«First  ‹Previous   Page 3 of 755   Next›  Last» 

UK Govt.: New law changes to bring better connectivity to the UK
United Kingdom Created: 6 Aug 2020
The government has today set out new law changes it will make to boost gigabit broadband rollout and bring better mobile coverage to the whole of the UK.

The move is part of the plan to give the UK the telecoms infrastructure it needs to meet the growing demands of consumers and businesses and to take advantage of future technologies that will be vital for the economy.

The telecoms regulator Ofcom will be granted new powers so it can share with the government information from broadband companies about where they plan to build gigabit-capable broadband networks, and to publish data about areas where gigabit broadband rollout is not currently planned.

These powers will help encourage the commercial rollout of gigabit broadband in locations where it is not yet earmarked. The government will also be able to take into account this information when deciding where it will spend £5 billion of funding to give the public access to the fastest broadband, capable of one gigabit per second download speeds.

This funding has been pledged to make sure hard-to-reach areas receive these much faster internet connections at the same time as towns and cities.

Separately, the government has confirmed it will push ahead with its plans to reform planning laws to make it easier for industry to share and upgrade mobile phone masts. This will speed up the rollout of 5G and improve 4G coverage in rural areas.
Matt Warman, Minister for Digital Infrastructure, said:

We’re investing billions so no part of the UK is left behind by the opportunities and economic benefits that faster, more reliable and more secure digital connectivity brings.

These changes will help target public funding in hard to reach areas most in need of better broadband. It will also help mobile companies banish rural not-spots by upgrading and sharing their masts.

European Electronic Communications Code

The government has today set out how it will bring the European Electronic Communications Code into UK law. The UK played a leading role in the negotiations for the Code, which updates the telecoms regulatory framework for the EU. A number of its provisions are influenced and inspired by existing UK objectives and best practice.

While the Code largely consists of minor changes to the existing legal framework, the government will bring in some new pro-investment measures from the Code that are in the UK’s national interest and support its plans for nationwide gigabit broadband. Other measures will give people and businesses greater consumer protection and ensure Ofcom’s regulatory powers are up to date.
They include, but are not limited to:

Network forecasting - New powers for Ofcom to gather information on operators’ planned network rollout. Ofcom will share this information with the government to allow better targeting of public investment in poorly-connected areas. It will also publish non-confidential data about where rollout is not planned to help inform industry investment.

A focus on gigabit-capable networks - A new broad duty for Ofcom to promote connectivity, access to, and take-up of gigabit-capable networks to help the UK realise its full digital potential.

Promoting cooperation and competition in hard to reach places - In areas where it is costly or difficult to install new networks, such as urban blocks of flats and rural locations, Ofcom will have the power to impose obligations on operators already present to offer network access or to share equipment such as mobile masts with other operators.

Pro-investment regulation - Ofcom’s market review period will be increased from three to five years which will give a longer period of regulatory stability to the telecoms market and more certainty for investors in gigabit broadband.

Easier switching for consumers - Currently, when switching broadband providers, consumers need to liaise with their old and their new provider and juggle the relevant old service end dates and the start dates for new services. Under these changes, they will be able to contact their new provider, who will lead and co-ordinate the switching process so it is as smooth as possible and with minimal loss of service.

Better regulation of bundles - Consumers on bundled contracts, which include mobile and broadband but also other services such as video and music streaming, will be able switch providers more easily. This means they will avoid being locked into bundled contracts if, for example, providers make changes to their contracts, or something goes wrong with just one service in the bundle.

Mobile infrastructure planning reforms

In another response to a public consultation published today, the government has announced it is taking forward proposals to simplify planning rules to speed up 5G rollout and improve rural mobile coverage.

Reforming planning laws in England will allow mobile network providers to put more equipment than they currently can on phone masts, making it easier to share masts and increase mobile coverage areas. This will help maximise the use of existing mast sites and minimise the need to build more infrastructure.

