PLC WORKSHOP

1
PLC WORKSHOP

• Introduction and Input stakeholders

2
Contributors

• 48 Contributions

Repartition by type
Repartition by origin
3
Background

• Results of Consultation

4
Background

• EU regulatory framework unclear, standards
  lacking
• Results into regulatory uncertainty and
  unfavourable environment for investment
• Copper based networks may be expected to be
  replaced in the future
• Bandwidths on telephone lines, cable networks and
  on PLC will become insufficient in 5-15 years
• Only companies with market share will however
  invest in fibre in the local loop

5
Issues - Radio amateurs

• Technical
• Concerns with mass roll-out
• PLC affects many services like Broadcast, mobile
  radio, military, land mobile, military, radio
  amateur. Makes them unusable especially with
  limits proposed in the Commission working paper
• Potential to destroy the HF spectrum ( high HF
  level, not designed for HF transmission, always
  on, overhead wiring acting as antenna, affects
  other appliances)
• Cumulative effect is likely
• DRM reception will be hampered (physical
  incompatibility with PLC) and investment in DRM
  are wasted
• PLC may suffer from HF transmission
• Interferences with air traffic control has been
  observed in USA - Japan has banned PLC
• 4 trials in Austria generated more than 80
  complaints of radio users and amateurs for
  harmful interference.
• PLC operators deny to resolve the interference
• PLC limits as indicated in COCOM03-32 document
  will kill amateur radio
• NB30 limits are too high to adequately protect
• Expensive mitigating measures

6
Issues - Radio amateurs

• Economical/social
• PLC will not solve the growing need for broadband
  access, because it will need a high speed
  backbone net and will not be deployed in rural
  areas
• Shortwave radio is critical in case of national
  disaster
• Short-wave provides the right to listen to
  not-controlled content sources, used for training
  and education, cheaper than satellite and
  provides cultural diversity
• Negative consequences for developing nations that
  heavily rely on SW and cannot develop alone
  technology
• Radio amateurs provides training and education of
  young people, private scientific and technical
  studies as well as emergency and disaster relief
  communications. This shall be preserved
• Impossible to step back once PLC has been allowed
  if found disturbing
• PLC has limited bandwidth, not fulfilling
  customer needs
• PLC allow only dominant electricity provider to
  enter the market

7
Way forward - Radio amateurs (individuals)

• Various positions
• Disallow PLC, using ADSL, FWA or satellite as
  alternatives
• No positive discrimination
• Consider frequencies to be particularly protected
• Maximum allowed radiation levels shall be much
  lower for PLC devices / PLC networks than those
  for other devices being subject to EMC
  regulations.
• Levels shall be such that no noticeable increase
  in noise level in radio receivers is observed
• Operators to evaluate the interference resolution
  costs
• establish notches for all amateur frequencies
• Favour alternatives like ADSL, cable, FWA,
  satellite

8
Issues - Broadcasters

• DRM will revitalise shortwaves
• Large investments done shall not be wasted
• Shortwave is a unique resource due to its
  propagation characteristics
• PLC is always on and power cables not designed
  for HF transmission ? interference likely
• Current proposed emission levels will make DRM
  useless
• Experiments have demonstrated (Crieff)
  interference when PLC operates in radio bands
• Recent PLC equipment radiate less and could
  comply with lower limits
• There is no consideration of other partys
  interest in standardistaion

9
Way forward - Broadcasters

• PLC emissions shall be limited to the level
  allowing DRM reception
• Frequency separation and allocation of a
  frequency band for PLC
• Standards should not define any radiated emission
  limits at all
• NB 30 is considered the minimum acceptable
  protection
• Authorisation shall be be conditioned to limits
  to be used in case of interference lower than
  standards (e.g. NB 30) and/or to frequency usage
• Conditions shall be set for authorising trials
  (transparency of measurements, audit on impact,
  contact point for complaints)
• PLC manufacturer shall work on alleviation
  techniques (e.g. silent idle mode)

10
Issues - Incumbent operators

• Technical issues
• Radio and PLC are physically incompatible
• VDSL is designed according well established EMC
  principles
• Potential coupling between PLC and Telephone at
  some frequencies (2.4 MHz)
• Commercial/social issues
• Potential distortion of market (abuse of dominant
  position in case on some business models).
• Electrical sector not yet liberalized in some
  countries

11
Way forward - Incumbent operators

• PLC development shall not affect existing
  services and infrastructures and avoid
  frequencies used by radio amateurs and radio
• Emission levels shall be restricted to NB30
• Cumulative effects shall be prevented
• Equivalent policy in the electrical sector than
  in the telecom sector (Local loop unbundling)
• Introduction of PLT shall be done carefully

12
Issues - others

• Technical
• radioastronomy works in the 3-30 MHz band with
  very low detection level (0 dbµV) . PLC will
  limit detection
• Economic/social
• PLC will remain a niche market
• Implied economic value of PLT is highly
  questionable and most certainly insufficient to
  justify sacrificing the HF-spectrum.
• PLC is not transitory

