electronics and telecommunication standards
and regulatory bodies, including the
- International
Telecommunication Union (ITU)
-
International Special Committee on Radio Interference
(CISPR)
-
European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications
Administrations (CEPT)
-
Institute of Electronics and Electronic Engineers (IEEE)
- US
Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
- US
National Telecommunications and Information Administration
(NTIA), eg its detailed 2004 BPL Report
exploration
Given overseas experience it is unsurprisingly that the
2004 report for DCITA on Technology Review of Powerline
Communications (PLC) Technologies and their Use in Australia
(PDF)
concluded that more research is needed.
That document noted that
the
key issues for PLC deployment in Australia are establishing
the business case for the technology and resolving potential
radiocommunications interference issues.
The report commented that
The
potential technical impediments to development and implementation
of PLC within Australia include signal distance limitations,
high temperatures, high humidity, line noise from salt
static discharge or transformer discharge, and other
line noise interference. All of these issues appear
to be manageable.
There are some concerns regarding interference levels
produced by PLC, mainly raised by amateur radio users.
Various tests and studies indicate that although this
issue theoretically does arise, evidence from commercial
deployments have not confirmed these concerns. The Australian
Radio Frequency Spectrum Allocation Chart shows that
current PLC systems do not intrude on protected frequencies.
A review of interference levels would be necessary prior
to large PLC deployments.
Other significant challenges for PLC development and
implementation within Australia include the structure
of the electricity industry, uncertainties regarding
commercial incentives for electricity distributors,
the diversity of participants needed to be aligned for
a commercial PLC deployment, lack of PLC standards,
commitment of major telecommunications carriers to alternative
technologies, the ability for PLC solutions to access
high speed backbone networks outside major centres,
and relatively low average population densities.
More
seriously, the report concludes
In
summary, involvement from Australian electricity distributors
in PLC has been limited to a small number of basic tests
and trials undertaken by only a few organisations. Indications
are that, although there is obvious enthusiasm for the
benefits that PLC could offer these businesses, there
are many uncertainties over the practical deliverables
of existing PLC systems and reluctance to invest significantly
where the technical and regulatory risks appear to be
high. The involvement and coordination required of the
various parties (electricity distributors, telecommunication
companies, content providers and vendors) would appear
to indicate that the progress of PLC deployment in Australia
is likely to be slow in the immediate future.
Concerns
were highlighted in a 2004 report (PDF)
by the Wireless Institute of Australia, consistent with
overseas research such as the UK Office of Communications
(OFCOM) studies.
In January 2005 the Australian Communications Authority
launched
an "information portal" giving background information
(PDF)
about BPL technology, along with details of "interim
trials" and regulatory guidelines for testing that
technology.
The
ACA had also started a comprehensive examination of
the communications regulatory issues associated with
BPL for delivery of telecommunications services using
electrical power wiring and is consulting with interested
stakeholders.
A
public discussion paper was released in April 2005 and
elicited 270 responses,
with concerns being expressed by the Wireless Institute
of Australia, Defence Department, St Johns Ambulance,
broadcasters, police and state emergency service agencies.
Those responses indicated that concerns are not restricted
to what BPL enthusiasts often dismiss as 'ham operators'.
The acting ACA chair commented that
The
challenge for the ACA is to set regulatory arrangements
that do not unnecessarily inhibit the adoption of BPL
technology but at the same time protect radiocommunications
services from harmful interference.
Given
the concerns highlighted on the preceding page of this
note it is unlikely that most contenders will get beyond
(or even to) the trial stage.
The list of frequencies identified by the ACA/ACMA as
being of potential concern is broad (from 3kHz to 30MHz),
encompassing rural emergency services, police, ambulance,
fire, aeronautical and some commercial broadcast parts
of the spectrum.
trials
Australian access BPL and inhome BPL trials as of January
2005 have been small scale, for example being restricted
to a particular building or a cluster of four houses.