The reforms will allow:

New masts to be built taller, subject to prior approval by the planning authority, to deliver better coverage and allow more mobile operators to place equipment on them

Existing phone masts to be strengthened without prior approval, so that they can be upgraded for 5G and shared between mobile operators

Building-based masts to be placed nearer to highways to support better mobile coverage of the UK’s road networks, subject to prior approval

Cabinets containing radio equipment to be deployed alongside masts, without prior approval, to support new 5G networks

Before amending the existing legislation, the government will carry out a technical consultation on the detail of the proposals, including the appropriate environmental protections and other safeguards, and the specific limits to be put on the widths and heights of phone masts.

The government also expects the mobile phone industry to commit to further measures and assurances to ensure that the impact of new mobile deployment is minimised.
Housing Minister Rt Hon Christopher Pincher MP said:

Delivering much-needed new homes is at the heart of this Government’s mission to support people in every part of the country, and this means delivering the modern infrastructure needed to go with them.

We’re taking forward plans to extend mobile coverage, particularly for those in rural areas, so everyone can benefit from the latest technology and the jobs, opportunities and growth that comes with this.

These reforms will aid the delivery of the £1 billion deal the government made in March with the mobile network operators to build a Shared Rural Network which will mean poor mobile coverage becomes a thing of the past. It has seen the four main mobile operators undertake legally binding commitments to collectively increase mobile phone coverage throughout the UK to 95% by the end of 2025, by investing in a network of new and existing phone masts that they would all share.
ENDS
Notes to Editors:
European Electronic Communications Code:

The European Electronic Communications Code Directive revises the EU telecoms regulatory framework, which has underpinned UK telecoms law since 2003. The UK played a leading role in the negotiations for the Directive, which largely reflects UK best practice. Its core objectives are to: drive investment in very high capacity networks and services through sustainable competition; support efficient and effective use of radio spectrum; maintain the security of networks and services; and provide a high level of consumer protection.

The UK’s approach to implementation of the Directive is in line with the UK’s commitments under the EU Withdrawal Agreement to transpose EU legislation before the end of the transition period and to provide flexibility for future domestic policy. It meets the minimum requirements of the Directive, and minimises additional costs to businesses.

The public consultation on the Code, published in July 2019, sought views on its implementation, focusing on provisions affording flexibility at the national level, including those supporting accelerated commercial roll-out of gigabit-capable and 5G networks.

Provisions where we have departed from the preferred approach outlined in the consultation represent areas where the UK legal regime is already flexible enough to cater for the specific EECC provision or a degree of discretion exists in the Directive to allow the UK (along with other EU member states) to take account of market conditions and characteristics existing in national markets.

Some articles are either already addressed by existing UK legislation, or are being transposed by Ofcom through their existing powers in the case of consumer measures, or by other Departments, such as a provision on car radio interoperability that is being transposed through Department for Transport’s Road Vehicles (Approval) Regulation legislation.

In recognition of the limited time between publication and the date when these measures will come into force and the impact of COVID-19, working with Ofcom, the government has sought to ensure that measures that directly bite upon industry including consumer protection measures will only be enforced at the appropriate time. The government is supportive of Ofcom’s statement, published on its website on 7 May, outlining that industry will be given at least 12 months to implement proposed changes to their regulatory rules allowing industry flexibility it needs during this challenging period.

Mobile infrastructure planning reforms for England:

The consultation ran for 10 weeks, from 27 August 2019, closing on 4 November 2019. Planning law is a devolved matter. These proposals and any future legislative changes apply to England only. The technical consultation will seek views on the detail of the proposals, including the appropriate environmental protections and other safeguards to mitigate the impact of new mobile infrastructure.

In developing the technical consultation, we will also work with industry and local planning authority representatives, and other government Departments and relevant regulators, including Ofcom, to strengthen the Code of Best Practice on Mobile Network Development in England

Electronic Communications Code - intention to consult on possible reforms:

The Electronic Communications Code, which is separate from the European Electronic Communications Code, is the domestic legal framework underpinning agreements between landowners and communications operators in the UK. The Code was substantially reformed in 2017 to make it cheaper and easier for electronic communications apparatus to be deployed, maintained, shared and upgraded. Now, more than ever, it is important that operators are able to do this at pace. Therefore the government intends to consult in due course on changes to the Code that may be needed to achieve this.