13
Issues - Standardisers

• In urban areas, PLT contribution is hidden in the
  background noise up to about 10MHz
• In the higher frequency band (10 to 30MHz) PLT
  operation with present technologies has clearly
  the potential to interfere with radio services,
• Reports are contradictory regarding the
  evaluation of risks due to PLT in respect of
  cumulative effects
• Practically no complaints have been recorded from
  the users.
• In house, indoor-radiated field measurements
  appear to be highly unpracticable, outdoor, it
  seems feasible
• Other broadband networks (e.g. VDSL) may produce
  radiated fields comparable to PLT Various PLT
  technologies may have different interference
  characteristics.
• It appears clearly that nowadays PLT systems in
  operation are not complying with NB30 limits but
  may comply with EN55022
• Absence of consensus in the JWG

14
Issues - PLC operators

• Technical
• Products are mature and Competitive
• Utilities stable and trusted alternatives
• Only telecom infrastructure in some eastern
  countries
• Solution for the last mile
• Local/regional utilities in central position-gt
  investment
• Possible new applications
• Commercial/Social
• Lack of regulatory certainty, accompanied by an
  inhomogeneous handling of PLT by the Authorities
  throughout the Community.
• Stable standard specifically dedicated to
  emission limitation for PLT not available ,
  emission limits should consider economic aspects
  and value added
• Heavy investments already done
• Restrictive policy restricts the number of
  players
• Fair treatment shall be offered wrt. ADSL/VDSL
• Recognition of a possible price to pay by other
  actors

15
Way forward - PLC operators

• The problem can not be solved at standardisation
  level
• Appropriate political decisions are needed
• Suitable regulation shall be set-up to allow PLC
  mass deployment
• The working paper shall become a recommendation
• Interference stemming from PLC have to be
  resolved
• An accompanied development is necessary (e.g.
  through conditional licensing scheme)
• Non-discriminatory treatment

16
Issues

• What markets for PLC can be distinguished?
• What market share can PLC realistically reach?
• What are its technical limitations?
• Which contributions can it bring to overcome the
  digital divide?
• What are the services potentially threatened by
  PLC?
• What are its risks to cause unacceptable
  interference to radio services?
• Do we need an EU harmonised regulatory approach?
• What is a wise way for regulators to deal with
  this issue?

17
Markets

• What markets can be distinguished?
• Alternative Local Loop for delivering broadband
  services
• Rural coverage (through satellite hub)
• In-house applications
• What market share can PLC realistically reach?
• Mass deployment or niche market 10-15 in
  markets where it is present is the observed
  realisty
• Lowers market access barrier for energy companies
  to step into telecommunications
• Needs substitution when high market penetration.
  Ultimately optical fibre will offer the required
  banwdith to match request
• Alternatives WiFi delivery, cable, satellite
• In house potential unclear, competition from low
  cost WiFi alternatives

18
Limitations

• What are its technical limitations?
• Shared bandwidth, 10 Mbit/s shared between the
  50 households behind transformer
• High attenuation, repeaters required to bridge
  larger distances
• Handling interference affects business plans
• notching out frequencies affects bandwidth
• power level vs. need for repeaters
• investments in adapting EMC characteristics of
  electricity networks costly (filters, high
  frequency bridges)
• Certainly older PLC technologies become
  uneconomic
• limited notching out capabilities
• higher emission characteristics
• Technology continues to be improved
• 1st generation single carrier
• 2nd generation spread spectrum technologies
• 3rd generation advanced OFDM technologies

19
Digital Divide

• Which contribution can it bring to overcome the
  digital divide?
• Problematic business case for incumbent operators
  to cover rural areas
• Many areas in the EU without effective
  competition
• Can help fostering new players
• PLC low cost local loop technology

20
Services threatened

• The risk for interference exists and is
  recognised. Caution necessary wrt. apocalyptic
  scenarios.
• Shortwave radio and in particular DRM shall not
  be disregarded
• Increase in interference and noise will reduce
  the coverage
• Needs to be assessed against network penetration
  and level of interferences
• Amateur radio, radio astronomy
• should still be possible
• usage in extreme cases may be restricted
  geographically
• Clean spectrum thinking is unsustainable.
  Introduction of a new services may restrict the
  freedom of movement of other services and has to
  be accepted as long as reasonable

21
Interference

• Must base regulations on realistic basis
• EMC Directive calls upon standardisation to find
  the right compromise but
• discussions are too emotional
• there may be hidden agendas
• lack of recognition of mutual interests is
  recognised
• much thinking is based on theory and unproven
  assumptions
• worst case scenarios not a realistic basis for
  regulation
• PLC opponents dont have an interest in stable
  standards
• PLC proponents seek an easy ride
• Electromagnetic Compatibility is a complex
  phenomenon
• Current experience doesnt seem to point at real
  problems, but there are only 6000 lines
• Most interference cases can be solved locally, if
  both technology allows for it and willingness is
  present

22
Harmonisation

• Different level of concern in Member States
• In certain Member States call for restrictive and
  mandatory national limits
• In other Member States a permissive approach
  obliging handling interference when it occurs
• Do the different electromagnetic compatibility
  environment require a different set of rules for
  PLC than for normal radio?
• Commission feels there are no reasons to assume
  there is a need for different regulations and we
  need a single standard under the EMC Directive
• A standard can never give absolute protection and
  needs to be complemented by a case by case
  resolution of issues at the local level

23
Way Forward

• Need to provide legal certainty
• Only PLC operators can assess the EMC
  consequences of their networks
• They are under the EMC Directive obliged to
  ensure they dont cause interference and need to
  resolve any concrete complaints
• Concrete complaints need to be distinguished from
  theoretical complaints