They have apparently concentrated on grid management operations
and on broadband to the home, including
- Moruya
Industrial Estate (October - December 2004) in 1.7 -
23 MHz frequency bands
-
Queanbeyan (November 2004 - March 2005) 1.7 - 23 MHz
-
Newcastle Central Business District (August - November
2004) 1.7 - 80 MHz
-
Hobart Central Business District (April - June 2004)
1.7 - 27 MHz
That
exploration appears to have resulted in little real enthusiasm
within the utility industry or government, in contrast
to the US where for example figures in the Federal Communications
Commission have uncritically embraced access BPL as "the
broadband nirvana". That tagline that is code for
the fervent wish for sustained and substantial competition
in markets where there is increasing concentration in
telecommunication services and the former RBOCs reassemble
something that looks like AT&T).
One observer of the Queanbeyan trial stated that
The
system in Queanbeyan radiates so strongly that in the
street where it is installed it is impossible to hear
any radio signals on any frequency used by the system.
It is only when you get about 500 metres away that the
signal goes down far enough to hear some strong radio
signals.
In
September 2005 Aurora Energy launched what it characterised
as the first "commercial trial" of BPL, discussed
in the final page of this note. That trial was abandoned
in November 2007, with Aurora commenting that the project
was not commercially viable.
expectations
One reader of this site said that
powerline
is just like the dot coms:
a blank canvas on which people paint their hope and
aspirations but without a clear link to reality. It
is a case of irrational enthusiasm rather than dot com
irrational exuberance.
Expectations
about access BPL in particular have been high, with enthusiasts
claiming that powerline will uniquely drive economic development,
allow SMEs to host online businesses at home, enable advanced
telemedicine, revolutionise education and increase social
cohesion.
Others have characterised BPL as "freedom from Telstra"
- or merely from line rental and other charges, apparently
on the assumption that a BPL network operator will not
pass on expenses. One writer on the Whirlpool forum said
the
important thing is the average person can have an internet
home without knowing all the network settings and options.
Just sign up with Aurora and you can have the fast internet,
Cheap phone calls without Telstra line rentals, new
appliances that use internet in home, and other abilities
and
that
BPL
is more important for a high tech future than other
services. Imagine having hospitals fully internet linked
for monitoring patients and equipment, or the home user
being able to host business internet content from home
to the World.
Supposed
benefits of BPL in Tasmania were identified
as
- Internet
communications based state.
-
The ability of free Intranet
-
Ease of adding RF access points for those mobile
-
Appliances based on Internet feedback, eg TV, Alarm
system, Hospital Equipment
-
Reduces doubling up of infrastructure due to inefficient
business and their competition.
-
Eliminate phone line rental costs
-
Reduce RF in the environment from WIFI and other forms
of RF communications
-
Tick for businesses wanting to situate in Tasmania
-
Improves business opportunities for Tasmanian's to market
to the World by allowing IT business from home or the
office.
-
Improves education and social harmony in the community.
Those
expectations are unsurprising given the unsophistication
of much media coverage, confusion about BPL technologies
and sometimes disingenuous statements by enthusiasts.
The
PLC Forum for example unashamedly proclaims
there
are still no cases of proven harmful interference despite
tens of thousands of users, hundred of thousands of
connected properties, and a number of independent and
comprehensive measurement campaigns! Moreover, would
any local EMC (electromagnetic compatibility) troubles
appear, current features of PLC technologies enable
the removing of emission frequencies to avoid such troubles
Questioning about technical and commercial feasibility
has encountered attacks that critics are unrepresentative
or luddites -
We
can not have people "back in the days of pulse
dialing systems" lobbying against technology that
will bring this country into the 21st century!
I've been amazed how much the ham'ers are tabloid'ing
this topic of BPL. This isn't some advertising drive
for the Amateur Radio community? No one is yet to come
up with a real substantial complaint, yet many are sprouting
stories of other non relative experimental trials using
different bases and techniques to discredit the current
roll out.
Overseas
such comments provoked the retort that
In the beginning, there was no interference, then there
was some and now it has become "who needs HAM radio?"
After
reading claims in some local online fora a researcher
for telecommunications guru Paul Budde pithily commented
(albeit somewhat differently to reported enthusiasm by
Budde himself) that -
Broadband
over powerlines (BPL) is a stinker and is going almost
nowhere, despite the hype. The dream of those power
lines turning into broadband pots of gold seems to have
a profound effect on some folks.
next page
(overseas BPL trials)
|
blaw