Click here to view the source article.
Source: Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport, Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government, 22 Jul 2020

FCC Ignoring Evidence Of Wireless Tech Harms, DC Circ. Told
USA Created: 6 Aug 2020
The Federal Communications Commission failed to address scientists' and individuals' health concerns when it concluded its current wireless safety guidelines are still sufficient for the 5G era, two nonprofits told the D.C. Circuit on Wednesday.

In an opening brief, the Children's Health Defense and the Environmental Health Trust argued the agency glossed over crucial evidence when it found in December that its radiofrequency-exposure limits — established in 1996 — still provide adequate protection.

"The FCC received an enormous number of peer-reviewed scientific and medical studies, analyses, and reports demonstrating a consensus of the scientific community that radiofrequency radiation is harmful and sometimes lethal to individuals and the environment," the brief says. "The factual record in this case is strong. Yet the Order gives no consideration to most of the evidence presented to it."

The case, filed in late January, argues that the FCC's rules don't go far enough to protect consumers, especially when those exposed to long-term or multiple sources of radiation. The rules also "do not provide for sensitive or vulnerable populations," according to the brief.

Last year, the FCC revisited its wireless safety standards and found that the current regulations are among the strictest worldwide, making them still effective in protecting people from harmful wireless transmissions.

But according to the lawsuit, the rules don't control for conditions like radiation sickness, which the suit says causes symptoms such as memory loss and fatigue when individuals are exposed to a high volume of invisible radio waves. Prolonged exposure can also impair development in children and is associated with negative environmental impacts, the suit claims.

The sources of such exposure include wireless towers, the proliferation of 5G small-cell nodes in neighborhoods, Wi-Fi signals and cellphones, according to the opening brief.

"The agency simply ignored the ills and challenges faced by individuals who are especially susceptible to Radiation Sickness," the petitioners wrote. "In so doing, the FCC begged the question of whether the agency has a responsibility ... to develop a remedy that would address the ills being visited upon these people."

According to the nonprofits, the D.C. Circuit must force the FCC to revisit its rulemaking that failed to take into account the testimony from individuals and scientists who expressed concerns that ran counter to the FCC's already established wireless safety guidelines.

"There is no meaningful explanation why the scientific and medical evidence regarding harms and risks from current limits was not valid," according to the brief. "The public still has no idea why the FCC decided thousands of studies and hundreds of individual assertions of harm were unworthy of serious discussion."

For its part, an FCC spokesman told Law360 that the agency stands by its decision-making process.

"We are confident that these stringent limits protect the health of the American people and that our decision will withstand judicial review," the statement said.

The petitioners are represented by Edward B. Myers W. of the Law Office of Edward B. Myers; and W. Scott McCollough of the McCollough Law Firm P.C.

The FCC is represented in-house by William J. Scher, Ashley Stocks Boizelle, Jacob M. Lewis and Richard Kiser Welch.

The case is Environmental Health Trust, et al. v. FCC, et al., case number 20-1025, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

--Editing by Peter Rozovsky.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Law360, Kelcee Griffis, 30 Jul 2020

Government and industry combine to downplay the science on cell phone danger
USA Created: 22 Jul 2020
In 2015, the city of Berkeley passed an ordinance requiring cell phone retailers to advise consumers, in a flyer at the point of sale, that keeping a cell phone in their pocket or near their body could expose them to wireless radiation above Federal Communications Commission safety levels. Councilmembers understood that manufacturers deceptively hide this federally mandated information deep within user manuals or in the phone that few ever see. The council also understood that cell phones are allowed to be tested for compliance away from the body— not as used.

A survey of Berkeley residents found overwhelming support for Berkeley’s ordinance. Eight-five percent of residents never saw recommendations from manufacturers about how to best protect against overexposure to cell phone radiation and 82% want this information at the point of sale.

America’s trade association representing the wireless communications industry (CTIA) challenged this ordinance all the way to the United States Supreme Court twice and lost every step of the way. Now this well-funded industry, along with support from the FCC, is again fighting to prevent the public from simple truthful information. Despite losing, the industry has now asked a federal court in California to rehear the case. Industry is repeating its failed argument that the FCC claims cell phones are safe no matter how used. A federal district court hearing is set in San Francisco for Thursday, July 23, on this motion.

FCC regulations mandate consumers be given “conspicuous” information regarding safe use of cell phones. Hiding safe-distance information deep within the phone and their own manuals is hardly conspicuous. We must ask ourselves what other critical information industry and the FCC are hiding from the public.

The FCC’s General Counsel, Thomas Johnson, recently submitted documentation to the court in support of the wireless industry. Johnson, conveniently, formerly worked for Gibson Dunn, the firm representing the wireless industry against Berkeley. The FCC is claiming that the manner in which manufacturers currently disclose the cell phone “safety” information is adequate, thus Berkeley’s ordinance is “over-warning” and therefore federally pre-empted.

This is not so.

Why is a federal agency aggressively defending the billion-dollar industry that it is mandated by Congress to regulate? Why are the FCC and CTIA so adamant about stopping this simple advisory at the point of sale? Berkeley’s ordinance merely alerts consumers that wearing or using a phone in a pocket, or tucked into a bra, may expose them to radiofrequency radiation that could exceed the federal safety limit. Again, this is basic information provided by the industry itself, though in a hidden fashion.

I, Mark Leno, championed a similar bill in the California Senate in 2011, the same year the World Health Organization put wireless radiation in the same category as lead and diesel fuel. They declared this radiation possibly carcinogenic to humans based on an increased risk of brain tumors associated with mobile phone use. My bill would have put minimal safety information at the point of sale. I experienced the intense lobbying and mistruths of this industry. This is corporate special interest at its worst.

This intense legal battle is an abuse of our legal system and exhibits the flagrancy of the FCC and the wireless industry in covering up independent science in regard to public health. The $30 million U.S. National Toxicology Program released results in 2018 stating “clear evidence,” the highest certainly level, that cellphone radiation causes cancer.

Why should we ignore the science?

This industry and the FCC are putting public health at great risk concerning a device used daily by nearly every American including the most vulnerable — our children and grandchildren. Consumers should have the right to know critical information at the point of sale so that they can make informed decisions as to safe use for themselves and their loved ones.

Mark Leno is a former state senator from San Francisco; Ellie Marks is a co-founder of the California Brain Tumor Association.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: San Fransisco Chronicle, Mark Leno and Ellie Marks, 21 Jul 2020

Campaigners' anger at Bromsgrove 5G mast go ahead 'without proper consulation'
United Kingdom Created: 19 Jul 2020
A CAMPAIGNER has lambasted Bromsgrove District Council planners who given the green light for a mobile phone mast to be built on Perryfields Road without the operator seeking permission.

The 20m pole with accompanying cabinets are being installed to increase 5G coverage in the area.

But Phil Haynes said: “There are known health and safety implications which are unquestionable and for companies to be able to put up a mast without the public being able to have their say on the issue is absolutely disgraceful.

“It is an infringement of people’s civil rights which have already been eroded over the past few months.

“I fear this could be like the asbestos situation where the long-term damage was not known for years and by then it was too late.”

Dr Shirin Joseph from the Radiation Research Trust, who also commented on the plan, claimed electromagnet radiation exposure (EMR) was dangerous to children, even within the recognised International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) levels.

He said the site was 100m from a nursery and close to a school, adding no meaningful consultation with local residents could be organised because of the pandemic.

Ruth Bamford, head of planning and regeneration, confirmed the decision on Tuesday and said it was not possible to question the principle of the development or resist it on inappropriate or greenbelt issues.

She said as the proposed installation met all the ICNIRP exposure standards, she considered it was acceptable on the public health grounds.

And she added the applicants had justified the proposed location which had been chosen as there was no viable alternative.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Bromsgrove Standard, Tristan Harris, 16 ul 2020

Huawei to be removed from UK 5G networks by 2027
United Kingdom Created: 19 Jul 2020
"Protecting the UK’s telecoms sector has always been the government’s top priority".

Decision follows a technical review by the National Cyber Security Centre in response to US sanctions.

HUAWEI will be completely removed from the UK’s 5G networks by the end of 2027, the government has announced, following new advice produced by the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) on the impact of US sanctions against the telecommunications vendor.

Ahead of this there will be a total ban on the purchase of any new 5G kit after 31 December 2020.

The decision was taken today in a meeting of the National Security Council (NSC) chaired by the Prime Minister, in response to new US sanctions. These were imposed on Huawei in May, after the UK’s initial decision on high risk vendors, and are the first of their kind removing the firm’s access to products which have been built based on US semiconductor technology.

Technical experts at the NCSC reviewed the consequences of the sanctions and concluded the company will need to do a major reconfiguration of its supply chain as it will no longer have access to the technology on which it currently relies and there are no alternatives which we have sufficient confidence in. They found the new restrictions make it impossible to continue to guarantee the security of Huawei equipment in the future.

As a result, ministers today agreed that UK operators should stop the purchase of Huawei equipment affected by the sanctions. There will be a ban on the purchase of new Huawei kit for 5G from next year and it will be completely removed from 5G networks by the end of 2027.

The decision takes into account our specific national circumstances and how the risks from these sanctions are manifested in the UK.

The existing restrictions on Huawei in sensitive and critical parts of the network remain in place.

The US action also affects Huawei products used in the UK’s full fibre broadband networks. However, the UK has managed Huawei’s presence in the UK’s fixed access networks since 2005 and we also need to avoid a situation where broadband operators are reliant on a single supplier for their equipment. As a result, following security advice from our world leading experts, we are advising full fibre operators to transition away from purchasing new Huawei equipment. A technical consultation will determine the transition timetable, but we expect this period to last no longer than two years.

This approach strikes the right balance by recognising full fibre’s established presence and supporting the connections that the public relies on, while fully addressing the security concerns of our world leading experts.

Digital Secretary Oliver Dowden said:

5G will be transformative for our country, but only if we have confidence in the security and resilience of the infrastructure it is built upon.

Following US sanctions against Huawei and updated technical advice from our cyber experts, the government has decided it is necessary to ban Huawei from our 5G networks.

No new kit is to be added from January 2021, and UK 5G networks will be Huawei free by the end of 2027. This decisive move provides the industry with the clarity and certainty it needs to get on with delivering 5G across the UK.

By the time of the next election we will have implemented in law an irreversible path for the complete removal of Huawei equipment from our 5G networks.

The government will now seek to legislate at the earliest opportunity with a new Telecoms Security Bill to put in place the powers necessary to implement this tough new telecoms security framework.

It will give the government the national security powers to impose these new controls on high risk vendors and create extensive security duties on network operators to drive up standards.

FURTHER BACKGROUND

Protecting the UK’s telecoms sector has always been the government’s top priority and last July, through the Telecoms Security Review, it announced one of the toughest regimes in the world for telecoms security. It will require all operators to raise security standards, to combat the range of threats, whether from cyber criminals or state sponsored attacks.

In January, as it concluded The Review, the government concluded ‘high risk’ vendors should be excluded from the core and most sensitive parts of the UK’s 5G network, restricted to up to a 35 per cent market share in the access network, which connects devices and equipment to mobile phone masts, by 2023, with the decisions kept under review. Our word-leading cyber security experts were satisfied that with our approach and tough regulatory regime, any risk can be safely managed, but were also clear that further sanctions could require them to change that assessment.

The policy in relation to high risk vendors has not been designed around one company, one country or one threat. It is intended to be an enduring and flexible policy that will enable us to manage the risks to the network both now and in the future.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: GOV.UK, Press release, 14 Jul 2020

Petition to block 5G gathers 3,200 signatures
USA Created: 19 Jul 2020
A petition set up to block the introduction of 5G mobile phone technology has attracted more than 3,000 signatures.

Camilla MacPherson, of Bermuda Advocates for Safe Technology, said that there were sound scientific reasons to be wary of the dangers of wireless radiation.

Ms MacPherson added: “People who want to discuss the health implications of electromagnetic frequencies are often branded as people with tin foil hats.

“But we have had overwhelming support from the community.”

The petition has been signed by 3,200 people, alongside 32 letters of objection to 5G technology, on the Regulatory Authority of Bermuda’s website.

The petition said: “Our mission is to educate and inform our community and policymakers about the dangers of exposure to unsafe levels of wireless radiation.

“We call on our government and regulatory agencies to make a firm commitment to our health and our children’s health and deny small cell and 5G applications and to create a more protective policy for wireless radiation in our community.”

The campaign group said it was worried by some scientific studies that suggested electromagnetic radiation could make chronic illnesses worse and cause some cancers, such as glioblastomas of the brain.

Ms MacPherson said: “A lot of people have contacted us to express their concern about the issues or feel that towers in their neighbourhoods contributed to their cancer.”

The 5G technology — dubbed the network of the “near future” by supporters — is said to provide quicker downloads and better network reliability.

But the 5G infrastructure has a more limited range than the earlier 4G network and needs more cell towers.

Opponents argued that more cell towers would expose the public to more electromagnetic radiation.

The RA is still in the preliminary report phase of the public-consultation process for integrated communications operating licences.

The Bermuda petition organisers appealed to people with comments or responses to the preliminary report and order to submit them to the RA before the July 20 deadline.

They questioned why Horizon Communications was verified as a qualified applicant for an ICOL in May, when its business proposal was centred around 5G technology.

Ms MacPherson said: “I think it is putting the cart before the horse.”

She questioned if it represented a change in the RA’s decision to hold off on 5G, announced earlier this year.

But Charmaine Burgess, the director of communications and stakeholder engagement at the authority, said there was no alteration in its stance, which it confirmed in April.

She added: “Our process is to first carry out a detailed radio frequency study, which will be conducted in the coming months.”

Ms Burgess highlighted the public’s opportunity to review and comment on the potential grant of multiple licences.

She said: “Therefore, I can confirm that Horizon Communications has not been granted an ICOL licence.”

Gilbert “Artie” Darrell, the founder of Horizon Communications, said: “Unfortunately, with the pending review of 5G in Bermuda by the RA, it would be premature for me to comment.”

The introduction of 5G has sparked worldwide health and safety fears.

Ayesha Peets Talbot, a doctor and director of Ocean Rock Wellness in Paget, said she had seen at least one patient who believed she had suffered harm from electromagnetic radiation.

The patient lived next to a wireless communications company, with equipment 20 to 30ft from her bedroom window.

Dr Peets Talbot said: “She stayed there for years. A few years ago she started to develop multiple cancers. She is in her forties.

“Her cancers were coming on so rapidly she was confusing a lot of the doctors.”

She said the patient’s history suggested it was hard to ignore the radiation exposure she had been subjected to.

Dr Peets Talbot added that Bermuda had to do more to ensure people were protected before it introduced 5G technology.

She said: “I have three young children. I really do think about their EMF exposure. I make sure I turn off the wi-fi at night.

“I make sure they have EMF protection when they are using their tablets and mobile devices. I make sure they sit far away from a flatscreen.”

She also questioned the potential impact on Bermuda’s sensitive ecosystem.

Dr Peets Talbot said: “We are not against technological advancement, but feel safe technology is smart technology. Ootherwise, it’s not really advancing us.

“Some people think you are either all for it or against it, which is not at all the case. We do not wish to turn back the digital clock.”

Switzerland, one of the world’s leaders in the introduction of 5G, in February imposed an open-ended ban on the use of its new network.

An independent panel advised the World Health Organisation’s International Agency for Research on Cancer in 2010 that mobile phone and other wireless radio frequency radiation should be classified as a “possible human carcinogen”, based on evidence from studies carried out up to that date.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: The Royal Gazette, Jessie Moniz Hardy, 13 Jul 2020

In ATT's mobile insurance terms, electromagnetic fields defined as "POLLUTION"
USA Created: 12 Jul 2020
Go to this link and see the PDF of the ATT mobile insurance terms there.:
https://ehtrust.org/wp-content/uploads/ASATT-531-MI-Terms-web-04.pdf

On page 2, in section "II. EXCLUSIONS", it says:

"F. Loss caused by or resulting from the discharge, dispersal, seepage, migration, release or escape of Pollutants".

Now go to page 4, in section "IX. DEFINITIONS.", see paragraph "M" (right column):

"M. “Pollutants” means: Any solid, liquid, gaseous, or thermal irritant or contaminant including smoke, vapor, soot, fumes, acid, alkalis, chemicals, artificially produced electric fields, magnetic field, electromagnetic field, sound waves, microwaves, and all artificially produced ionizing or non-ionizing radiation and waste. Waste includes materials to be recycled, reconditioned or reclaimed".

So there you have it. The largest U.S. wireless telecom classes its own emissions as POLLUTION and of course exempts itself from any insurance liability in relation to such exposures.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: EHTrust, commentary by H. Eiriksson, 12 Jul 2020

Bordeaux: new mayor Pierre Hurmic wants a debate on "the dangers of 5G"
France Created: 12 Jul 2020
(auto-translated:) The new mayor of Bordeaux wants to consult the population on 5G. Other Green candidates expressed their opposition to the technology during the campaign. But they do not have the powers to oppose the government's timetable.

Will the ecological wave that swept through France in the municipal elections put a stop to the deployment of 5G in the territory? Invited to RTL's morning show on Monday (June 29th), the new ecologist mayor of Bordeaux, Pierre Hurmic, said that he wanted to "open the debate on 5G" while the Bordeaux metropolis is one of the French territories selected by Arcep (telecommunications regulatory authority) to test a 5G experimentation platform in the coming months.

"I find it totally unacceptable that we can impose 5G without explaining, without discussing, without seeing what the aspirations of the inhabitants are. You know, I'm a civil lawyer, I've been fighting Linky (SmartMeter) in the last few years. I don't like the techniques imposed. 5G deserves a real debate, we have to tell our citizens what the dangers of 5G are, there are dangers of 5G, and I think we need to put this discussion on the table so that Bordeaux and Bordeaux do not learn overnight that their territory is covered by 5G," he explained.

This position echoes one of the proposals on the "Bordeaux Breathe" list that he led to victory in the municipal elections in Bordeaux. Candidate Pierre Hurmic promised to obtain a moratorium on the city's experimentation with the 5G network and to launch a major public debate around the deployment of this technology.

As in Bordeaux, several newly elected Green mayors expressed their opposition to 5G during the campaign. In Nantes, Grenoble or Besançon, they questioned the impact of 5G on health and the environment and denounced the increasingly important weight taken by technology in society. But, they should not have the means to prevent operators from deploying their antennas and the future network.

Mayors can't oppose 5G

On Twitter, telecoms network lawyer Alexandre Archambault recalled that in a 2011 decision,the Council of State ruled that "only the state authorities designated by law (minister, ARCEP, ANFR) have the authority to regulate the implementation of mobile phone relay antennas in general. "A mayor cannot therefore regulate by decree the establishment of relay antennas on the territory of his municipality, on the basis of his general police power," the public institution said.

Contacted by RTL, the lawyer explained that "given the obligations of deployment, respect for emission powers and environmental integration, the flexibility of the communities will be almost nil once the licences have been granted by the end of the year". "Regarding Bordeaux, it is all the more limited because the metropolis has committed itself to the ARCEP to facilitate experimentation," he stresses.

The current climate of distrust of 5G should not prevent the government from keeping its timetable. Despite the appeal filed before the Council of State by associations, the moratorium requested by the Citizens' Convention and the dozens of relay antennas that have been targeted across the country in recent weeks, the executive has maintained the auction for the allocation of frequencies at the end of September with a view toa commercial launch before the end of the year. The results of the Anses evaluations on the health effects of 5G are expected in the first quarter of 2021.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: RTL, Benjamin Hue, 29 Jun 2020

Towering problem in Teulada-Moraira, Costa Blanca
Spain Created: 12 Jul 2020
RESIDENTS on a 20-home Moravit urbanisation are furious about a mobile phone mast going up in front of them.

At a recent meeting with Teulada-Moraira’s Public Works councillor Hector Morales they complained that despite their opposition, workmen had started work on the tower.

This, they pointed out, not only affected them but also a nearby hotel, while admitting that they were puzzled by the choice of site as the area is in a hollow.

“We came here looking for tranquillity and now we can’t sleep for worrying about the antenna,” one resident told the local Spanish media.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Euro Weekly News, Linda Hall, 09 Jul 2020

Massive 5G Electricity Costs are in Focus Ahead of the Global Build-out at the Edge
USA Created: 5 Jul 2020
5G remains in the headlines as test cities and clusters are popping up in the western world while parts of Asia are set to pull the trigger on broad-based service as early as next week. As I have talked about in earlier blogs, 5G is a technology that operates in a small cluster unlike the linear, continuous service of 3 and 4G. Once you travel outside of the confines of a 5G cluster, you lose connection to the 5G service and will automatically revert to 3/4G for continuation of service. Yes, this means 5G and 4G, 3G and even 2G will overlap in many deployments.

In terms of scale, significant global coverage in 2/3/4G is in place with about 5 million telco tower base stations in the world with average power draw at about 6 kilowatts (kW) rising to 8-10kW at peak traffic periods. The global footprint is 50GW at peak power! Unfortunately, most of these tower base stations were not conceived with energy efficiency in mind. They operate around a PUE of 1.5 (power in/power of the telco(IT) load), meaning that about half of the power is wasted. When deployed at scale, this power adds up quickly and waste is multiplied by the number of deployments.

For example, as an initial 5G buildout, a Chinese operator recently added 100,000 5G ready base station sites averaging 10kW each – that’s 1 GW of energy! At a PUE of 1.5, this could cost 1.3 B€ ($1.45B) and give off 8,000 tons of CO2 annually (based on U.S. national average CO2 footprint). But if these systems were designed to be extremely energy efficient, PUE could be 1.1, and it would only cost 1B€ ($1.12B) and give off only 6,000 tons of CO2 annually.

These 5G base stations will also support 2/3/4G as well, in as many as seven different bands from 700MHz up to 3.5GHz. These “all the G’s” base stations average 10kW, with 13.7kW during peak periods. With standalone 5G (no 2/3/4G) two or three times as many base station sites will have to be deployed to achieve continuous 5G coverage! But there is some good news: once standalone, continuous 5G coverage is in place, and 5G devices are ubiquitous, the 2, 3, and 4G equipment can be retired with a corresponding energy reduction of around 4kW average and 6kW peak.

However, power draw at these sites will not necessarily get better. In about five years, newer technology 3.5GHz sites using massive MIMO (multiple in, multiple out) with four transmitters and four receivers (so-called 4T4R) are predicted to draw 14kW on average and up to 19kW under peak load. But that’s not all – the power consumption of 5G sites at 3.5GHz, with even larger 64T64R and massive MIMO could require three times the power of a 4T4R site!
A new generation of transformation rolls through telco at the edge

A positive for energy consumption is a shift from traditional telco equipment in the base station to software defined 5G running on standard IT equipment in the form of a MEC (mobile edge computing or multi-access edge computing). The first MEC deployments are a combination of traditional telco and pre5G/5G, but these will gradually move to be more and more IT based servers – see my blog, Powerful Confusion! The Differences Between 4.5G, Pre5G, and 5G Explained. 5G is a software-defined architecture and that means telecoms are setting themselves up for success by deploying a canvas from which they can innovate, easily introduce new services, and deploy applications on the network with location flexibility. This is a very important point, as the 5G standard the industry has been collaborating on – the 3GPP R16 Standard – is delayed and will not be frozen until April 2020, and not be released until July 2020.

As this new generation of transformation rolls through telco at the edge, it is quite clear that energy use is a top of mind topic from a business and societal perspective. The massive scale of deployments dictates that much attention needs to be given to these edge sites. For 5G to succeed, MEC data centers must be: initially designed for maximum efficiency; sealed for low maintenance; easily deployable (connect and start-up); built in a factory to drive down costs and drive up reliability; and managed by next generation DCIM to maximize availability and efficiency. We may need new architectures and technologies, such as liquid cooling, predictive analytics, and AI enabled power optimization, to make this a reality.

This journey is just beginning…
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Schneider Electric blog, Steven Carlini, 11 Nov 2019

«First  ‹Previous   Page 3 of 755   Next›  Last»